![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So this weekend the periodically re-occuring discussion on behaviour and consent at KAOS parties fired up again. And it feels like there is a new vibe to it this time, a more positive one than I have experienced in my going-on-20 years of seeing it repeated.
This post collects a lot of my thoughts and opinions on the subject into one place. Because FB discussions are hard to reference later and verbal discussions even more so, and heck some of these are just jotted down in my notes for my contribution to an somewhat improvised speaking at the 48-Hour party just been.
1. Mild trigger and hot-button warnings for conversation around sexual assault, non/consent and KAOS party behaviour.
2. I've tried to keep this as gender neutral as possible - I know we're socially conditioned to automatically cast thse events in a M-on-F light but F-on-M, F-on-F and M-on-M events are equally problematic, and often more difficult to speak up about.
3. Comments on this post to be directed at the Dreamwidth version please. Anon comments will be screened automatically.
Update: conversation seems to have started at the Livejournal post anyway, so comment there.
4. These are my opinions; opinions do not exist in a vacumn. I'm happy to engage further in conversation/debate; I'm happy for people to share their experiences if they feel like doing so; I will not tolerate personal attacks, criticism of peoples actions/reactions in an event or well-intended advice in response.
5. At points in this post I've straight out borrowed from a few other people who have already said the things I would like to say, often better, with permission for the big chunks. I haven't attributed these because I want people to be able to choose if or how they enter the conversation. If you recognise someone's voice or comment from elsewhere please respect that. If you see your words in here, thank you.
In this conversation I find it important to keep a sense of perspective about the "size" of the behaviours we are wanting to address. A lot of this particular discussion and one of the reasons going to the police has been brought up repeatedly has been in the context or shadow of actionable sexual assault.
Even with serious assaults and rapes there are a myriad of reasons the victim/survivor may not wish to go to the police. If you don't get that, here are a couple of links to genuine accounts written by survivors which might help you.(TRIGGER WARNING sexual assault, rape, negative post-assault experiences ...)
Writehanded: Yes All Women
Writehanded: Yes All Women Part 2
If you want to learn more about this topic #yesallwomen recently bought a lot online and sparked a lot of discussion (of varying merit but) - google is your friend.
While the end game is certainly eliminating "major" events the means to that end that we are (correctly) discussing is nipping the much "smaller" precursor behaviours and habits in the bud whether these are due to a simple lack of social skills or imported from a potential transgressors previous social norms, before they step over that line deliberately or otherwise. (Deliberate predation is of course a different matter.)
Although we need to be prepared for a more serious incident ideally there would never be a need for the powers-that-be to be called in for anything beyond a quiet word in the ear of someone who is awkwardly hitting on someone or turning out to be a gropey drunk. Where the suggestion of getting the police involved would really be using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut.
One thing I'm pleased to see and hear are people (not just women because this problem is by no means limited to M-on-F) standing up and writing/speaking about their own negative experiences in KAOS. This is the sort of thing which makes it personal and real to other members of the social group - full credit to those people for having the courage to do that. Thank you.
[Update: quote added after permission arrived post-publishing]
If you associate with KAOS at all I can assure you - you know someone who has been affected by this, even if they haven't chosen to speak about it to you.
Hell in a wider context, if you're breathing you know someone who has been abused or assaulted even if they haven't chosen to share it with you.
I think it is really important that the anger and pain these conversations come from and evoke is acknowledged. If people weren't being hurt by this aspect of culture then it wouldn't be a problem would it. And it is really important that people understand that these feelings are out there regardless of whether they experience them themselves.
But I also feel that repeatedly expressing that anger within the conversation does quickly start to hinder attempts to progress to a resolution. I don't intend to criticise anyone here, but if you get the red mist rising whenever the topic comes up it could perhaps be wise to admit that you are not the best person to drive a solution.
Keep prompting the people who are working on solutions by all means, provide the fuel that powers the engine, but calmer heads are also important here! I have certainly done my share of raging in the past - but looking at the outcomes in retrospect has seriously contributed to how I try to be guided by intellect as well as passion.
Things I have heard over the years - multiple reports, some first-hand some only second-hand, that such and such's friend came to KAOS, something happened that they were uncomfortable with, they tried to express this and were told "Oh that's just KAOS" (often by the same friend) .. and consequentially never came back. From knowing some of the persons who didn't come back I can attest this was KAOS' loss.
I have heard KAOS members scoff "Oh well if they can't handle what happens at parties maybe they shouldn't be in KAOS".
At the same time there have been many individuals who definitely triggered my "dubious/creepy" radar and the radar of those around me who have been perfectly welcome to partake in their habits of "getting feely" at parties, or pouring drinks into attractive / already intoxicated young ladies, or seeing how many of the first-year guys they can freak out by being sexual at them.
