Hi All,
This is a mild divergence from the usual content of my reflections, but nonetheless, equally important to speak about. I believe that topics of social justice, activism and community building go hand in hand when considering aspects of liminal (in between) experiences of otherness :slash: experiences outside the norms - be they gender-based, sex, class, ability, race, cultural, religious or otherwise.
Since I've moved to T.O. I have been thinking about the dynamics of activist communities and our relationships with each other. There has been some work done on this subject, see: The Revolution Starts at Home as a recent book release, as well as a few workshops done locally on the issue of addressing (mostly) physical and sexual, as well as emotional violence in our everyday interactions with one another in our communities. While I believe these conversations are useful, in my humble opinion, conversations about how we treat each other and especially this idea of emotional violence need to be at the center of activist and community building work.
In other words, social justice is meaningless, if you cannot have a relatively safe and connective discussion with members of your own community. And by "safe" I am not referring to interactions and conversations that are avoidant. Safety, to my mind, should not imply nor involve avoidance of delving into topics or discussions that involve vulnerability in investigation and accountability. Nor does it mean presuming a lack of emotional expression in having such discussions, even if they be 'difficult' emotions such as anger, sadness, or grief, for example. But, it does require that as members of diverse communities, we abstain from making assumptions about the life history, and intersections of oppression and privilege that each of us faces.
While I believe in the necessity and importance of carving space for folks to self-identify the intersections of their lived experiences and histories, it is important to bear in mind that not doing so does not imply an absence of experience. In other words, while there is much power in the act of naming experiences of oppressions, we should not expect nor assume that a community member's abstention from labelling or identifying themselves translates into an absence of lived experience of oppression. We should not assume that members of our community who appear to be able-bodied, physically healthy, to have no 'visible' mental health issues, who appear to have access to money, who function what one may consider to be well or highly, who do not appear to have substance misuse issues, who appear to have access to education, who have not divulged pervasive histories of abuse or neglect, or housing status, or employment history, gender identity, or who may pass as white, for example.... do not experience trauma, pervasive societal barriers or experiences of marginalization.
Each one of us has a unique blend of experiences historically, within our family makeup (if we were so lucky to have one), and in our current contexts that without naming, would be invisible to each other.
In fact, I believe the very basis of social justice work and connecting with each other in our communities should start with the assumption that every one of us has our own unique experience of trauma, and potentially with any number of intersections of oppression. To assume otherwise, is to invisibilize oppression, and to set up community dynamics where credibility is given to those who are willing and more importantly, able to name those experiences.
Recently, I spent some time in New York City over Pride. I have been there several times over the past few years, and this year at the Trans march, I was really struck by the differences in community makeup and activist expression. The most glaring difference, was the language used by speakers. There was a notable difference in who was on the microphone, how they spoke, and the language used that indicated to me a huge difference in the class and academic access of folks in this community vis a vis Toronto. I have come to realize that Toronto's activist community is highly educated... and the language used and the way ideas around social justice are conveyed are often at a very high intellectual level, meaning that select folks will have the ability to comprehend these conversations.
In T.O., especially, a large portion of the West End Queer Activist Community, as well as other community activist circles, are comprised of Masters and PHD level students - or at least, articulations of ideas and experiences. There is a certain level of reading ability and comprehension one must have, as well as time, access to and direction to seek out the ideas commonly circulated in T.O. activist circles in order to feel a part of much of the work done in our communities.
The ideas of everyday folk who experience marginalization and oppression (as seen in NYC), however, are no less impactful. In fact, those folks who lack access to these activist spaces should be at the center of community work. What kind of activism are we doing when only a select group of us can comprehend the ideas?
Radical activism should not be about cred or status or who is the loudest, or busiest with 'x' amount of projects, or how many ways one is capable of identifying their experiences. There are many creative ways for us to cross borders within our communities and truly do grassroots solidarity work (eg. community kitchens, zines, murals, art projects, call for artists targeting mental health survivors etc.) that do build Access For All.
And, while Toronto is better than many places at creative projects, we still have a long way to go in our conversations with each other...
