Maenads of the (R)Evolution

Going Mad and Taking You With Us (Since 2012)

Category: Social Justice


I’ve noticed something of late.

A lot of discussion about behavior in social justice circles has circled on what’s “decent.” As in, respecting people’s identity or acknowledging their struggles is the bare minimum requirement to be a decent human being.

And I’ve noticed a lot of pushback from folks on this.

“You’re saying I’m a monster just because I don’t want to use your pronouns!” seems to be the general cry.

Well, no.

Decency isn’t a pass/fail. It’s not something you have or you don’t.

You might, in fact, be a perfectly decent person — when dealing with animals. Or one marginalized group, but not another. Or only with privileged folks.

The fact that you’re unwilling to attempt to treat other human beings as if they have a right to exist doesn’t erase ALL of your decency. It just means that those of us who are being erased, marginalized, hurt by your words are not going to see the other sides of you that may be decent. Or particularly care that they exist.

This goes double for when you’re posting on the internet. I can’t see your time volunteering at the local ASPCA or donating to Battered Women’s Support Services; I can see only you whining about how using pronouns is so difficult; I can see only you setting yourself up as the expert on overculture in a particular country; I can see only you moving goalposts in the discussion and erecting so many straw men you could start several festivals in the desert.

Continue reading

Respecting Agency

The first step to building a better world — a culture of respect, a culture of consent, a culture of strong, empowered people and awesome relationships — is respecting each other’s agency.

Individualism gets its horn tooted a lot, and it’s held up as a veritable god, the central figure of the North American cult of Bootstraps. But there’s some disconnect here — whereas many people are quick to shout to the heavens about everyone being an island, they never got any help, why should you, they’re not so quick to shout to the heavens about respecting the agency of individuals.

If you get assaulted, it’s also your fault — it’s not the fault of the other individuals who didn’t respect your agency, your boundaries, who didn’t seek your consent. You’re expected to fend off all these attackers with a single glance from your world-weary eye, one blow from your sharpened tongue.

Related to that, if people define you wrong — if they disrespect the definitions and labels you have chosen for yourself — that’s also your fault. Why do you fit so well into the definitions we’ve built up in our heads, we ask, if you didn’t want to be defined that way? If you don’t wish to be called something, stop acting / looking /thinking / being like how we perceive / define that thing.

We get this message in childhood — “If you don’t want to be called a wild cat / disobedient child / crazy person, stop acting like one” — and it continues into adulthood, where we take it, internalize it, and use it as a weapon against others.

The paternalistic belief that we can define other people for them. The refusal to accept that they reject those definitions, those labels; the refusal to respect their agency as they choose their own markers.

Recently Star Foster relinquished the term pagan. She’d blogged within pagandom, as a pagan, for several years, but she’s finally realized that word no longer fits her. She can no longer consider herself pagan.

Continue reading

Human Rights are for Everybody — Even our Monsters

Trigger warning: discussion of rape, rape culture, ableism

“He killed someone. In my opinion he shouldn’t have any rights.”

“When she decided to take a life, she decided to give up her rights.”

I see this attitude a lot. A lot more in pagandom than I’d like to, frankly. I guess people don’t realize how many things are so incredibly problematic with that idea.

For one, you can’t shade it. The idea that committing a crime causes someone to forfeit their human rights requires black and white thinking.

But the people who say this don’t want to admit that, oh no. If you question them on their position — “Do you think the same way about someone who robs a bank?” — they’ll evade, hem and haw. “Well it’s not that simple; nothing’s black and white; it’s a situational thing.”

Yet every time someone gets killed, you see this same attitude get trotted out by the same people.

Because all deaths are exactly the same. Because murderers don’t need help. They’re just evil. Or mentally ill, and obviously mentally ill people shouldn’t have rights. Like you, Morag. You shouldn’t have rights.

Do you see this slippery slope we’re on?

That’s not all, though. There’s more wrong with this picture.

“When she decided to take a life, she decided to give up her rights.”

Oh, so she’s no longer entitled to a fair trial, in a court of law, by a jury of her peers? She’s no longer entitled to due process

Well that makes things simple. Just throw her in the electrical chair! Don’t have to pay to feed and clothe her or rehabilitate her. We’ll just kill her, so people know that killing people is wrong, and you get punished for it.

Of course, this is what people are getting at when they say criminals have given up their rights. They are saying that murderers should not go to jail, because it’s a waste of taxpayer dollars. They’re saying we should just kill these people.

Still want to tell me it’s not black and white thinking?

But wait. There’s more.  Continue reading