And then every so often there is an "incident" which has to be dealt with. And I'm very sorry to say that I've seen many of the victims ultimately leave the group and many of the culprits stay on, even if under minor social stigma for a little while but often still perfectly happy and accepted within their particular subgroup of friends.
Then this conversation happens all over again and people agree that "something needs to be done" and sometimes something *is* done WRT to a particular person and things are kept an eye on for a while, then the people "in charge" something move on and with their lives and new people come in (as is the way of it with University groups and most others) ... and the institutional memory seems to develop alzheimers and it happens all over again :(
[deep breath]
First point I would like to address is language related - I feel that framing it as a "club" problem or even a "wider society problem" and saying "well we're better than the general case already" is dangerously framing the situation as an "SEP" (Someone Else's Problem) and abdicating responsibility for doing anything about it.
See also: Five Geek Social Fallacies
This is our circus and all of us monkeys are in this together. It's very clear from this discussion and other things that no matter how good we think we are we still have massive room for improvement - and we all have the responsibility of holding ourselves and our peers to a higher standard - especially those of us who can be considered to have say "elder of the tribe" status. WRT I agree there are people who take that status as a licence to ... be lazy about certain things like asking for consent from younger members.
This is not an issue just to be passed to politburo or to others with the "social status" to do something. Cultural change - which is what is required to counter the "alzheimers" - ultimately requires that the majority step up and accept/enforce the need for change. Everyone has the social status to do something - or should do. But I accept that practically this is not currently the case, and that is one of the things we need to work on.
I included a version of this point when I spoke at the party. KAOS is not a monolithic establishment and we have members with a range of personal boundaries and definitions of fun. It is unavoidable that these are going to come into conflict occasionally - but we can strive to establish a culture where these conflicts are recognised and steered away from while they are still minor, and where people who might be inclined to take advantage of the "permissive" aspect are identified and halted before they cause damage.
KAOS is (supposed to be) a safe environment for people to push their own boundaries. It is not a place to push other peoples boundaries, unless they explicitly asked you to.
These are often floated and I think it is probably a good idea to have a list of people who are on a warning or who have been asked to leave events in the past if only so hosts (and others who might wish to avoid that person specifically) don't have to rely on the grapevine to know that a potential problem may be present at their party, and as a clear way of letting individuals know that they are considered a potential, actionable problem.
But the majority of KAOS parties are actually privately hosted events, or be it with a fairly broad invite. There is no way to enforce a "do-not-invite list" on these hosts, nor should there be.
Also blacklists are a very blunt tool which are nigh-impossible to maintain properly, especially in a group where personal politics and private likes/dislikes have been known to strongly influence the course of events in the past (another aspect of KAOS culture we need to work on). For an excellent extreme example of how a blacklist can become useless/more trouble than use consider the USA's no-fly lists.
Finally there are certain potential legal issues around circulating blacklists and things like libel and slander which KAOS really doesn't want to invite upon itself.
These are people who are designated and identified as the go-to people if there is an issue at a particular event. They will be sober and make it their business to make sure everyone is looked after an having a good time. They will be responsible for resolving issues as much as possible to the caller's and other affected parties satisfaction know to whom to take issues which cannot immediately be resolved. This year in particular the politburo have been making an effort to have politburo members present and semi-officially filling this role at events.
It's technically explicit that you can approach a member of the politburo at any time but again some people didn't see the memo and just because you know it is an option doesn't necessarily make it an easier thing to do if you are new / don't know them that well / happen to have a personal issue with them. And this is what makes this only ever a partial solution. To parapharase what I said when I opened my part of the talk (paraphrase) "Hi my name is Marsden some of you have known me for years but to some of you I could bear a strong resemblence to some guy wearing a black jacket and with long hair who just molested you in one of the darker spaces of the party."
(Lots of people looked confused. But I had their attention.)
There are also concerns that the Approachables may be infiltrated by people who will then take advantage of the position, or become the targets for emotional abuse / attention seeking by some people, or that there simply may not be anyone available to volunteer for some events. All of which should be minimisable if the right cultural expectations are established.
Ideally of course - and this is the goal - everyone in the group should function as an approachable should a situation arise.
If you are not familiar with the use of the term "missing stair" in this context please read at least the first of these links before continuing.
(Trigger warning for sexual assault etc)
The genesis of the term
Two excellent posts on the subject written by a past Kaosian - a lot of Emma's other columns also relate to topics surrounding behaviour and consent.
