this is the code for the render ad
Wedding Woes

"I'm not sure sweeping generalizations helps our/the cause."

Dear Prudence,

In the past, every activist or action group I’ve been a part of has either fallen apart due to infighting or had people all be on exactly the same page about everything (usually the former). Recently I’ve been part of creating a practical support network that provides free transportation for people traveling for healthcare. We are helping a lot of people. There have been a few instances where people in the group have clashed over what our policies should be in different situations due to some ideological/personal differences in the group (we are a hearty mix of old school dems, progressive liberals, socialists, and anarchists). What has been amazing is that we have actually managed to work through these issues! I’ve never seen this happen before, and I think it’s because everyone in the group is very committed to the work. The problem is that some of my friends (not in the group) almost look down on me/the group because of this. I confided in a friend that people in the group were having a heated (but civil!) conversation about gender neutral language and reproductive rights, and she responded “lol f*ck TERFs, burn it down.” I genuinely don’t know how to respond in these situations. I feel immensely proud that we are able to help people and that any differences we have we are able to find a workable compromise on, but I feel like if I point that out, I’m defending the views of someone I don’t necessarily agree with. Is there a good response? Should I just avoid getting into these conversations in the first place?”

— Is Compromise Complicit?

Re: "I'm not sure sweeping generalizations helps our/the cause."

  • I mean. I’d assess whether you want to be friends with someone cutting down the valuable work you do. 
  • Pragmatism is not dead. 
  • I mean yes f*ck TERFs absolutely but explaining why something is TERFy and/ not just saying FU to people is often what it takes to make progress. 

    Now if someone in the group is explicitly using racist/sexist/homophobic/bigoted language and is not at all interested in being called in then yes I agree compromise is complicit there. But are they learning, are they making progress, are their behaviors changing? Then I don’t see that as compromise I see it as progress. Slow progress but that’s what this works is. 
  • I'm trying to figure out the situation this conversation would be coming up in.  I think LW could save themselves some grief by just sharing that they're proud of their group's work and leave it at that.
  • VarunaTT said:
    I'm trying to figure out the situation this conversation would be coming up in.  I think LW could save themselves some grief by just sharing that they're proud of their group's work and leave it at that.
    I agree, but it also sounds like LW is talking to friends about it and they're the ones who are all "Fuck TERFs! Burn it down!" meaning that LW should tell her co-collaborators (co-workers?) with whom they're having these conversations to kick rocks instead of trying to work through differences/educate them.  But maybe LW should take this as a lesson to not bring it up with friends who can't see nuance.  IDK if it's worth ending a friendship over, but it also sounds like the friend can't envision the conversation(s) LW had and how productive they were/are.  
Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards