Social Justice: What Do We Want?
So the other day, I talked about calling out, and bfp posted about calling out yesterday and asked:
the question is: where is there *any* room in the social justice swarm style calling out to respect “triggers”? When the very justification of social justice swarm style is the swarm has been triggered? also, admitting to being triggered requires you to be fairly vulnerable—something I’m not very inclined to do in front of people telling me to fuck off and accusing me of triggering just because I exist (just happened recently). I did say I’m triggered, and for whatever reason, the group backed off—but it about killed me to admit it.
I quoted as much as I needed for this post, but you really should read everything at Flipfloppingjoy before reacting to that excerpt.
As bfp and Amandaw both point out, calling out has become central to online social justice activism. It is like, the entire goal. Find someone who said something busted, lay into them, link them on your blog, your friends show up, people you don’t see all that often otherwise show up, the targeted person (or blog) gets a bad reputation because of that incident, and then what? Is there social justice in this process?
Bfp’s intended conclusion in her above question? There is no room for respecting triggers. And I agree with that. And really, is there room in social justice for calling out in the first place? I don’t think so. Maybe at one time, it worked, and people were willing to talk to each other and respect each other’s voices and accept that when one of us said “What you said was offensive and harmful” another would accept that, apologize, and try to do better.
But I think it’s evolved into several different things. It’s like an absolution, you make a mistake and you get called out, and you make absolution for that mistake. It’s so ritualized and I think that it doesn’t really make room for sincerity, not that the people who do apologize are not sincere? And not that the people calling out are not sincere.
So, for people who are sincere about this: What do we want? Do we want to watch each other for that moment of weakness when we make a mistake and dive in? Is this what we want to do? Do we want to engage in triggering behavior just to get a pound of flesh from someone because they said something harmful? As bfp also said:
I just have a gut feeling that “calling out” especially in the context of “within a community that are more often than not survivors,” it should just be *assumed* that that the person(s) being called out is a survivor, and may have had to deal with any number of (potentially) violent situations under the guise of being “held responsible” and should be “confronted” (or called out) in a way that is respectful of that. there is a difference between being “held responsible” and “being accountable,” I think—I was held responsible for the entirety of [abusive persons] life, including the fact that this person was abused. I didn’t have a choice in it. when this person was “triggered,” my entire life came to a halt, because I was the person responsible for managing this person’s triggers.
Is this how we want to talk to each other? Is this what healthy communication is? Do conversations spring from this? What happens if someone on a blog somewhere says something that’s not quite right? And so we head back to our blogs before or after commenting on theirs and write this post that says “So-and-so at such-and-such blog just said X.” And now your readership picks that up, and maybe some of them boost the signal, and suddenly we have a handful of blogs saying “So said something busted!” and now there’s this massive response, and as Amandaw says:
for a long time, I have been creeped out by a certain type of person in the blogosphere.
for a while now, I’ve been hating and fearing the times I know I’ve played that type.
it’s the person who is there for every fight. there for every drama.
the person who’s got the gossip on all the parties and can report on the game.
the person who has to take every drama and analyze it to death. has to give the play-by-play and offer commentary on every little move. where so-and-so went wrong here, said a Bad Word there, broke The Rules(TM) over there. where so-and-so followed The Rules(TM) well here and you all should observe so-and-so’s example.
the person who can always fit an incident into a convenient narrative mold, shove it in as tight as you can and pop! out comes the pre-shaped narrative. the person who can always find a way to create two clearly defined and opposite sides, and set up the argument in such a way that the Right Side and the Wrong Side are easy to deduce if you know The Rules(TM).
the person who hangs around like a vulture, waiting for someone to slip up, trip up, fuck up — so they can pounce, and pop them in the mold, and serve up the resulting conveniently-shaped thing for the public to devour.
consume.
the person who knows the right words to repeat, and the right people to suck up to.
the person who knows how to network. how to build a following.
the person whose interactions in the community always seem to come down to winning. being the best activist. the most perfectest. the best “ally.”
and it just feels weird because they sau all the right words along the way, but ultimately it feels like … they aren’t in it because they care about the issues they’re talking about. they’re talking about those issues so that they can be in it.
and seem to get so excited when something new erupts. because it’s not a clear sign that there is some pretty tough pain going on. it’s a clear sign that there’s a new drama to reputationally profit off of.
And I don’t even think I can add to that.