The Missing Stair and the Necessary Bastard
The Missing Stair Part Two: The Creeper and the Excuser
For all Rule 1 (or zero) is "Don't be a dick" we are often really bad at calling people out on dickish behaviour; is it any wonder that they "show no sign of improvement" even given incredible time and tolerance if we won't even let them know they are doing something unacceptable? I like to believe that very few people are deliberate dicks - although those that are unrepentant need to be sent on their way smartly.
Personal account: when I was (dragged along to) KAOS I was "that guy". I know now that eg women were warned away from me and that I was blocked by various means from purchasing certain people at slave auctions, things like that. And I have come to understand why.
I also believe that this non-confrontive ring-fencing was not and is not the best approach. I was spoken to a few times but never about my general attitude, more by my then girlfriend's friends about specific issues with my behaviours (which to my shame I did not grok very well at the time).
While I am very grateful that KAOS tolerated me long enough to get a few clues - and this is why I will (almost) always advocate an attempt at "rehabilitation" as the first approach - and I can't say that I would have groked what people were trying to convey any better than I did what was said - I do believe that a more direct approach could have shaved a couple of years off the process and prevented significant discomfort to others over that time.
Humans are excellent at cognitive dissonance - the ability to hold mutually exclusive opinions and of particular relevance here to not recognise/admit unwanted behaviours in ourselves and our friends.
- The longer it is between an event and the transgressor being called out the weaker the link in their mind between the event and the consequences.
- eg who sits in the First Meeting listening to the consent part of proceeds and think "oh, I have some bad habits in that area?" How many people listen to this conversation repeating itself year after year and think "Oh I don't contribute to any of that?"
- when you hear a friend made someone uncomfortable do you automatically think "oh so-and-so wouldn't do that" (and give voice to it)?
OTOH when someone does speak up and the the response from those around is to shrug and carry on or laugh it off, that is a very immediate negative consequence for the victim which is highly likely to prevent them speaking up again in the future or even encouraging others to do so. It also sends completely positive feedback to the culprit that this is acceptable behaviour increasing the chance they will repeat, and escalate on future occasion.
Lines need to be drawn early and clearly. They can always be redrawn later on, if the parties involved have become more (or less) comfortable.
I said earlier:
Everyone has the social status to do something - or should do. But I accept that practically this is not currently the case, and that is one of the things we need to work on.
How do we do this? Its fairly simple actually: when something is called out everyone present should at the very least be paying attention and prepared to indicate support for the caller (or their proxy) if and as necessary. Regardless of how you/we/they may feel about the behaviour in question support the right of someone else to not want to go there.
It's a catch 22 situation - if people don't speak up we can't prove that we are going to back them up. If we can't prove we are going to back them up people aren't willing to speak up - for all the reasons their cultural experiences (including KAOS) up to this point have likely drummed into them.
Let's not pretend these types of social actions are em>easy. Especially
- given KAOS' internal "social norms"
- when you don't know the people involved
- when no-one else seems to have noticed / be concerned
- or are new to the group and surrounded by strangers / don't know who it's appropriate to report your concerns to
but
- you might be the only one who picked up on a cue in eg body language if everyone else is doing their own thing
- just because they were doing it happily at the last party doesn't mean that the consent status is unchanged, or is identical to the others doing more-or-less the same nearby
- A false positive is going to do no harm to them
- if someone calls you out / puts you down for asking, that's also calling out behaviour. Start escalating and you will get the attention of someone appropriate pretty quickly (which ideally is everyone, but right now that's still a goal).
(I have not developed the confidence to actually action this responsibility with any regularity myself, which is something else I will admit to being ashamed of and why I don't hold not-acting against others. Even though I might be one of those expected to unquestionably have the status to do so. Again KAOS is not a monolithic entity and not everyone feels the same way about anyone.)
Lets also try not to let our failure to act in the past inform our ability to act in the future. We can make speaking up an accepted, supported, safe part of KAOS, and the group will be the stronger and more welcoming because of it.
Let's acknowledge that this is also really hard. Being told - heck even the suggestion that - you are doing something "wrong" especially in a social context is at the least uncomfortable for most people and tends to immediately put them on the defensive. The potential come-down from having your fun curtailed probably won't help either. Taking criticism constructively is a difficult skill to learn (as is giving constructive criticism).
So it is important that we give the people who accept graciously, withdraw and apologise where appropriate (apologising genuinely might take up a post on it's own) and indeed try to do better the same sort of support and positive reinforcement that is given to the people who step up and call them out.
No one can be immune to being called out - at the very least everyone makes mistakes where social cues are concerned, at the other end of the scale it seems clear that some long-term members have developed habits which are not in line with the culture KAOS is trying to promote and there exists a reluctance to challenge these people for fear of social consequences. (I may still be one of those - if so I expect I will learn about it shortly. I do already know about the camera and it is something I need to work on. Thank you.)
