[Smashpatriarchy] Message from Allison

[Carven Li]

Hey Peter,

Thanks for sharing the message. I am new to the group, everyone.
I want to thank SAP for including me as a new member and for leading the
Book Club.

Allyship groups have always faced this criticism and I would love to meet
with members to discuss this email in-depth. My initial thought is that all
SAP meetings should be intentionally co-facilitated by people who
self-identify as not having male privilege. Voices of allyship should not
be more centered than voices of those who do not have the privilege in
question; they are both important and very effective when seen in dynamic.

The self-identified woman or women should be rotated, if possible, to
reflect the diversity of people who do not have male privilege.

Looking forward to discussions!

Carven


On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Peter Gill <petergill85 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I’m gonna start this with a caveat, cause there are folks in Solidarity
> Against Patriarchy<https://www.facebook.com/SolidarityAgainstPatriarchy?ref=hl&directed_target_id=0> i’ve
> got a lot of respect for, and i believe the group’s intentions come from a
> well-meaning place. As well, in relation to the whole MRA ordeal last
> summer, the formation of a feminist-allied group of (mostly) men did seem
> to make sense, and i still appreciate the “Don’t be a creep!” poster
> campaign y’alldid.
>
> However, despite my initial support, a year later I’ve come to see SAP as
> problematic, if not outright patriarchal. I’m realizing that “men educating
> men” reinforces the idea that men are authority figures - even in the realm
> of women’s lib. I can now see how this kind of (public) organizing cedes
> more space to men, making their experiences, interests & concerns the focal
> point of women’s struggles against male-centric environments. I am
> concerned that SAP may be a kind of “safe space” for participants to avoid
> having their privileges challenged, and opinions deprioritized by women.
> Seeing that solidarity is never a given, I also worry that this kind of
> organizing enables men to claim “feminist cred” while still going about
> their daily lives treating women as their inferiors, never learning to
> listen to their experiences. (Albeit, I will admit, this is not a problem
> limited to this kind of organizing; there are plenty of doods who organize
> -with- women and still act like know-it-all shits)
>
> I’m not saying this because I want y’all to go out & find some women to
> tokenize & take orders from (myself included in that). I’m saying this
> because I was openly in support of the group when it first began, despite
> many women’s concerns, and now feel it’s my responsibility to publicly
> clarify that I am no longer in favor of this kind of organizing. I think
> it’s been an interesting journey, and there are certainly some lovely
> things that have come out of SAP. For me though, the problems are
> outweighing the positives, and I can no longer give a thumbs-up on publicly
> organizing as "mostly" men around feminism.
>
> I realize what I’m saying may hurt feelings here, cause y’all have been
> invested in this project for some time now, taking risks, experimenting &
> all, but y’know – a year ago I was asked what I thought about men
> organizing like this, and although my opinion hasn’t been solicited...
> well, here it is! **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Smashpatriarchy mailing list
> Smashpatriarchy at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/smashpatriarchy
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/smashpatriarchy/attachments/20130920/110e1176/attachment.html>