This is what I wanted to do with Social Justice, even before I realized the words fit together like that: I created Questioning Transphobia because of the rampant transphobia in the feminist blogosphere, because of a website called Questioning Transgender Politics that was filled with unanswered transphobic rants that demonized the hell out of trans women and treated trans men as victims of patriarchy who lacked the agency to define themselves. I saw a handful of trans people and cis people who do get it responding to them even as many bloggers let the really transphobic commenters hijack every post about trans people into trans 101 and demands to justify why transsexual people should transition and how transsexual people get away with supporting the gender binary and while speaking out against the gender binary attacking non-binary trans people for “creating more gender” rather than destroying it entirely, and basically being a bunch of prats to trans people who are simply trying to live our lives and cope with a world that really doesn’t try very hard to accommodate us.
So I saw this, and I wanted to answer it. I wasn’t the first, and I’m not the most powerful writer, and I’m not the most prolific. But I wanted to take these things on directly, answer their claims, create a counter to their transphobic politics, a place where trans people could see how their arguments are flawed and dangerous and not internalize them and not feel powerless to respond because that is exactly how I felt when I found these things the first time, and so many other trans people have told me they felt the same and were grateful for Questioning Transphobia when they found it.
So I had to be prompted by Belledame and a few others to start blogging. And when I started QT, so many other social justice bloggers gave me a signal boost right off the bat. I can’t even remember how many, or who they all were, but from the start I had support and links and people being kind enough to help me get started, to get an audience, to be heard. And I think, in this regard, QT has succeeded beyond my own wildest expectations. I have amazing co-bloggers whom I love beyond the telling of it, and readers that I am so grateful have stayed around for a long time, and new readers all the time. And I’ve noticed as many commenters dropped off over time, I do miss them. I think that QT is almost a community, or at least a network where we can talk about how society hurts us and create our answers in opposition to that pain.
I also think that QT has occasionally failed at this. And we’ve failed individual cis and trans people here. I mean, there have been times when cis people have come here looking to understand, and we’ve treated them rather poorly. I mean, these are cis people who have trans people in their lives? And while they don’t experience transphobia it can still impact them when the trans people they love suffer from it? And is it really good for us to pile on them when they make a mistake? I mean, if they’re here, I would like to believe they’re here in good faith, and I think a lot of the time they’re not really up on anti-oppression language and concepts and just want to support the trans people in their lives, and I think to some extent QT should be supportive of that. It’s what I want, I want to help cis people learn to not be transphobic. I don’t want to chase them off if they’re not perfectly up to standards I try to set for myself.
This is not to say that when cis people are transphobic we just let that slide, but I think we really need to think about how we engage this, what kind of place we engage this from. As I quoted bfp in my post about empathy and kyriarchy,
The very political choice to ally herself with all oppressed people. The very political choice to prioritize a radical love that recognizes the humanity in another, even if that person can and did and does hurt you.
And I think we’ve failed other trans people, trans people who do not 100% agree with what’s said here, who have their own takes, who approach gender and bodies differently than us. And I think, sometimes, say things that challenge our own assumptions. It’s pretty tempting to think we’re always right and reject all conflicting worldviews. Sometimes those worldviews are painful, and it’s hard to just admit that because admitting that makes us vulnerable, and we don’t trust the people we’re talking to or the people who are reading with that vulnerability. But we have to be able to engage disagreement without scorched earth tactics, and I’m not sure what suggest here, but I think that QT has failed at this in the past, that I have failed at this in the past.
I think QT has also failed at intersectionality, at acknowledging the full complexity of people’s lives. It’s too easy to reduce everything to transphobia and sexism and maybe some homophobia. It’s too easy to look at another oppressed cis person and elide all the oppression they do experience and treat them as privileged over us in all ways because they are cis and we are trans. It is also, and I think this is even more critical, easy to elide the fact that trans people have to deal with racism, ableism, fatphobia, economic hardship, and other issues that do not directly relate to gender as concepts but are not separable from gender in real lives. And these are not taken into account as thoroughly as they could be – and then people come here and find they have to leave race or disability or class at the door. Now I will say, I do try to account for intersectionality, but I do not always succeed. Based on what Jane LaPlain said the other day, QT fails at this a lot more than I realized, and I want to turn that around. I can’t guarantee that I will be perfect, but I will do my best.
And really, this is what I wanted from QT, and I think QT is a social justice site. And I think, that more broadly defined, this is the kind of thing that lots of people probably want from social justice in general – not trans issues, but every issue. I think, failures or not, that if we tried harder to do this kind of thing – to actually work on our failures and in general emphasize trying to build networks and relationships with people who share similar goals with us. I don’t think that the point is to push people away or mark them as enemies when they make one mistake, to call down the thunder upon them or their blogs. Because, seriously, these people? Are generally speaking not your enemies. They may not be perfect every time they discuss matters that affect you personally, but if somethings happens? They would often have your back.