If you are feeling uncomfortable about the idea that you might be called out this might be a good point to take a hard look at why that is. Yes it could be that you are part of the problem - in which case welcome to becoming part of the solution.
As a bonus this is an incredibly valuable life-skill that members can take out into the world with them.
In addition to the "that's just KAOS / member X" handwave above it's even been known for people to basically disappear from a party without telling said friends or to proceed to get completely trashed leaving said friends basically alone and surrounded by strangers without even their planned/promised ride home. Or to bring a friend and suddenly not be there when that friend turns out to be a serious creeper.
These are extreme examples but nevertheless if you choose to bring friends to KAOS you have some responsibilities, usually spelt out at the First Meeting but we know not everyone manages to attend that.
Active informed and enthusiastic consent is not optional and another topic which could take an entire post itself. Here's something I prepared earlier.
Here are a couple of other relevant links.
Modelling Consent
Lets Talk About Consent In Practice
One point I stood up to make at the party that I don't actually recall from previous conversations is that as a club we talk about explicit consent a lot but we are really quite bad at modelling that in our party environment. We have a lot of people who know each other well enough that eg face-boobs or grabass is almost a handshake or a hug - permission is implicit - is it any wonder that new people get confused and believe it is generally acceptable behaviour to walk up to someone and grab/motorboat them?
I think one step we could take is if people could remember to take a few seconds when they encounter each other to visibly ask for and receive permission in the process of these greetings. That might be a bit hard to remember to do (habit) and I'm not saying it needs to happen every time but it would be great to actually demonstrate the behaviour we promote.
Another thing which I thought of (woke up with) on Sunday and think is possibly incredibly important is about the actual language we use. Just as with the physical behaviours I mentioned above it's generally considered acceptable around KAOS to say to/of someone - especially someone revealing clad/unclad words to the effect of "I'd tap that/you" meant as a compliment. But outside KAOS that is the language of harassment and a) I think that probably contributes to a lot of people feeling uncomfortable / triggered especially when it it directed to/at them. I would also ask that people take moment to think about this when they go to compliment someone.
It is great that KAOS is a place where many people feel comfortable with their bodies being effectively on display and with dressing to look "sexy" or "slutty" but just as in wider society dressing to look good is *not* asking to be treated as a sexual object and certainly not asking to receive comments identical in form to sexual harassment they may have encountered elsewhere.
Now that you have read all that, if you would like to engage positively with the ongoing conversation on Facebook the original post (closed for comments) is here, and the currently active discussion thread at the time of this post is here. (I'll be removing these links once they become tired.)
Update: I have realised there is an important point I only touched on indirectly in my previous post so I've written a follow up.
This post collects a lot of my thoughts and opinions on the subject into one place. Because FB discussions are hard to reference later and verbal discussions even more so, and heck some of these are just jotted down in my notes for my contribution to an somewhat improvised speaking at the 48-Hour party just been.
Rules and Disclaimers
1. Mild trigger and hot-button warnings for conversation around sexual assault, non/consent and KAOS party behaviour.
2. I've tried to keep this as gender neutral as possible - I know we're socially conditioned to automatically cast thse events in a M-on-F light but F-on-M, F-on-F and M-on-M events are equally problematic, and often more difficult to speak up about.
3. Comments on this post to be directed at the Dreamwidth version please. Anon comments will be screened automatically.
Update: conversation seems to have started at the Livejournal post anyway, so comment there.
4. These are my opinions; opinions do not exist in a vacumn. I'm happy to engage further in conversation/debate; I'm happy for people to share their experiences if they feel like doing so; I will not tolerate personal attacks, criticism of peoples actions/reactions in an event or well-intended advice in response.
5. At points in this post I've straight out borrowed from a few other people who have already said the things I would like to say, often better, with permission for the big chunks. I haven't attributed these because I want people to be able to choose if or how they enter the conversation. If you recognise someone's voice or comment from elsewhere please respect that. If you see your words in here, thank you.
A matter of scale
In this conversation I find it important to keep a sense of perspective about the "size" of the behaviours we are wanting to address. A lot of this particular discussion and one of the reasons going to the police has been brought up repeatedly has been in the context or shadow of actionable sexual assault.
Aside: (Not) involving the police
Even with serious assaults and rapes there are a myriad of reasons the victim/survivor may not wish to go to the police. If you don't get that, here are a couple of links to genuine accounts written by survivors which might help you.(TRIGGER WARNING sexual assault, rape, negative post-assault experiences ...)
