![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A while ago I had a brief conversation with Shreen Ayob about her pdf "Pick Your Battles: a practical guide to social activism" and promised to give her further feedback...then didn't. (Sorry Shreen /o\)
Having been reminded about this promise I think I have to give up on the clear summary I was hoping to produce, so instead here are some rambling general thoughts. I'm making this a public post since she said she's after feedback leading up to the next edition and this way other people can have a look and comment.
So, these are my thoughts after reading the pamphlet again. Not all of these relate to disability, but I found it hard to untangle them. For some context: I am not sure I count as an activist myself, though it's something I'm trying to get into, but a lot of my friends and social circle are activists and not all my experiences with them have been good.
The main thing I was reminded of is that I really like it! It's inviting and easy to read and incredibly inspiring, and you cover all the important points pretty well. I realised afterwards that I should have been taking notes on the things I liked AS WELL as the things I didn't like, sorry. Of course then this post would be even longer!
And now...a bunch of less positive things.
Disability specific:
First off, I'm not sure PDFs are very accessible to screenreaders and people with issues with certain colours and fonts, a text only version might be helpful. I must admit I'm not 100% sure of this point, though. I had no trouble reading the pdf myself apart from some weird issue with all the quotes going grey and unreadable.
The "I don't have the energy" advice is not really very useful for disabled people. Here's the general gist of what I would add, either there or elsewhere:
"There are many different kinds of activism, and hopefully you can find something that doesn't use up too much energy. For example, if you have limited mobility or low physical energy that makes it hard to attend rallies etc, you might find it easier to write letters or make phonecalls instead. If you have social anxiety consider writing a blog, creating art, or volunteering to do behind the scenes work like stuffing envelopes. If you want to organise a group but can't stand the spotlight, get someone else to do public relations. Sometimes it feels like there is some minimum bar of True Activist Achievement required to make a difference, but every little bit counts, and activism should have space for people of many different levels of ability and skill."
(It's a bit longwinded as is my way, I'm sure you could make it pithier)
"Choose your level of commitment": I feel it would be nice to mention disabled people here. If nothing else, explicitly including disabled people in your audience will challenge your able bodied reader's expectations. Why centre the experiences of ablebodied people?
A hugely important point you don't say: Make sure your meeting places are accessible! Specifically to wheelchairs, but also in general. Also on public transport routes if possible. In general be open to the needs of your members (eg some people can't hear well in noisy environments, and so would prefer not to meet in a restaurant) If you have your meetings up a flight of stairs in an expensive restaurant on the outskirts of town, you are actively excluding disabled and poor people before you even start.
Other things I think are definite flaws:
Your pamphlet implies that "working to make the world a better place" and
"activism" are the same thing, yet there are forms of political action that really aren't activism and certainly aren't included in your pamphlet. There's nothing wrong with having a specific focus but I think you need to explicitly say that there are powerful ways to improve the world which do not fit the definition of activism. Otherwise it implies that anyone who is unable to perform activism of the sort you describe is incapable of helping make the world a better place, which isn't true. I have encountered a lot of able bodied activists dismissing disabled bloggers who are unable to attend rallies etc and thus aren't "real" activists, and your pamphlet could inadvertently feed into this kind of attitude.
You assume everyone is in a position to create a new activist group themselves, when many people can't or wouldn't want to.
It feels like you avoid saying "A lot of the problems overseas are exacerbated by the policies of governments including ours. It may be more effective to lobby the government at home to change those policies instead of trying to help people overseas"
If you are trying to fix a problem affecting a group you're not in, you should try as much as possible to let the people who are directly affected not only be included but take centre stage, both as decision makers and as the face of your movement. Sometimes the most powerful thing you can do to affect change is to step back (I have experienced this as a white antiracist trying to remember to shut up and let POC talk)
I guess I don't feel you are strong enough in saying: if your activist group does not actively include people in a particular oppressed group, you are effectively contributing to their oppression. It is vitally important not to assume that everyone shares your level of income, education, ability etc. (I mean I'm sure you do believe that, based on what you've written. I'm just not sure your readers will pick it up if the idea hasn't occurred to them before)
You act like there is this clear distinction between Activism and everyday life. Obviously people can't wear their activist hats all the time, but I think it's important not to underestimate the political power (both good and bad) of small everyday acts. I have seen too many activists who make a distinction between Activists (who are always good) and Regular People (who are at best useless proto-activists), eg male feminists who think they are immune from sexism and consider themselves better feminists than any women who don't know the right jargon.