Or they would have your back if you didn’t post about how they wrote a sentence wrong and and a dozen people swarmed their blog to tell them how much they failed, or if your post about how their mistake is so hard to forgive didn’t encourage people to send them toxic, abusive e-mails. if your call out itself wasn’t triggering or abusive or intimidating or silencing. If your call out hadn’t left them alone under a pile on wondering what the hell just happened. If your call out didn’t actually include outright lies about things they’ve said and done. Wondering why if you didn’t personally do these things you stood aside and let it happen.
And I do not mean that they abandon your particular cause, I mean they will have nothing to do with you personally. This is not about a tone argument, as I said in my post on calling out. This is about hurting people. Silencing them. Isolating them.
I say this having been guilty of most of these.
God willing, I do not believe I have ever lied about anyone, but the rest? Absolutely. I’ve done it. I have caused by (mostly) my own inaction real harm to other people. People who are sincere, who are among the strongest allies we (trans people) have. Who do important work by blogging – the same kind of work that I want to do with QT. And my inaction, my silence, let them get hurt so badly. I am not responsible for the abusers who attacked them, who lied about them, who “called them out” and refused to let go even after they apologized. I did not make their choices, I simply didn’t act to stop it. This has happened multiple times on QT. So when you read this and think this might be about you? It’s also about me.
And if you have strong objections to this, please think them over before immediately responding. I don’t want to have a fight in the comments. It’s okay to be angry, I’m angry about all this. I am upset about all of this. I cannot say that I just started being angry and upset, but I have just started talking about it. And I think we, not just as a community, but I mean online social justice activists and bloggers, we need to talk about this and stop hiding it. Stop enabling it. Stop doing it.
Edit: I suspect this post may sound like it has more answers than I wanted to put in it. I don’t really know what to do beyond stopping the abuse. We need to talk about what kind of community anti-oppression can be, we need to talk about how to engage each other. I should have included what bfp said in her comments:
so i just wonder what would happen if “calling out” became less of a focus. and how that would happen and what the effect might be of that. if say…there was a different intention behind engaging with other people. does that make sense? like–if instead of “doing our part” by asking people to call us out, we “do our part” by making space for a thousand, a million stories to be told. and when we engage with each other, we think: how will this engagement make space for others to tell their stories?
I mean, the thing is, and I saw your comment at your place about this same thing—i’m NOT saying (and I don’t think *any* of us are) to NOT engage–but to think of *how* to engage in a way that is productive and might lead to some bigger goal. And for me–the first step in that is recognize that to engage in good faith requires a sense of vulnerability. and I am not willing and I don’t think ANYBODY should willingly be vulnerable with everybody and anybody. I think that maybe a part of the movement (for whatever it is) is recognizing that our bodies and minds are precious, and not everybody is entitled to them. So–I will engage with people I trust, people *I* have decided that I trust, and I will trust myself in deciding if I trust that person or not. And I will talk with that person in a good faith way and in a way that respectfully lovingly critical–because i think trust comes through *mutual work*–it is something done together. But i’m not going to engage with somebody i *don’t* trust. I’m not going to be vulnerable with that person in that way.
Because again, I can not say this better than she has.
Emily in the comments:
I think that blogging encourages us into fantasies of omnipotence, of heroic individuals showing us how to break down whole, powerful systems. But Working on real material change isn’t as easy as writing a righteous post. It’s messy, and painful, and sometimes it means working with people who don’t get every issues of yours perfectly because your liberation is bound up in theirs. And we need to get beyond internet politics of purity and learn this, because otherwise we are fucked.
I think that you’re absolutely right; a lot of “call outs”, rather than being about pointing out someone’s misstep, and gently and lovingly correcting it (or, outside of a community one is part of, being about gently correcting it), have turned into a way to score “points”, to get activist cred, and to trash people.
I’m reminded far too often of Jo Freeman’s essay on trashing: http://www.uic.edu/orgs/cwluherstory/jofreeman/joreen/trashing.htm
Which was about stuff that was going on in the feminist movement in the late 60s/early 70s, and I feel like the internet has given people a lot wider scope and more tools to trash each other. And it’s destructive, it’s nasty, and the more communities focus on giving credit to how perfect someone’s reputation is and the form of their words and actions rather than the content, the worse it will get.
anarchafemme
2 Sep 10 at 7:41 pm
I worry that posting this is reproducing the calling out, but I think all this stuff needs to be said, you know?
Thanks for the kind words, and the link to the trashing essay. I’d forgotten about that.
Lisa Harney
2 Sep 10 at 10:01 pm
I have often been saddened, here and elsewhere, at the way we often treat each other. We have much to be angry about, but there are ways to express that anger, to own our own anger, without attacking and hurting each other. We can disagree with each other, and express that disagreement, without disrespecting each other. We can’t build a movement by hurting each other and come here with a desire to learn but without the thick skin than we transgender people have had to develop to live as our true selves.
I have learned more about not just transphobia, but other kinds of oppression and privilege, here than anywhere else in my life. I will value that forever. And I will keep coming back here to learn more, I simply wish that it didn’t have to be so painful sometimes.
Thanks for doing all that you do, and I appreciate the introspection you’re showing in these recent posts.
Abby
2 Sep 10 at 10:07 pm
I have to say I’m finally feeling safer and emerging from my shell the more I read about people on various blogs addressing this stuff. It’s such a profound relief that this topic is generating so much discussion and realization of harmful tactics that have burned so many. Thank you for adding your voice to the mix again, as every person who adds their thoughts about this is one more person finally speaking up for those of us who have been silenced and isolated, and it helps so much.
I just have one very minor little thing I want to bring up: the use of gender neutral pronouns. I’m kind of uncomfortable with the use of them when it’s not for a gender variant individual specifically whose preference is for neutral pronouns. I see it as something that’s “ours” (as in, gender variant individuals) in a way, as it’s to distinguish our gender as being outside the binary, so it’s not really for cis people of indeterminate gender. …I hope I’ve articulated that properly.
Galhea
2 Sep 10 at 11:50 pm
I’m pretty careful with explicitly gender neutral pronouns as I’m uncomfortable with the idea that I may be taking away a binary identified persons gender, which is similar to misgendering to my mind. This obviously doesn’t apply to a vague ‘them’ sort of thing when talking about ‘possible’ people. (I hope that makes sense).
WRT to the the idea of avoiding swarm attacks or bashing people for percieved transgressions of whichever moral code – I don’t tend to bother online, but IRL I tend to adopt a policy these days of saying something like “Oh, you might want to be careful phrasing it like that because someone could misinterpret what you said as meaning *XYZ*”. and then seeing how the person responds.
If the person meant it offensively they tend to clarify it pretty quickly, and I then know to simply ignore them and not waste my time. On the other hand I often find that someone has misused a word they thought was appropriate, are repeating something they have been told or simply hadn’t thought it through and need a bit of space to back up and try again (more than once I’ve misheard something they said.)
Tone there is important (I’m meaning my tone as I broach it rather than any socially expected tone) and I find that an “oh, by the way” sort of approach works much better than a “Oi you” sort of tone. Nobody likes getting attacked and an abrupt call out doesn’t help at all in pointing out that they just said/did something I’m uncomfortable about.
This is face to face that I’m talking about, and even in person it’s pretty hard at times to try to bring it up pleasantly rather than just snarling at them. I do find though that a lot of people either listen to why it bothers me and take it on board or apologise on the spot.
The ones who are genuinely bigots or offensive prats on the other hand tend to respond to politeness as though I’d just started swearing at them (the response they wanted), and I then have a choice whether to cut them off cold or whether to bring my (mile wide) passive aggressive streak to bear in the form of clueless polite incomprehension – any onlookers tend to see the situation for what it is.
Not saying that I have ‘the answer’ or even a great answer, but this method of dealing with being triggered is lower stress than anything else I’ve tried, including walking away and seething.
Em
3 Sep 10 at 12:19 am
I changed the pronouns, it’s cool.
Em, thanks for the advice! I find a lot of that works well for me too, and with similar outcomes – online mostly, as offline I just don’t hang around with enough people for this to come up.
I wanted to think more about how to talk about social justice, how to focus on it and bring it to life, and maybe how we deal with conflict and problems can grow from that?
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 12:30 am
My bad :D
I suspect that social justice has to ultimately be the goal of each individual, I think that a site, community, or forum can be a nexus for that, but I think social justice begins when each person looks past their own borders, limits, and challenges, and starts seeing commonality in humanhood.
Personally I am aware of myself as being comparitively privileged, I do have to deal with a chunk of negative stuff, but with effort and learned skills I can generally avoid the worst of it, most of the time anyhow. Many people don’t have it as lucky as me, and I guess I’m coming to realise that. I’m quite willing to admit that I have plenty to learn.
Em
3 Sep 10 at 1:02 am
Well, no bad at all. I mean, the post spends a lot of time on calling out again because I wanted to respond to BFP and Amandaw’s posts, so it’s reasonable to go there.
