Struggling Together at General Assembly

 (Updated Below)

This past Wednesday at Occupy Boston, near the end of the assembly, a group of young men* spoke out (loudly, breaking from process, and with some degree of [male] anger); they said that we had lost sight of why we were here and what we were about and they had felt that their voices had been silenced.

They were reacting directly to the facilitation of that evening’s GA. This GA had been quite tightly facilitated and facilitators were trying a new tool: floor monitors. Floor monitors were to seek out all of the clarifying questions, points of information, friendly amendments, and blocks, and then direct the group’s attention to them when their time came. This first night, the floor monitors had taken on the role of speaking for the person with the point, question, amendment, or issue. This, it seems, had not necessarily been the intentions of the facilitator team but had occurred nonetheless (and has since not been repeated). Also there was some degree of vetting by the floor monitors (i.e. if your point of information was too-off-topic then the floor managers would suggest, or maybe tell you, that you needed to get on individual stack). This vetting process appears to still be happening by floor monitors.

So, Wednesday, this group of men—who I believe were all physical occupiers—was very upset and threatening to leave the movement/encampment. They used their loud male voices and their anger to direct attention towards themselves and effectively disrupt the process. The facilitator, at this time—GA was pretty much over—decided that it was time for her to step aside. The group of 5 4 men moved to the front and onto the “stage” where they stood side-by-side and shouted their dissatisfaction.

I was incredibly impressed and proud with how the assembled community reacted. People moved forward to listen to these men and there was a sense that we must embrace them and be sure that they feel valued, loved, and listened to. People’s Mic immediately went into effect (we had been using a PA system during GA). A few people spoke out to them asking what it is that they were specifically taking issue with. Then @TomJoadsGhost called for People’s Mic and requested that these men join us down in the general area, rather than standing above us on the stage. They obliged—this was a great first step as far as the dynamics of the space and the mood of the discussion. As more people begin speaking out (with People’s Mic) someone stepped up to take stack (so less assertive people would not be passed over). A bit later, a woman spoke out and asked that we create a more deliberate circular space so that more people can see the individual speaking up. Several members of the facilitator working group spoke—largely without defensiveness. The woman who was facilitating that night came into the center of the crowd and spoke up. She had had a stressful night and often frustration is unfairly targeted at the facilitator his/her/hirself; however, she did not back away from this conversation and instead placed herself right in the middle of it.

What had begun as a somewhat anxious and tense conversation sparked by some very upset individuals had been caringly and respectfully deescalated and addressed by the community. I believe that most of the men who originally voiced their complaints did feel responded to, cared about, and respected by the community. (One of these men did storm away before we were able to begin conversing about it; several people did follow him to talk it through and I believe I’ve since seen him at the occupation.)

To wrap up this anecdote for those particularly interested in how this panned out: the thrust of the conversation became understanding what people were having issues with; communicating and re-communicating that facilitators do not have power over others, but rather are there to aid in empowering the process (which is an expression of the entire group and a structure meant to empower the community); it was re-iterated that we are learning about how we like to run GA and that new things are just experiments and need not stay the same; it was repeated that the more people who can participate in the facilitator’s working group the better; the facilitators noted that having the floor monitors paraphrase others’ thoughts is problematic; and we all began to work through the complexity and tension inherit in empowering a process and trusting that a powerful process with an empowered facilitator need not feel like or lead to hierarchies or authority of one individual, but also that it is important to remain vigilant in holding the process accountable to the group. Good stuff all around.

But the main reason that I bring this story up is to discuss the way these men expressed their dissatisfaction, their concerns, and their feelings. They did so with their loud (and empowered) male voices and by allowing their anger to be very visible to the group. I think that their concerns are very valid and I do understand being angry about them. And I don’t bring this up to get into a hierarchy of oppression debate or to make commentary about these men’s experiences. But what I do wish to say is that I believe the community should respond to all concerns of this nature by embracing those who are upset, deeply listening to their issues, and working with them and others to address people’s feelings and concerns. But, I worry: In this case, these men were greeted with precisely that, but were they greeted with it because they used institutionalized and normative means to garner a great deal of attention and alarm? I believe so, at least in part.

They used a set of means that are much more comfortable for them to use than they would be for others to use. And they used a set of means that are much more uncomfortable for me to witness than they are for others with different identities and experiences to witness.

And, while their feelings of upset and frustrations are valid, it makes me very worried that their behavior, in fact, further silences others whose concerns are just as valid.

In some ways, a stricter process makes space for those who are more often and easily silenced and we must bear this in mind. I am thankful that, on Wednesday night, several people stepped up to improvise implementing some type of respectful community process in order to simultaneously address these men’s concerns and to make safe spaces for all. That was a very positive reaction (one we might not have had just a week ago, before we began to experiment with the structure and process of GA).

It’s important to keep in mind what the facilitation process at GA can do that is positive, while we also strive to keep it accountable to the whole community. And I hope that those who can use their booming male voices and their scary anger remember the effects of those tools on others and those tools’ history as a means of oppression. I hope as a group we continue to be vigilant in keeping spaces safe for even the quietest among us. Those people, too, must have space to express their issues (over which they are feeling just as upset as those men were those that night) and get equal time in front of the community. Those are some of the things I hope.

I almost People’s Mic’d myself to say a bit about this last Wednesday night, but I wasn’t sure how to say it in a short enough sound byte and to do so in a way that did not trigger to oppression-hierarchy game amongst the group of men who already felt silenced and misunderstood. Anyone reading this with some fabulous sense of how to cut this down to a few non-triggering sentences that can easily be divvied into 3 or 4 word parcels, PLEASE let me know!

In solidarity, A

*Note: I am assuming that these 5 4 individuals are male-identified. This is not an OK assumption, but—in this case—I am really just using this instance as a case study to talk about larger concerns. Therefore, while I might be misrepresenting the details of this a particular anecdote (please do correct me), I think that the larger point remains valid.

UPDATE  1, 10/9/11, 19:12 PM:
The facilitator's take on what happened at Wednesday night's GA. She also touches upon some of the issues of sexism that the facilitation working group is dealing with.