Writehanded: Yes All Women
Writehanded: Yes All Women Part 2
If you want to learn more about this topic #yesallwomen recently bought a lot online and sparked a lot of discussion (of varying merit but) - google is your friend.
Back to the current conversation
While the end game is certainly eliminating "major" events the means to that end that we are (correctly) discussing is nipping the much "smaller" precursor behaviours and habits in the bud whether these are due to a simple lack of social skills or imported from a potential transgressors previous social norms, before they step over that line deliberately or otherwise. (Deliberate predation is of course a different matter.)
Although we need to be prepared for a more serious incident ideally there would never be a need for the powers-that-be to be called in for anything beyond a quiet word in the ear of someone who is awkwardly hitting on someone or turning out to be a gropey drunk. Where the suggestion of getting the police involved would really be using a sledgehammer to crack a peanut.
Surfacing the experiences
One thing I'm pleased to see and hear are people (not just women because this problem is by no means limited to M-on-F) standing up and writing/speaking about their own negative experiences in KAOS. This is the sort of thing which makes it personal and real to other members of the social group - full credit to those people for having the courage to do that. Thank you.
[Update: quote added after permission arrived post-publishing]
I had an experience at the 48 that I'd rather have no had. I'd also like to note I was rather vocal and loud about it, and that people would have definitely heard me, but no one else did ever say "hey - she said stop it - stop it." Probably because to them, it looked pretty "tame" - and it was tame, but I said no repeatedly and I really did mean no.
It wasn't assault at all, not even remotely close. But not everyone at KAOS is touchy-feely, and when those of us say "no" it isn't a game, we really do mean no.
If you associate with KAOS at all I can assure you - you know someone who has been affected by this, even if they haven't chosen to speak about it to you.
Hell in a wider context, if you're breathing you know someone who has been abused or assaulted even if they haven't chosen to share it with you.
I think it is really important that the anger and pain these conversations come from and evoke is acknowledged. If people weren't being hurt by this aspect of culture then it wouldn't be a problem would it. And it is really important that people understand that these feelings are out there regardless of whether they experience them themselves.
Anger vs creating a productive outcome
But I also feel that repeatedly expressing that anger within the conversation does quickly start to hinder attempts to progress to a resolution. I don't intend to criticise anyone here, but if you get the red mist rising whenever the topic comes up it could perhaps be wise to admit that you are not the best person to drive a solution.
Keep prompting the people who are working on solutions by all means, provide the fuel that powers the engine, but calmer heads are also important here! I have certainly done my share of raging in the past - but looking at the outcomes in retrospect has seriously contributed to how I try to be guided by intellect as well as passion.
Framing the problem - "that's just KAOS"
... KAOS encouragres it by refusing to take it seriously. Mainstream society wants its girls to be sexually available under the guise of what is owed men. KAOS wants its girls to be available under the guise of sex-positivity. We put about that the club is safe, accepting, trustworthy, and sexy. Any trasgressions then come under the headding of encouraging people to join in, get with the KAOS spirt. We assume, just because of the localle, that consent of certain things, touching kissing, groping, is automatically implied. Because that's just part of KAOS, right?
Things I have heard over the years - multiple reports, some first-hand some only second-hand, that such and such's friend came to KAOS, something happened that they were uncomfortable with, they tried to express this and were told "Oh that's just KAOS" (often by the same friend) .. and consequentially never came back. From knowing some of the persons who didn't come back I can attest this was KAOS' loss.
I have heard KAOS members scoff "Oh well if they can't handle what happens at parties maybe they shouldn't be in KAOS".
At the same time there have been many individuals who definitely triggered my "dubious/creepy" radar and the radar of those around me who have been perfectly welcome to partake in their habits of "getting feely" at parties, or pouring drinks into attractive / already intoxicated young ladies, or seeing how many of the first-year guys they can freak out by being sexual at them.
And then every so often there is an "incident" which has to be dealt with. And I'm very sorry to say that I've seen many of the victims ultimately leave the group and many of the culprits stay on, even if under minor social stigma for a little while but often still perfectly happy and accepted within their particular subgroup of friends.
Then this conversation happens all over again and people agree that "something needs to be done" and sometimes something *is* done WRT to a particular person and things are kept an eye on for a while, then the people "in charge" something move on and with their lives and new people come in (as is the way of it with University groups and most others) ... and the institutional memory seems to develop alzheimers and it happens all over again :(
[deep breath]
SEPs and "Our circus, our monkeys"
First point I would like to address is language related - I feel that framing it as a "club" problem or even a "wider society problem" and saying "well we're better than the general case already" is dangerously framing the situation as an "SEP" (Someone Else's Problem) and abdicating responsibility for doing anything about it.
When someone does come forward, we will never stand together against the transgressor. That would be rude, and mean, and not in the spirit of acceptance. We won't ban missing stairs, KAOS is "safe", someone has their eye on them, and that's enough, apparently. KAOS is for everyone even rapists. We're just that accepting. We know that we are the wierdos, mister. We aren't going to make someone an outcast of the outcast. That makes us bad people. It's easier to look at posts like this. This was their choice, not your actions.
KAOS has a problem with "not my circus, not my monkeys". Our apathy is making us bad people.
See also: Five Geek Social Fallacies
This is our circus and all of us monkeys are in this together. It's very clear from this discussion and other things that no matter how good we think we are we still have massive room for improvement - and we all have the responsibility of holding ourselves and our peers to a higher standard - especially those of us who can be considered to have say "elder of the tribe" status. WRT I agree there are people who take that status as a licence to ... be lazy about certain things like asking for consent from younger members.
This is not an issue just to be passed to politburo or to others with the "social status" to do something. Cultural change - which is what is required to counter the "alzheimers" - ultimately requires that the majority step up and accept/enforce the need for change. Everyone has the social status to do something - or should do. But I accept that practically this is not currently the case, and that is one of the things we need to work on.
The tension between "Permissive" and "Safe"
One observation from a few years in KAOS: it is a permissive space, not a safe space. There is a degree of safety in the visible social network of it, but fundamentally normal baselines for behaviour are not applied - which both results in freedom and abuses.
I included a version of this point when I spoke at the party. KAOS is not a monolithic establishment and we have members with a range of personal boundaries and definitions of fun. It is unavoidable that these are going to come into conflict occasionally - but we can strive to establish a culture where these conflicts are recognised and steered away from while they are still minor, and where people who might be inclined to take advantage of the "permissive" aspect are identified and halted before they cause damage.
KAOS is (supposed to be) a safe environment for people to push their own boundaries. It is not a place to push other peoples boundaries, unless they explicitly asked you to.
Partial solutions
Black/ban/no-invite lists and their problems
These are often floated and I think it is probably a good idea to have a list of people who are on a warning or who have been asked to leave events in the past if only so hosts (and others who might wish to avoid that person specifically) don't have to rely on the grapevine to know that a potential problem may be present at their party, and as a clear way of letting individuals know that they are considered a potential, actionable problem.
But the majority of KAOS parties are actually privately hosted events, or be it with a fairly broad invite. There is no way to enforce a "do-not-invite list" on these hosts, nor should there be.
Also blacklists are a very blunt tool which are nigh-impossible to maintain properly, especially in a group where personal politics and private likes/dislikes have been known to strongly influence the course of events in the past (another aspect of KAOS culture we need to work on). For an excellent extreme example of how a blacklist can become useless/more trouble than use consider the USA's no-fly lists.
Finally there are certain potential legal issues around circulating blacklists and things like libel and slander which KAOS really doesn't want to invite upon itself.
Doormen/Duty Managers/Wardens/Approachables
These are people who are designated and identified as the go-to people if there is an issue at a particular event. They will be sober and make it their business to make sure everyone is looked after an having a good time. They will be responsible for resolving issues as much as possible to the caller's and other affected parties satisfaction know to whom to take issues which cannot immediately be resolved. This year in particular the politburo have been making an effort to have politburo members present and semi-officially filling this role at events.
It's technically explicit that you can approach a member of the politburo at any time but again some people didn't see the memo and just because you know it is an option doesn't necessarily make it an easier thing to do if you are new / don't know them that well / happen to have a personal issue with them. And this is what makes this only ever a partial solution. To parapharase what I said when I opened my part of the talk (paraphrase) "Hi my name is Marsden some of you have known me for years but to some of you I could bear a strong resemblence to some guy wearing a black jacket and with long hair who just molested you in one of the darker spaces of the party."
(Lots of people looked confused. But I had their attention.)
There are also concerns that the Approachables may be infiltrated by people who will then take advantage of the position, or become the targets for emotional abuse / attention seeking by some people, or that there simply may not be anyone available to volunteer for some events. All of which should be minimisable if the right cultural expectations are established.
Ideally of course - and this is the goal - everyone in the group should function as an approachable should a situation arise.
Missing stairs
If you are not familiar with the use of the term "missing stair" in this context please read at least the first of these links before continuing.
(Trigger warning for sexual assault etc)
The genesis of the term
Two excellent posts on the subject written by a past Kaosian - a lot of Emma's other columns also relate to topics surrounding behaviour and consent.
The Missing Stair and the Necessary Bastard
The Missing Stair Part Two: The Creeper and the Excuser
Calling people out
For all Rule 1 (or zero) is "Don't be a dick" we are often really bad at calling people out on dickish behaviour; is it any wonder that they "show no sign of improvement" even given incredible time and tolerance if we won't even let them know they are doing something unacceptable? I like to believe that very few people are deliberate dicks - although those that are unrepentant need to be sent on their way smartly.
Personal account: when I was (dragged along to) KAOS I was "that guy". I know now that eg women were warned away from me and that I was blocked by various means from purchasing certain people at slave auctions, things like that. And I have come to understand why.
I also believe that this non-confrontive ring-fencing was not and is not the best approach. I was spoken to a few times but never about my general attitude, more by my then girlfriend's friends about specific issues with my behaviours (which to my shame I did not grok very well at the time).
While I am very grateful that KAOS tolerated me long enough to get a few clues - and this is why I will (almost) always advocate an attempt at "rehabilitation" as the first approach - and I can't say that I would have groked what people were trying to convey any better than I did what was said - I do believe that a more direct approach could have shaved a couple of years off the process and prevented significant discomfort to others over that time.
KAOS does have a history of being something of a "social group with training wheels", in that we have a fair number of people who're socially awkward in one way or another. Part and parcel of accepting people who don't fit in well elsewhere is doing our best by them to make sure they don't come to rely on those training wheels, on having certain behaviour tolerated because they don't know any better. We should know better, and we need to both walk the walk and talk the talk.
Distance and cognitive dissonance
Humans are excellent at cognitive dissonance - the ability to hold mutually exclusive opinions and of particular relevance here to not recognise/admit unwanted behaviours in ourselves and our friends.
- The longer it is between an event and the transgressor being called out the weaker the link in their mind between the event and the consequences.
- eg who sits in the First Meeting listening to the consent part of proceeds and think "oh, I have some bad habits in that area?" How many people listen to this conversation repeating itself year after year and think "Oh I don't contribute to any of that?"
- when you hear a friend made someone uncomfortable do you automatically think "oh so-and-so wouldn't do that" (and give voice to it)?
OTOH when someone does speak up and the the response from those around is to shrug and carry on or laugh it off, that is a very immediate negative consequence for the victim which is highly likely to prevent them speaking up again in the future or even encouraging others to do so. It also sends completely positive feedback to the culprit that this is acceptable behaviour increasing the chance they will repeat, and escalate on future occasion.
Lines need to be drawn early and clearly. They can always be redrawn later on, if the parties involved have become more (or less) comfortable.
Giving people agency
I said earlier:
Everyone has the social status to do something - or should do. But I accept that practically this is not currently the case, and that is one of the things we need to work on.
How do we do this? Its fairly simple actually: when something is called out everyone present should at the very least be paying attention and prepared to indicate support for the caller (or their proxy) if and as necessary. Regardless of how you/we/they may feel about the behaviour in question support the right of someone else to not want to go there.
It's a catch 22 situation - if people don't speak up we can't prove that we are going to back them up. If we can't prove we are going to back them up people aren't willing to speak up - for all the reasons their cultural experiences (including KAOS) up to this point have likely drummed into them.
Let's not pretend these types of social actions are em>easy. Especially
- given KAOS' internal "social norms"
- when you don't know the people involved
- when no-one else seems to have noticed / be concerned
- or are new to the group and surrounded by strangers / don't know who it's appropriate to report your concerns to
but
- you might be the only one who picked up on a cue in eg body language if everyone else is doing their own thing
- just because they were doing it happily at the last party doesn't mean that the consent status is unchanged, or is identical to the others doing more-or-less the same nearby
- A false positive is going to do no harm to them
- if someone calls you out / puts you down for asking, that's also calling out behaviour. Start escalating and you will get the attention of someone appropriate pretty quickly (which ideally is everyone, but right now that's still a goal).
(I have not developed the confidence to actually action this responsibility with any regularity myself, which is something else I will admit to being ashamed of and why I don't hold not-acting against others. Even though I might be one of those expected to unquestionably have the status to do so. Again KAOS is not a monolithic entity and not everyone feels the same way about anyone.)
Lets also try not to let our failure to act in the past inform our ability to act in the future. We can make speaking up an accepted, supported, safe part of KAOS, and the group will be the stronger and more welcoming because of it.
Accepting being called out
Let's acknowledge that this is also really hard. Being told - heck even the suggestion that - you are doing something "wrong" especially in a social context is at the least uncomfortable for most people and tends to immediately put them on the defensive. The potential come-down from having your fun curtailed probably won't help either. Taking criticism constructively is a difficult skill to learn (as is giving constructive criticism).
So it is important that we give the people who accept graciously, withdraw and apologise where appropriate (apologising genuinely might take up a post on it's own) and indeed try to do better the same sort of support and positive reinforcement that is given to the people who step up and call them out.
No one can be immune to being called out - at the very least everyone makes mistakes where social cues are concerned, at the other end of the scale it seems clear that some long-term members have developed habits which are not in line with the culture KAOS is trying to promote and there exists a reluctance to challenge these people for fear of social consequences. (I may still be one of those - if so I expect I will learn about it shortly. I do already know about the camera and it is something I need to work on. Thank you.)
If you are feeling uncomfortable about the idea that you might be called out this might be a good point to take a hard look at why that is. Yes it could be that you are part of the problem - in which case welcome to becoming part of the solution.
As a bonus this is an incredibly valuable life-skill that members can take out into the world with them.
Your responsibilities when you bring a friend to KAOS
In addition to the "that's just KAOS / member X" handwave above it's even been known for people to basically disappear from a party without telling said friends or to proceed to get completely trashed leaving said friends basically alone and surrounded by strangers without even their planned/promised ride home. Or to bring a friend and suddenly not be there when that friend turns out to be a serious creeper.
These are extreme examples but nevertheless if you choose to bring friends to KAOS you have some responsibilities, usually spelt out at the First Meeting but we know not everyone manages to attend that.
- You are responsible for your friends behaviour! If they turn out to be a creeper, if they get plastered and throw up vodka all over the hosts' cream carpet it is your name which is going to be associated with the event and you that will be held responsible for any restitutions.
- In the same vein you are responsible for making sure your friends know about Consent and other KAOS party etiquette before engaging with the party.
- You are responsible for making sure your friends know who to go to if there is a problem! Introduce them to the Approachables, to the politburo present, to the party hosts etc.
- You are responsible for keeping an eye on your friends in case they have found themselves in a situation they don't know how to get themselves out of / are about to get in way over their head!
- You are responsible for your friends ability to get home! If you do have to leave the party unexpectedly or want to stay and they really want to go then at least hook them up with one of the KAOS "taxis" first. (If they get taken away in an ambulance you are going to be going with them.)
- Please only introduce your friends a few at a time! Don't introduce a dozen people KAOS doesn't know and who don't know KAOS all at once - something is going to go wrong even if it is just they all sit in one corner together for the duration having their own little party and don't actually interact with KAOS at all. -> exceptions to this rule - some events like First Party and to a lesser extent 48-hours and New Years cope better with groups of strangers than others. And any event you are hosting / in your honour where you want to invite your friends from multiple social groups.
Modelling consent
Active informed and enthusiastic consent is not optional and another topic which could take an entire post itself. Here's something I prepared earlier.
Here are a couple of other relevant links.
Modelling Consent
Lets Talk About Consent In Practice
One point I stood up to make at the party that I don't actually recall from previous conversations is that as a club we talk about explicit consent a lot but we are really quite bad at modelling that in our party environment. We have a lot of people who know each other well enough that eg face-boobs or grabass is almost a handshake or a hug - permission is implicit - is it any wonder that new people get confused and believe it is generally acceptable behaviour to walk up to someone and grab/motorboat them?
I think one step we could take is if people could remember to take a few seconds when they encounter each other to visibly ask for and receive permission in the process of these greetings. That might be a bit hard to remember to do (habit) and I'm not saying it needs to happen every time but it would be great to actually demonstrate the behaviour we promote.
The language of harassment
Another thing which I thought of (woke up with) on Sunday and think is possibly incredibly important is about the actual language we use. Just as with the physical behaviours I mentioned above it's generally considered acceptable around KAOS to say to/of someone - especially someone revealing clad/unclad words to the effect of "I'd tap that/you" meant as a compliment. But outside KAOS that is the language of harassment and a) I think that probably contributes to a lot of people feeling uncomfortable / triggered especially when it it directed to/at them. I would also ask that people take moment to think about this when they go to compliment someone.
It is great that KAOS is a place where many people feel comfortable with their bodies being effectively on display and with dressing to look "sexy" or "slutty" but just as in wider society dressing to look good is *not* asking to be treated as a sexual object and certainly not asking to receive comments identical in form to sexual harassment they may have encountered elsewhere.
Finally
Now that you have read all that, if you would like to engage positively with the ongoing conversation on Facebook the original post (closed for comments) is here, and the currently active discussion thread at the time of this post is here. (I'll be removing these links once they become tired.)
Update: I have realised there is an important point I only touched on indirectly in my previous post so I've written a follow up.
Tags:
