I have a bunch of new zines and some new books for the distro! at riot grrrr distro
Including SCAM! The First 4 Issues!
Also, I just looked at Mimi Distro, and it is so great! Check it out at mimizinedistro.wordpress.com
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Polyamory and Patriarchy Zine Questionnaire
This is a zine an amazing aquaintance of mine is putting together.
Please send your stories to: polypatriarchyzine@gmail.com, or mail them to 4951 Catharine St., Philadelphia, PA 19143.
Polyamory and Patriarchy Zine Questionnaire
These questions are for a zine I’m writing about polyamory and patriarchy. So often, people feel either that polyamory is the only revolutionary way to be intimate, or the worst way. I’d like to hear what you’ve learned from polyamory – ways it felt liberatory, and ways it may have felt like familiar oppressive gender roles dressed up in revolutionary language. My agenda isn’t to discredit polyamory, but to identify how much we have to learn about truly liberatory relationships.
These questions are fairly personal and ask you to revisit some painful memories, so please take your time, answer only what you feel comfortable answering, and let me know how you want your anonymity protected. Please use pseudonyms! Do give me contact info, though, if you want to review how I use your material before the zine is published.
1. Let’s start with gender. What gender roles did you learn from your family of origin? From the media? From your chosen community? How do you express gender now – is it different than how you were socialized to express gender?
2. What were your reasons for first trying polyamory? Was it your idea or a partner’s? Did you have any models in your community for successful polyamorous relationships?
3. What was the most empowering experience you’ve had in polyamory?
4. What was the hardest situation to handle in a polyamorous relationship? Looking back, what would you have done differently, if anything?
5. What kinds of insecurities did polyamory raise? Did they concern your gender or body image? How did you handle these insecurities?
6. How have you felt most empowered in polyamory? How has it felt expansive, liberatory, or healing?
7. Do you have a different kind of intimacy with lovers than with friends? Who are you more likely to turn to for emotional support?
8. How do your expectations change based on what kind of relationship you’re in? Do you have different standards of behavior for partners and lovers?
9. Has polyamory ever made you feel silenced, or unable to ask for what you needed?
What have your relationships with your lover’s other lovers been like? How have you handled feelings of jealousy and competition? How have you handled your partner’s jealousy?
10. Tell me a little about your best relationship, polyamorous or otherwise, and what made it work so well.
11. Today, what is your ideal relationship?
12. Do you want to see the zine before it’s published? Do you want a copy mailed to you? If so, let me know how to reach you.
Please send your stories to: polypatriarchyzine@gmail.com, or mail them to 4951 Catharine St., Philadelphia, PA 19143.
I also welcome your analysis and thoughts about sexual politics, polyamory, and this project – thanks!
Please send your stories to: polypatriarchyzine@gmail.com, or mail them to 4951 Catharine St., Philadelphia, PA 19143.
Polyamory and Patriarchy Zine Questionnaire
These questions are for a zine I’m writing about polyamory and patriarchy. So often, people feel either that polyamory is the only revolutionary way to be intimate, or the worst way. I’d like to hear what you’ve learned from polyamory – ways it felt liberatory, and ways it may have felt like familiar oppressive gender roles dressed up in revolutionary language. My agenda isn’t to discredit polyamory, but to identify how much we have to learn about truly liberatory relationships.
These questions are fairly personal and ask you to revisit some painful memories, so please take your time, answer only what you feel comfortable answering, and let me know how you want your anonymity protected. Please use pseudonyms! Do give me contact info, though, if you want to review how I use your material before the zine is published.
1. Let’s start with gender. What gender roles did you learn from your family of origin? From the media? From your chosen community? How do you express gender now – is it different than how you were socialized to express gender?
2. What were your reasons for first trying polyamory? Was it your idea or a partner’s? Did you have any models in your community for successful polyamorous relationships?
3. What was the most empowering experience you’ve had in polyamory?
4. What was the hardest situation to handle in a polyamorous relationship? Looking back, what would you have done differently, if anything?