Right! Sorry to bombard you with so much negativity, I really do think it's a good guide. Good luck with the new version and I hope some of this was helpful.
Having been reminded about this promise I think I have to give up on the clear summary I was hoping to produce, so instead here are some rambling general thoughts. I'm making this a public post since she said she's after feedback leading up to the next edition and this way other people can have a look and comment.
So, these are my thoughts after reading the pamphlet again. Not all of these relate to disability, but I found it hard to untangle them. For some context: I am not sure I count as an activist myself, though it's something I'm trying to get into, but a lot of my friends and social circle are activists and not all my experiences with them have been good.
The main thing I was reminded of is that I really like it! It's inviting and easy to read and incredibly inspiring, and you cover all the important points pretty well. I realised afterwards that I should have been taking notes on the things I liked AS WELL as the things I didn't like, sorry. Of course then this post would be even longer!
And now...a bunch of less positive things.
Disability specific:
First off, I'm not sure PDFs are very accessible to screenreaders and people with issues with certain colours and fonts, a text only version might be helpful. I must admit I'm not 100% sure of this point, though. I had no trouble reading the pdf myself apart from some weird issue with all the quotes going grey and unreadable.
The "I don't have the energy" advice is not really very useful for disabled people. Here's the general gist of what I would add, either there or elsewhere:
"There are many different kinds of activism, and hopefully you can find something that doesn't use up too much energy. For example, if you have limited mobility or low physical energy that makes it hard to attend rallies etc, you might find it easier to write letters or make phonecalls instead. If you have social anxiety consider writing a blog, creating art, or volunteering to do behind the scenes work like stuffing envelopes. If you want to organise a group but can't stand the spotlight, get someone else to do public relations. Sometimes it feels like there is some minimum bar of True Activist Achievement required to make a difference, but every little bit counts, and activism should have space for people of many different levels of ability and skill."
(It's a bit longwinded as is my way, I'm sure you could make it pithier)
"Choose your level of commitment": I feel it would be nice to mention disabled people here. If nothing else, explicitly including disabled people in your audience will challenge your able bodied reader's expectations. Why centre the experiences of ablebodied people?
A hugely important point you don't say: Make sure your meeting places are accessible! Specifically to wheelchairs, but also in general. Also on public transport routes if possible. In general be open to the needs of your members (eg some people can't hear well in noisy environments, and so would prefer not to meet in a restaurant) If you have your meetings up a flight of stairs in an expensive restaurant on the outskirts of town, you are actively excluding disabled and poor people before you even start.
Other things I think are definite flaws:
Your pamphlet implies that "working to make the world a better place" and
"activism" are the same thing, yet there are forms of political action that really aren't activism and certainly aren't included in your pamphlet. There's nothing wrong with having a specific focus but I think you need to explicitly say that there are powerful ways to improve the world which do not fit the definition of activism. Otherwise it implies that anyone who is unable to perform activism of the sort you describe is incapable of helping make the world a better place, which isn't true. I have encountered a lot of able bodied activists dismissing disabled bloggers who are unable to attend rallies etc and thus aren't "real" activists, and your pamphlet could inadvertently feed into this kind of attitude.
You assume everyone is in a position to create a new activist group themselves, when many people can't or wouldn't want to.
It feels like you avoid saying "A lot of the problems overseas are exacerbated by the policies of governments including ours. It may be more effective to lobby the government at home to change those policies instead of trying to help people overseas"
If you are trying to fix a problem affecting a group you're not in, you should try as much as possible to let the people who are directly affected not only be included but take centre stage, both as decision makers and as the face of your movement. Sometimes the most powerful thing you can do to affect change is to step back (I have experienced this as a white antiracist trying to remember to shut up and let POC talk)
I guess I don't feel you are strong enough in saying: if your activist group does not actively include people in a particular oppressed group, you are effectively contributing to their oppression. It is vitally important not to assume that everyone shares your level of income, education, ability etc. (I mean I'm sure you do believe that, based on what you've written. I'm just not sure your readers will pick it up if the idea hasn't occurred to them before)
You act like there is this clear distinction between Activism and everyday life. Obviously people can't wear their activist hats all the time, but I think it's important not to underestimate the political power (both good and bad) of small everyday acts. I have seen too many activists who make a distinction between Activists (who are always good) and Regular People (who are at best useless proto-activists), eg male feminists who think they are immune from sexism and consider themselves better feminists than any women who don't know the right jargon.
Right! Sorry to bombard you with so much negativity, I really do think it's a good guide. Good luck with the new version and I hope some of this was helpful.
Tags: