Back in January, we spent four weeks learning about rape culture at Occupy, after realizing that one of our die-hard OB folks was a level-3 sex offender. What followed was pretty predictable near-total breakdown of public discourse--- but it wound up being a useful opportunity to think about how to deal with real affinities in a big community space. I just found this email -- I was exasperated and annoyed at the time, so didn't send it, but I think there's some useful stuff here.
Here it is!
****************************************************
[some introductory stuff here - relating to a proposal being blocked]
In three months of doing outreach work at OB, it has become very, very clear to me that OB is a big group of people. When facilitation does a role call on a room of 200 people and asks who is here for the first time, *very few people raise their hands.* That's amazing, and it's a credit to how big this movement actually is. When I look around the room at community gatherings, I don't recognize most of those people -- but I am absolutely persuaded that they are as much a part of OB as I am, and that many of them are as involved as I am, and that our paths have simply never crossed.
This level of dissonance - the way our sense of cohesion within the group can be changed at a moment's notice -- can be very traumatizing. It's awful when someone you don't recognize, who has never tried to have a conversation with you or know you personally, gets up and is able to call a halt to the whole process. Likewise, it's awful when a bunch of people who don't know any better clap Martin on the back for all his good work (not knowing just. how. many. women have been systematically talked down to and verblly attacked)
It's hard not to want to be angry at the wider group, or to resent individuals for not taking the time to get the whole story.
But in a movement this big, no one has time to get the whole story. We'd never get anything done, if everyone read every email, or went to every working group meeting. We are, in a very strong sense, still getting to know another, and getting to know each other requires a lot of trust. If we only define OB as "those we go to Biddy's with" or "people who show up at the same WG meetings we go to," we're missing an astonishingly large number of people who are nevertheless *part of this movement* Knowing this, it's quite important that the first reaction NOT be to assume the worst of someone, or to shout people down, just because they are not immediately recognizable as allies or friends.
This relates to Paul Shannon's block, and how people respond to it and to him. It also relates to Martin (there are, after all, dozens and dozens of people who *don't* know that he systematically talks down to and attempts to manipulate women, who haven't observed this, and so are rightfully confused when he's called out on it). It relates to Jason's email, and why certain emails are taken seriously, when others are dismissed. It also relates to why, in the face of what seem to some like, others are completely confused and take aback in a world in which OB is large and no one can possibly know everyone else, it's really, really important that --- and that the first reaction NOT be to assume the worst of someone, or to shout people down, just because they are not immediately recognizable as allies or friends.
2. Safe spaces, power dynamics, who gets to call the shots, etc etc
People regularly ask "Who's in charge" and "who do I talk to to get shit done at OB?" (if you're me, they usually ask this in an exasperated tone, having already spent a long time trying to find someone who will answer their question, which is usually a procedural one about how to get stuff up on the calendar. That's another story) If you're me, this question can be answered pretty simply: on one level, it's the people who have access to Twitter, who are able to post to facebook and the website. On another level, it's people who have time and space to be involved across working groups, or who play a large role in specific groups (facilitation and media are two big ones that come to mind). On another level, it's the folks who go to Biddy's together, or who get invited to go to meetings after the fact.
Anyone who falls into that category counts as someone who can "get shit done."
In a world in which the OB community is large and diverse, it's important to *recognize this* -- to realize that you may be talking to someone who has been around for three months, who just showed up yesterday,
There are some individuals who are more central, who are more connected -- who are more visible -- and there are others (individuals and working groups), who are less so. It's important that people who are at the center, so to speak -- who are connected to a bunch of different people, and who have the ability to talk to many people at once (through twitter, facebook, what have you) not be deliberately obtuse and pretend that this power doesn't exist -- or worse, use it to push through a self-serving version of "safe spaces" that doesn't acknowledge the ways in which one person's voice can marginalize and silence another's without attempting or meaning to. That's dishonest, and it's a poor use of one's influence.
It's also incumbent on those who *aren't* as well-connected -- and who realize it -- to take the time to figure out what's going on, to not take the Twitter feeds as the final word, and to make a good-faith effort to situate themselves in the conversation before jumping feet-first into it (or alternatively, throwing up their hands and walking away) When Jason sent that email, my first response wasn't about safe spaces or sexual violence -- it was a sense of deep anguish, that it seemed like members of the anti-oppression WG were only now looking up and realizing that there was a problem. It was anger, that this group that seems so important and important to have connected here, to provide guidance, to help us through this, was two or three GAs late in realizing there was a problem. Only secondarily was it a response to him personally.
Similarly, when Martin writes long, dramatic emails about how he's leaving, there are many people who receive those emails and respond sympathetically, who don't realize the ways in which he has consistently spoken down to and denigrated women in this movement. Those people, when they see him called out publicly in GA, are not sexist or malicious -- they are confused, and largely out of the loop.
It is very, very important that as we work to create safe spaces in this movement, we do so with an understanding of how these social dynamics work -- and, rather than just kicking the can down the road and failing to engage, make a good-faith effort to meet people where they are.