5. What kinds of insecurities did polyamory raise? Did they concern your gender or body image? How did you handle these insecurities?
6. How have you felt most empowered in polyamory? How has it felt expansive, liberatory, or healing?
7. Do you have a different kind of intimacy with lovers than with friends? Who are you more likely to turn to for emotional support?
8. How do your expectations change based on what kind of relationship you’re in? Do you have different standards of behavior for partners and lovers?
9. Has polyamory ever made you feel silenced, or unable to ask for what you needed?
What have your relationships with your lover’s other lovers been like? How have you handled feelings of jealousy and competition? How have you handled your partner’s jealousy?
10. Tell me a little about your best relationship, polyamorous or otherwise, and what made it work so well.
11. Today, what is your ideal relationship?
12. Do you want to see the zine before it’s published? Do you want a copy mailed to you? If so, let me know how to reach you.
Please send your stories to: polypatriarchyzine@gmail.com, or mail them to 4951 Catharine St., Philadelphia, PA 19143.
I also welcome your analysis and thoughts about sexual politics, polyamory, and this project – thanks!
Monday, August 23, 2010
community accountability zine call for submissions
I am so glad someone is doing this zine! I have been trying to find time to try and put together this exact thing!
Please submit!!!
It's Down to This
For info and submissions contact: responsezine@gmail.com
“It’s Down to This” is a new zine compilation that aims to give space to step back, take a deep breath and reflect on where we’re at.
Reflecting on our experiences with community accountability processes, survivor support, or general efforts to cultivate community response to sexual violence- this is a space to talk about our experiences with this work, what we have learned, where we want to go from here, what we feel, what we want others to be able to hear, see, think about, engage with.
It is an attempt to further give voice to our efforts and experiences in doing this work, to give space and voice to silence. To know and hear how we have survived in this work, how we have sustained this work, or why we burned out. To further document our attempts at figuring out what community accountability looks like, or what it even is. To be able to reflect and grow from our mistakes and epiphanies.
SEEKING: stories, essays, interviews, comics, artwork and thoughts reflecting on working around accountability and community response to sexual violence:
What has it looked like? What has it entailed? What could it look like? Who does it involve? In what ways? How is a community responsible? How is a community involved? What can an accountability process look like? What has it looked like? What works? What doesn’t? What were the fuck-ups, the successes?
*These questions are asked with the assumption that confidentiality will be respected and that stories will not be shared if they are not yours to share.
*The word ‘community’ is used with the awareness that it is often used problematically.
Looking for submissions that:
- explore the importance of accountability and support work as an act of community building and collective liberation, that express the importance of this work within social justice movements.
-reflect on the support, empowerment, recovery and growth that have come out of this work
-reflect on the pain, trauma and frustration of this work or which is inherent in this work.
-develop ideas and methods of sustainability around this work
-look at the social and political contexts in which community accountability and response to sexual violence and partner abuse grows and exists.
-share our stories
Anonymity and confidentiality will be respected.
DEADLINE: October 22nd, 2010
For info and submissions contact: responsezine@gmail.com
Feel free to send in ideas/proposals and ask for feedback!
Please submit!!!
It's Down to This
For info and submissions contact: responsezine@gmail.com
“It’s Down to This” is a new zine compilation that aims to give space to step back, take a deep breath and reflect on where we’re at.
Reflecting on our experiences with community accountability processes, survivor support, or general efforts to cultivate community response to sexual violence- this is a space to talk about our experiences with this work, what we have learned, where we want to go from here, what we feel, what we want others to be able to hear, see, think about, engage with.
It is an attempt to further give voice to our efforts and experiences in doing this work, to give space and voice to silence. To know and hear how we have survived in this work, how we have sustained this work, or why we burned out. To further document our attempts at figuring out what community accountability looks like, or what it even is. To be able to reflect and grow from our mistakes and epiphanies.
SEEKING: stories, essays, interviews, comics, artwork and thoughts reflecting on working around accountability and community response to sexual violence:
What has it looked like? What has it entailed? What could it look like? Who does it involve? In what ways? How is a community responsible? How is a community involved? What can an accountability process look like? What has it looked like? What works? What doesn’t? What were the fuck-ups, the successes?
*These questions are asked with the assumption that confidentiality will be respected and that stories will not be shared if they are not yours to share.
*The word ‘community’ is used with the awareness that it is often used problematically.
Looking for submissions that:
- explore the importance of accountability and support work as an act of community building and collective liberation, that express the importance of this work within social justice movements.
-reflect on the support, empowerment, recovery and growth that have come out of this work
-reflect on the pain, trauma and frustration of this work or which is inherent in this work.
-develop ideas and methods of sustainability around this work
-look at the social and political contexts in which community accountability and response to sexual violence and partner abuse grows and exists.
-share our stories
Anonymity and confidentiality will be respected.
DEADLINE: October 22nd, 2010
For info and submissions contact: responsezine@gmail.com
Feel free to send in ideas/proposals and ask for feedback!
Saturday, August 14, 2010
upcoming Snarlas shows
Here's where we're playing....
Aug. 19 Pittsburgh with Surrender. at Zach's house. I'm not sure of the address
Aug 20 (maybe)Athens OH 35 Brown St
Sept 16 Baria KY, maybe
Sept 19 Ida work party, Tennesse (they need more people to come to this work party. check it out at www.workhardstayhard.com
Sept 21 Chatanooga - probably at Sluggos
Sept 23 Asheville NC, Buccannen St house (I don't know how to spell it)
Aug. 19 Pittsburgh with Surrender. at Zach's house. I'm not sure of the address
Aug 20 (maybe)Athens OH 35 Brown St
Sept 16 Baria KY, maybe
Sept 19 Ida work party, Tennesse (they need more people to come to this work party. check it out at www.workhardstayhard.com
Sept 21 Chatanooga - probably at Sluggos
Sept 23 Asheville NC, Buccannen St house (I don't know how to spell it)
Monday, August 9, 2010
call for submissions - Substance: on addiction and recovery
CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS ON ADDICTION AND RECOVERY
Substance: On Addiction and Recovery is a collection of peoples’ experiences with addiction and recovery in radical and/or marginalized communities. Not just a text to break the silence, Substance is an opportunity for those affected by substance abuse to make meaning of our lives and create opportunities for lasting social change. Substance: On Addiction and Recovery will be a book that transcends the mainstream discourse regarding addiction and recovery and forges new pathways towards healing and the reclamation of our lives.
I am open to essays, poetry, personal narratives, photography, art, comics, collage, and more.
Please be in touch with questions and submission ideas: substancebook at gmail dot com!
Potential topics:
• personal narratives of addiction and/or recovery • support groups • radical sobriety • harm reduction • silence and stigma • withdrawal and detoxification • the intersections of race/class/sexual orientation/gender identity/disability status and addiction • creating and sustaining community support networks • how addiction intersects with activism, sexuality, health, sexual and intimate partner violence, mental illness, privilege, oppression, identity, capitalism, the state, work, and
creativity • current or historic examples of community-based groups that focus on the politics of addiction or support of community members • healing from addiction • self-medication • overdose and death • incarceration and criminalization •
In addition to pieces by individuals, I'd like to include a few pieces about the work that community-based groups have done to address the politics of addiction and recovery and to support those dealing with substance abuse. If you are a member of such a group, please feel free to write.
THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS IS MARCH 7, 2011
Additionally, if you know anyone who would like to donate funds of any amount to support the printing of this book, please have them contact substancebook at gmail dot com!
Please forward this message on, and spread the word!
Substance: On Addiction and Recovery is a collection of peoples’ experiences with addiction and recovery in radical and/or marginalized communities. Not just a text to break the silence, Substance is an opportunity for those affected by substance abuse to make meaning of our lives and create opportunities for lasting social change. Substance: On Addiction and Recovery will be a book that transcends the mainstream discourse regarding addiction and recovery and forges new pathways towards healing and the reclamation of our lives.
I am open to essays, poetry, personal narratives, photography, art, comics, collage, and more.
Please be in touch with questions and submission ideas: substancebook at gmail dot com!
Potential topics:
• personal narratives of addiction and/or recovery • support groups • radical sobriety • harm reduction • silence and stigma • withdrawal and detoxification • the intersections of race/class/sexual orientation/gender identity/disability status and addiction • creating and sustaining community support networks • how addiction intersects with activism, sexuality, health, sexual and intimate partner violence, mental illness, privilege, oppression, identity, capitalism, the state, work, and
creativity • current or historic examples of community-based groups that focus on the politics of addiction or support of community members • healing from addiction • self-medication • overdose and death • incarceration and criminalization •
In addition to pieces by individuals, I'd like to include a few pieces about the work that community-based groups have done to address the politics of addiction and recovery and to support those dealing with substance abuse. If you are a member of such a group, please feel free to write.
THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS IS MARCH 7, 2011
Additionally, if you know anyone who would like to donate funds of any amount to support the printing of this book, please have them contact substancebook at gmail dot com!
Please forward this message on, and spread the word!
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
clarification
I just want to make a clarification about something I wrote in my letter to Microcosm and the blog about it. In it, I talked about writing a blog awhile ago and then removing it the next day because I didn't know where the information came from. I want to clarify and say that I trusted the person who gave me the information, and I removed the blog because I wanted to do more research on my own so that I would be able to discuss it from a place of personal knowledge rather than second hand. I do believe that second hand information is extremely valid, and not everyone can or should feel like they have to do their own research into a situation to stand up against it. I feel like people feeling like they have to do their own research is part of what perpetuates the whole dynamic where survivors are always having to defend themselves and perpetrators are always getting the benefit of the doubt.
Because I have a place of power within our community, I wanted to make sure I felt well versed in the situation before making a public statement about it.
In my letter to Microcosm, I referred to Ciara's blog as inflamatory, which I really regret. I think inflaming people is essential and brave, and I think I meant it in that framework, but obviously, I should have thought deeper, because most people think of inflamitory as a bad word. Continuing to stand up against abuse when people all around you are ignoring it is frustrating and sickening, and I am very proud of and suppport the work Ciara has done. I apologize for any misunderstanding or backlash my words have caused.
Because I have a place of power within our community, I wanted to make sure I felt well versed in the situation before making a public statement about it.
In my letter to Microcosm, I referred to Ciara's blog as inflamatory, which I really regret. I think inflaming people is essential and brave, and I think I meant it in that framework, but obviously, I should have thought deeper, because most people think of inflamitory as a bad word. Continuing to stand up against abuse when people all around you are ignoring it is frustrating and sickening, and I am very proud of and suppport the work Ciara has done. I apologize for any misunderstanding or backlash my words have caused.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Microcosm
This is about Joe Biel and Microcosm.
A number of years ago I read Alex's zine Brainscan 21. Alex was Joe's long-term partner and wife and worked with Microcosm. It was about how she came to realize, with the help of her therapist, that he was emotionally abusive and manipulative in their relationship and business. It wasn't a big surprise to me, because when I had seen them together, they really reminded me of me and my former emotionally abusive partner. After I read the zine, I wrote to Alex and asked if she thought I should remove my stuff from Microcosm, and she said she didn't really think I should have to do that. In retrospect, I wish I had.
I believed Alex's zine. I wanted to believe that Joe might change, or that his behavior could possibly be situational and not show up as abusive in other relationships. I also said to myself "all publishers and record store guys are scumbags." I saw that Microcosm had more members than in the past, and was being collectively run, and I hoped that this meant Joe was stepping aside and giving up power in order to deal with his control issues. I had heard he was in therapy.