And I agree with you. I think that’s the basis of radical love that I’ve really barely been able to describe so far. I think it’s pretty important that we reach out to each other and not close each other off, but I mean that has to come from all sides.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 1:05 am
I really love the writing on this blog, always read it. I think it is so important that it exists and continues to do so.
I personally find the comment section to be generally hostile. I tried commenting once and felt attacked. My minor difference of opinion was cast as something I would never say. I was made into a target for accusation. I think that happens to others too, in my opinion. So I won’t comment here. I felt this was important to say, though.
I completely agree with Lisa’s post. One of the things that saddens me about internet discussion in general is that it just isn’t. And I think this has lead to a very defensive mind set that sometimes sees an attack where all there is is a difference of nuance, or opinion, or just a different way of saying things. Of course other times there is reason. Blog communities are like walled city states and the gates are firmly shut. It takes a lot more self confidence to wander in and start talking to the locals than I think many people realise.
Anyway, I hope my comment is of interest. If it offends anyone, please do know that was not intended at all in any way. I don’t mean it as an attack on any individual or individuals. It’s a general observation based on my own personal views and experience and is, of course, therefore subjective.
Maddie
3 Sep 10 at 2:04 am
That hostility is one of the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post that I was thinking about putting an end to the blog. I’m going to try much harder to keep the hostility down, although I totally understand that you don’t feel comfortable here because of that past occasion. I know that in that circumstance, I may have actually participated (I responded immediately after your first comment) and ultimately the comments were closed and locked away because the discussion got completely our of hand when regulars piled on another commenter.
And I think, unfortunately, what happened to you was lost in the noise of that other argument. I am sorry that happened, and I appreciate that you took the time to make your comment.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 2:18 am
Also, Maddie, if there’s something you’d like to say or respond to in one of my posts, my e-mail address is qtlisah at gmail dot com – I’m willing to talk to people in e-mail if they don’t feel comfortable in the comments.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 2:22 am
Thank you Lisa, I really appreciate that. I do hope you don’t decide to end QT. I think it’s unique and extremely important.
I think piling on a commenter is a problem many community sites have, not just QT. In the end I think that a community has to make an effort as a whole, not just those at the sharp pointy post writing end :)
Maddie
3 Sep 10 at 2:48 am
Piling on happens but at that particular time it was really toxic here, I mean as in being open season.
And I gave up on ending QT several months ago. I did actually end Questioning Transphobia on August 31st, but nobody goes there anymore.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 2:52 am
The issue for me personally is that I literally don’t know any other way to be: I “grew up on the internet”, so to speak, entirely within the toxic culture that you talk about here. The first activism-related site that I was a part of (I think!) was strap-on.org, and though I loved that site and many of the people contributing to it, at some point, I just had to leave because of exactly the toxicity that you describe.
So yes, I have and do engage in almost every behavior that you describe, and I cannot even swear that I haven’t lied about the people or the things they said that I’ve attacked.
I’ve actively participated in attacks and pile-ons that I am deeply ashamed of.
The thing is: I don’t know any other way to go about doing it, other than just shutting up and not raising issues at all. The thinks that you and bfp and nix and a lot of other people are talking about are things that I have trouble even grokking (frex, bfp’s discussion of the difference between being held responsible and being accountable).
My jumping on people comes from a place of deep pain and PTSD. I’m hypervigilant; I’m in a place that getting one more reminder that I’m less-than is intolerable, so it means nothing to me when that reminder comes from someone who really doesn’t think I’m less than, but just simply made a mistake or is ignorant, or when that reminder comes from someone who also suffers from oppression (which is nearly everybody, right?)
This was illustrated so well with the NOWHC situation; a whole bunch of white feminists, trans folk (including myself), and allies came crashing down on NOWHC, bfp, and many others who were involved with the situation of poor people in New Orleans.
NOWHC made a misstep. But did we come together as a community to look for ways that trans women in New Orleans could get health care? Or did we flame and trash until the point that NOWHC closed, and now every woman of color and every poor woman in New Orleans is having a harder time getting health care. What would have happened if instead “we “[did] our part” by making space for a thousand, a million stories to be told”? Because NOWHC closing was the worst possible outcome and should not have happened.
GallingGalla
3 Sep 10 at 7:05 am
Ach. I meant: The things that you and bfp and nix…
Also, I don’t want to deny that trans women were hurt by not being able to receive care at NOWHC.
