I have no idea what % of my timeline #romance and romance adjacent and already tuned in to the RWA implosion ...but beyond that if you are in the nonprofit / membership org world this concerns you.
Detailed Timeline: claireryanauthor.com/blog/2019/12/2
Good Summary:
ew.com/books/2020/01/
Conversation
Replying to
If you are on the staff of a nonprofit and/or volunteer on a board of a nonprofit, this cascade of events concerns you. Particularly (I believe) the way that efforts toward justice (diversity, inclusion, equity, access reforms via policies and processes) were used against intent.
1
3
15
The labor of marginalized members, particularly women of color within RWA, who were fighting to make concrete changes in their national professional organization, was appropriated and used to destroy their work (and directly used to try and silence them).
1
2
10
This isn't an isolated incident, either in RWA or in the world of nonprofit cultural institutions and organizations where under-represented people are fighting to re-center their own stories and voices in the face imperialist, white supremacist cisheteropatriarchy.
1
1
8
If you work + volunteer in any space of this kind, and you care about fighting for a more just future, be on the offensive. Think about how policies and procedures could be weaponized. Think about who is most likely to weaponize them. Build defenses, contingency plans.
1
4
11
We can't stop the work. We absolutely shouldn't stop the work. But be ever aware that there are people for whom the change we are fighting for is something they will literally put their entire career (hell, the very existence of RWA!) on the line to stop in its tracks.
1
1
7
One key vulnerability in codes of conduct, codes of ethics, statements of diversity and inclusion, and other policy instruments that we often turn to within organizations to work toward justice is that they too often rely on language of non-discrimination.
1
1
5
They rely on the very (white) American belief that the solution to inequality is treating everyone equally. To be "colorblind" ... to be proud that you couldn't tell your colleague was queer ... to "not notice" a disability.
1
4
When policies and procedures require treating everyone "the same" they are VERY VERY EASY to weaponize against those who name discrimination. Because it's not the quiet white supremacist who broke the rules ... it's the mean black woman who called them names.
1
1
5
Drawing attention to inequality, in effect, becomes equated with creating the inequality. IF YOU JUST DIDN'T NOTICE the inequality, you marginalized person making a fuss, everyone would be treated the same BUT NOW I (the person expressing bigoted opinions) am being treated badly.
1
4
person expressing bigoted opinion
⬇️
files code of conduct violation complaint
⬇️
against the person who identified the bigotry
⬇️
what does your policy require you to do in this instance?
1
1
7
If your policy is written as a "neutral" document (there are no neutral documents) then likely your policy encourages you to find fault with the person who used Mean Words against the person who had a Bigoted Opinion because, after all, we must be *inclusive*.
1
6
So.
Think.
And think DAMN hard.
About when push comes to shove who gets to be welcome in your space, who gets to be included, and who pays the price of that welcome by being excluded.
Because someone ALWAYS pays the price.
1
6
And I, personally, would rather the shitty white supremacist grifters paid the price than the queer black lesbians writing me good kissing books. And I'd like organizational policy documents to back me up on that one.
2
1
9
Oh, my, I guess I had some feels.
1
4