The truth was, I benefited from being published and distributed by Microcosm. I was overwhelmed by dealing with abuse in my immediate community, and didn't want to look too closely at my complacency regarding Microcosm.
Early this year, I got involved in trying to set up an accountabiliy process for Joe. He had said that he had done all that was requested of him and that he didn't know how to stop rumors or how to communicate with Alex that he had changed, since she didn't want contact.
Attached below is the final statement of the attempted accountability process.
I am trying to figure out what to do about Microcosm and distributing my zines with them. Below the statement from the accountability process is a letter I wrote to Microcosm a few weeks ago.
Microcosm is collectively run by like 8 people or something, and Joe does not have final say in things, however, as I say in my letter, I think collectives have to stand up and confront abuse by members within their collectives. Microcosm as a collective, does not do this.
I don't want people within the Microcosm collective who do believe Alex, and who know that Joe does have abusive and manipulative behaviors, to suffer, however, I can no longer support a collective that will not stand up against abuse.
I won't be publishing my next book with Microcosm. I am going to give them until the end of the year to come up with a collective statement confronting/admitting Joe's abuse and manipulation, and/or for Joe to legally remove himself from the collective. If by the end of the year, this isn't done, I will be removing my zines from Microcosm. I will also be reprinting Support and Learning Good Consent on my own.
Statement from the Athens Support Network:
In January, 2010, we convened to help with the accountability process of Joe Biel. We had been given the understanding, from Joe, that he was in therapy, had met Alex's demands, and didn't know how to proceed since she did not want contact. We confirmed that Joe had met most or all of Alex's logistical/legal demands, but in order to confirm whether or not he had identified and changed his behavior, we set about some written excercises. Our process was straightforward and formal, working on identifying behavior and making amends. Joe cooperated with the "identifying behavior" exercises - vacilating between what we perceived as willingness and defensiveness. We did not make it past the "identifying behavior" section of the process, as it became clear that a much deeper conversation/process needed to happen and we were unable to commit to the time and energy it would take. We think that if another process was to take place, it would need to be face to face and would need to have people in his immediate community actively involved. We believe that these people would need to have professional training and experience, and have a large amount of time to commit to the process. We do not believe it is the community's responsibility to sacrifice themselves for this. We do think that it is the responsibility of Joe's friends and other people who benefit from acquaintance with Joe to recognize that the accusations concerning his abusive behavior are valid, that he still has problems with control and manipulation that he is working on, and to point out to him when he is behaving in these manners, even if it is not negatively affecting them. We also belive it is up to Joe to actively encourage and support this type of dialogue with his friends, co-workers and acquaintances.
Joe is in therapy, and we feel that he is making progress through therapy. He has identifed a large number of behavior issues and has done work and continues to do work to change them. He believes that he honors Alex's experience. We, however, feel that he still has extreme problems with control, manipulation, defensiveness, and portraing himself as the victim. We feel that he often minimizes and belittles Alex's experience, and sometimes seeks to redefine it as communication problems rather than emotional abuse (see blog response post, Feb 5). In Brainscan, Alex's counselor identifed Joe as "using classic examples of distraction while arguing like some sort of sleight of hand trick with words". We also noticed this in our working with him.
Joe has a number of counter-charges against Alex. While we were unable to explore all these charges, they are consistent with the actions of someone trying to regain power when their power has been taken away from them due to emotional abuse.
We do believe Joe is working to understand and change his behaviors. We do not believe this gives him a clean slate.
letter I sent to Microcosm before I got the statement from the accountability team
Dear Microcosm,
I'm sorry about the confusing request for Joe to change the legal ownership to the collective. I guess I was just looking for a simple answer to a complicated question.
I believe that Joe was emotionally abusive controling and manipulative to Alex. I also believe that he still has these problems, even if they do not show up in his current intimate relationship. I believe that he is working on these issues in therapy. I also believe that he doesn't take as much responsibility as I think he should.