But it’s about how this was approached, as if NOWHC and their supporters were the Big Bad Enemy, that all that mattered is that they’re cis and we could ignore that they’re also women of color and poor women struggling to provide *some kind* of health care to WOC and poor women in a city that most USians have chosen to close their eyes to.
GallingGalla
3 Sep 10 at 7:10 am
You make a very good point about what happened with NOWHC, and Em and I actually talked about this privately. I think the response actually hindered any chances of working with NOWHC or organizing around something for trans women and women of color in the New Orleans area, and most of us who reacted don’t even live in New Orleans.
NOWHC was already closed at the time, and yeah, it was kind of “what?” when I got that information.
As for the rest, if you want to talk about that you can e-mail me? I don’t know how comfortable you are in comments about it, but I’m not sure a public discussion would help you much?
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 9:47 am
I mean, that’s your call, just offering whatever.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 9:47 am
>>>But did we come together as a community to look for ways that trans women in New Orleans could get health care?
Yeah, exactly. That whole thing was a mess that illuminates all kinds of problems with blogging as activism.
Me, I fucked up, pure and simple, cos I reacted to a real-life situation through internet flames. Rather than pausing, waiting, working with NOWHC, I took one look at a website and posted sarcastically about it on a website where I knew it would be read. Cos that’s what we do, right? Find something wrong and pour righteous scorn on it? I don’t take full responsibility for everything that went down, but I certainly lit the match. Someone always does.
After NOWHC confirmed they were closed, I offered to volunteer, help with fundraising but at that point? Can’t blame them for not wanting to work with someone who’d dragged their name through the mud.
And you know, even after I was thinking oh gawd have I screwed up here and had posted about, there were loads of people reassuring me I’d done the right thing. When it just wasn’t that simple, and I hadn’t approached it from the right perspective from the start.
Queen Emily
3 Sep 10 at 12:40 pm
Yeah, well, I supported that when it happened as well. It was not a proud moment, and I think a lot of us stepped in it together. And it’s kind of surprising that QT didn’t catch more heat after that.
Oh, and I think: This is where apologies fail? You can’t always make a mistake and expect to be able to move on from that with an apology and an understanding. Sometimes it’s just too painful a wound.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 12:45 pm
Also, on the meta:
I think that blogging encourages us into fantasies of omnipotence, of heroic individuals showing us how to break down whole, powerful systems. But Working on real material change isn’t as easy as writing a righteous post. It’s messy, and painful, and sometimes it means working with people who don’t get every issues of yours perfectly because your liberation is bound up in theirs. And we need to get beyond internet politics of purity and learn this, because otherwise we are fucked.
Queen Emily
3 Sep 10 at 12:49 pm
BTW, my comment to GG: I didn’t mean not to talk about it here, but that if you feel it’d be better to talk privately, I’m okay with that. I don’t know which would be better, and I think saying what you did about how you engage is pretty brave, all things considered. ♥
And everything Emily said, which I have now edited into the post.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 12:53 pm
Right. An apology doesn’t fix things, and maybe it shouldn’t. I think I learnt something from messing up that badly, but so fucking what?
And yeah, I am surprised that we didn’t–we should have. Bfp caught so much heat, and she didn’t deserve it. She of everyone was the one person who I knew *was* on my side, looking for health care for me. I adore that woman something fierce, and I let her down too. Ach.
Queen Emily
3 Sep 10 at 12:53 pm
Yeah, and while it’s painful to realize that you can’t fix something? Moving forward and doing better still matters.
And I totally agree, Bfp didn’t deserve any of the heat.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 12:56 pm
it might be nice if there were a way to have “private discussions” or “private posts” for such discussions, rather than just via email. and private might mean more than just keeping posts non-public.
just a thought.
b. sanford
3 Sep 10 at 1:08 pm
I had considered putting up a forum here, but I wasn’t sure about the commitment in time, resources, people, oversight, etc.
Lisa Harney
3 Sep 10 at 1:09 pm
get beyond internet politics of purity
Queen Emily, yes, this. And the thing that shouldn’t be underestimated is how hard this can be. How difficult it can be to have differences of opinion, ethics, politics, needs, etc. and to acknowledge those differences and still commit to working together, or side-by-side. And I think what bfp said in her comments regarding engaging with people that we *trust* is really important. Building relationships based on that trust and respect (and, if you like, radical love) is absolutely necessary – but it’s also something that can’t be done in an instant. It takes (or can take) a lot of time, a lot of work.
nix
3 Sep 10 at 5:08 pm
This gets at something that’s been eating at me a while now. Very often I’ll see frustrated “With allies like you, who needs enemies?” posts that basically say that members of X oppressed group have decided to just reject any people who are not X’s because they’re SO BETRAYED. And I get that — hell, I’ve felt and done that — but I think it can also get pretty destructive. If it’s “God, I’m frustrated, it seems everyone is doing Y today and I feel uncomfortable,” okay, but it easily becomes a purity thing.
Fierceawakening
4 Sep 10 at 6:29 pm
I think that reaction can be healthy to make some space and get away from some destructive/frustrating situations. But I think that a lot of people are allies in the sense that they are personally invested, and even as they say and do busted things it’s easy to forget that investment.
Lisa Harney
4 Sep 10 at 6:31 pm
But I think critiquing this idea of “ally” as an identity and the way it’s been used in oppressive ways is also important, because we have people who are like “I’d care about your problems but since you weren’t nice enough to me I won’t care about anyone in the entire world who is like you” which also happens way too often.
Thanks for dropping by, too!
Lisa Harney
4 Sep 10 at 6:33 pm
[...] center itself around one method. And the issues go past the Nuker pitfalls. Ranging from becoming a ritualization of the call out and apology that destroys sincerity, becoming a dialogue destroying influence, being used even in situations where a dialogue is a [...]
[Activist Modus Operandi] The Anatomy of a Call Out (And Why It Needs To Change) « Genderbitch: Musings of a Trans Chick
4 Sep 10 at 7:53 pm
This is an absolutely fantastic post and I am thrilled that you and so many other awesome bloggers are writing so accurately on this topic. Over the last year or so I’ve become aware of how my own internet behavior – I’ve done everything described here, with the exception of lying about people, over and over and over – was not really motivated by the righteous rage that I’d told myself it was and I had to face some pretty gross truths about myself in the process. I sympathize with GallingGalla – I also “grew up” on the internet, at least with regard to social justice stuff, and it’s hard to figure out another way to *be*. It seems like the alternative to snark is earnestness, which does require vulnerability, which is the first thing that is attacked by people engaging in this kind of behavior.
Unfortunately I think some spaces are never going to be able to get away from this dynamic but I’m so thrilled that you and others are speaking to this. It’s so necessary.
Armchairshrink
4 Sep 10 at 7:55 pm
Thanks much. And I agree, I mean I don’t think there will be a 100% solution, and I think a lot of people are invested in this as an activist method.
And I agree about vulnerability.
Lisa Harney
4 Sep 10 at 9:32 pm
I’m going to have to disagree.
First, I’m seeing a lot in these posts about being more “constructive” with criticism and “reaching out” with criticism. I’ve learned from my engagements with people more privileged than me that “more constructive” criticism that “leaves room for discussion” just means “be less angry.” I’ve rarely seen it used in a way that doesn’t mean “be less angry.” “Be more constructive”, to me, sounds like a tone argument that’s been wrapped up to sound nicer.
Second, one of the weird things about the Internet is that things get said a thousand times or not at all. Even on posts where comments aren’t moderated if people load the page at the same time, they can leave the same comment. Because of this, the only way to not have multiple people calling someone out is to never call people out at all, and if we don’t call people out, they’ll just keep using the same busted language over and over.
Sky
5 Sep 10 at 1:25 am
The criticism is to find a way to not enable abuse. That’s not the tone argument.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 1:27 am
And I’m not sure what you mean by reaching out? My post about empathy talked about reaching out to others and to forge connections rather than build walls, but that had nothing to do with calling out.
My first post refers to people who are called out not responding constructively, but that has nothing to do with how the call out happens but with how someone responds to it, and doesn’t mention reaching out at all. I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at, because you’re not addressing concepts I’ve attempted to describe.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 1:33 am
The problem (as I see it) is that we can’t control the behavior of people who read the things we say. We ourselves can avoid being abusive–you can say “this thing you have said is busted” without adding abuse to it—but if others use calling-out comments as a jumping-off point for abuse there’s not much we can do about that, short of never calling out at all (and then, abusers will just find a new excuse.)
Sky
5 Sep 10 at 1:38 am
The problem (as I see it) is that we can’t control the behavior of people who read the things we say.
This is exactly why the way we handle this stuff needs to change. This is the problem. No, we can’t control the behavior of other people but we do know what can happen when we make a post calling another person out for something. I know this intimately.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 1:40 am
And we have to make the abusive behavior unacceptable.
That doesn’t mean the busted behavior is acceptable either, but I think the public naming and shaming isn’t cutting it because of the blogswarm that seems to follow.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 1:42 am
I mean, I say this as someone who has called out many many people from this blog, in the hopes of having a conversation, and having it devolve into muckraking, flaming, and even abuse. I won’t do that anymore. If someone says something, I’ll find a way to tell them, but I’m not going to stand on a pulpit and shout about it. And what follows when I do that is, to some extent, my responsibility.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 1:51 am
Then what is one supposed to do? Not calling out, letting people say the same busted things over and over, seems like a non-solution to me. I can see where you’re coming from and how the mob mentality takes over, but not calling out, and not telling people that they’re saying hurtful things, doesn’t seem any more helpful than the mob.
As for engaging and so on, I was going off what I read into bfp’s post, especially about making room for other people’s stories. If someone calls me a slur, my response is going to be “Don’t call me that, it’s hurtful and derogatory” but that doesn’t leave room for their story, or why they called me that; it just tells them to stop. But in my experience if I leave room for a person in an oppressor-group (relative to me) to explain themselves and why that word isn’t really hurtful, they don’t understand that the word is hurtful and they’ll use it again and again. (If I engage them again, they say that I wasn’t offended the first time, so it must not matter that much.) And I don’t want to put up with that.
Sky
5 Sep 10 at 1:57 am
(I wrote my comment while you were writing yours, so my first paragraph is now irrelevant.)
Sky
5 Sep 10 at 1:58 am
I don’t think that’s what she means about stories. I think her point is that instead of calling out and asking to be called out (which tends to be a rather adversarial position), don’t focus on that. Instead, focus on listening to what other people have to say – so if someone says “Hold on, what you said wasn’t okay” (however it’s phrased) give them the space they need.
I mean, I think most of this is talking about dealing with other people in social justice – especially online – to find ways to not tear into each other over every slight. But not to let things slide and not assume the worst before saying something.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 2:11 am
I think I’ve failed to write what I wanted as well as I wanted if you’re getting the message that it’s not okay to protect yourself. I’m sorry about that.
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 2:46 am
“But I think critiquing this idea of “ally” as an identity and the way it’s been used in oppressive ways is also important, because we have people who are like “I’d care about your problems but since you weren’t nice enough to me I won’t care about anyone in the entire world who is like you” which also happens way too often.”
Oh, yeah, I get that. I don’t like people “identifying” as “allies” either. Actually I think that’s kind of inherently busted — if the only “cred” you have is “I CARE SO MUCH about the poor pitiful transfolk” then you’re not invested in fixing the world, you’re invested in Being the Savior. And that’s gross. But I think we have to get those people out in ways that don’t enable abuse of people who are trying and who are not trying for “identity”‘s sake.
Fierceawakening
5 Sep 10 at 10:04 am
Well, yes. Check out Elizabeth McClung’s comment on the Prescriptivism post for a very pointed comment on that (and specifically applicable to QT’s commenters at the time it happened, and for some time after…and probably still true to some extent).
Lisa Harney
5 Sep 10 at 4:19 pm
[...] Social Justice: What Do We Want? – There is some discussion going on across blogs about re-thinking the social justice blog tactic known as a call-out, which in effect looks like a swarm and can feel like bullying to the person being called out. [...]
Interesting posts, weekend of 9/5/10 « Feminists with Female Sexual Dysfunction
5 Sep 10 at 6:30 pm
I definately agree with a lot of this post. I know I’ve engaged in behaving badly online. And don’t I know that it’s easier to justify when I think I’m defending someone from another person’s “bad behavior”? *sigh*
Honestly, as a trans man I’ve pretty much given up on commenting at most trans related websites or posts about trans issues altogether. I’m not calling out QT in particular, as I really haven’t spent a ton of time here, so I don’t believe I have any business doing that.
When I did comment at sites that were run by my sisters, the reactions basically seemed to vary from “there they go trying to make it about teh menz again” to “yes, I’m sure you all have some problems but your lives are nowhere near as hard as ours, so sit down and STFU because we didn’t ask for your opinion.” It got kind of old.
I talked with my fiancee about this. She’s a trans woman of color, and has let me know in no uncertain terms, that this is a beef between white trans women and white trans men. She says that trans POC don’t have the time for this kind of infighting. But she really wishes we would work this out once and for all, because as long we keep going back and forth about who is most oppressed, (which I hadn’t realized it looked like, I just felt like I was trying to be heard), the lives and struggles of trans POC will continue to be devalued.
The ripple effect, it is stronger than it looks.
I also know that I tend to go away very easily when I’m only acting on my own behalf, and that I have personal baggage around this not in any way related to being trans that I do my best to separate out. But feeling like there’s often no use in even opening my mouth is disheartening.
Lincoln
6 Sep 10 at 8:12 am