I beleive that collectives, even when they are just collective businesses, are responsible for confronting issues of patriarchy (and other forms of domination) within their collectives, and working on change and transparency with their members. I believe that Joe's behavior stems from patriarchy, even if he is not really sexist - the communication/manipulation models he uses are, in my view, patriarchtical.
In order to feel comfortable continuing to be published by Microcosm, I would need to know either from each collective member or from the collective as a whole (with a minority disenting opinion) that they don't think Alex was crazy or that the attempts to deal with the situation are a witchhunt. I would need to know from each member, or the collective as a whole (with a minority disenting opinion) that the collective recognizes that Joe still has issues with control and manipulation.
I would need to understand better what the collective structure is - like who has the ability to hire and fire.
I would like it if the collective members got involved in a new accountability process or some kind of process where people who are close to Joe can point out, in a constructive way, where they see these issues arising.
I need to feel like the collective takes this seriously and does not put the burden of instigating change on the survivor/s, or on people negatively affected by Joe's behavior.
For the most part, I enjoyed working with Joe at Microcosm. When Brainscan came out, I wanted to ignore it because I liked working with Microcosm. I know that sometimes a person can be abusive in a relationship, and the same behavior can be ok in another relationship, and I just wanted to hope for the best. However, I did have an incident with Joe, back then, that made me doubt that it was an isolated problem. I can't remember the exact specifics, but I think I had been to Portland and SF and had been around to stores, none of which had Doris stuff, so I sold it to them. I think it was right before the SF zine fest, and when Joe went to the Bay Area and found my zines/books in the stores, he got upset (I'm not sure if that's exactly when it was, that's just my vague memory). I do remember clearly having a tense phone conversation, where I felt like he was extremely defensive, and although he probably wasn't actually raising his voice, it felt like he was yelling at me. We made an agreement about where I could/could not sell books, and I decided to never talk to him on the phone again if I had a potentially conflicting issue.
As I'm sure you all probably know, a number of months ago, I got involved in an accountabiliy process with Joe. I'd like you to know how that came about.
Two people had contacted me, expressing concerns over Joe's past behavior. One of these emails had been from someone who was part of an organizaiton that was about to make a public statement about Joe's behavior. I read a blog by Ciara that was very inflamitory. I wrote a blog about how upset I was that Joe was continuing this behavior, then the next morning removed the blog because I realized I didn't know exactly where Ciara had gotten her info. Joe wrote to me and said he was sad about my blog, he explained that he'd been in therapy, that he took responsibility for his actions, and that he didn't know how to resolve things with Alex since there was no accoutability process that could facilitate closure.
I felt that it was important to get an accountability process going imediately. I tried to find people in Portland to do it, and couldn't. I offered to help head of a new accountability process. We were working on the assumption that the behaviors were in the past and resolution would be basic communicating with all parties involved. I know there were problems with the communication between the accountability people and Microcosm, and I apologize.
Early in the accountability process, I sent Joe a personal statement - it was a very personal account of my own experience with an abusive/controling relationship and how I didn't want my experience to color the accountability process, but would like it if my experience could lend understanding, it ended like this:This statement doesn't need a response (and please don't respond telling me how my experience is different from what you are being held accountable for. I know that), but if you have questions that are in a spirit of deeper understanding, feel free to ask.
Joe didn't notice this part of the statement. He went though my statement, adding in where he felt like it was or wasn't what his experience was, and also talking about his own understanding of abuse, with a link to an article he thought I should read, and he wrote about his own experiences in general.
Another instance of disregarding boundries/not noticing boundries happened when we were discussing the cover for the Doris Anthology - he had forwarded me the internal discussion of what people did/didn't like about the cover. I asked him not to forward the internal discussion, because it sucked to have to read everyone not liking something, and would be nicer if he could just sum it up. He said since everyone thought different things, he didn't have any other way to do it except to forward me the whole dialogue.
It is funny because when someone else in the collective said they heard I was having problems with something about it, I explained it to them, and they said they would never send a whole dialoge like that.
This wasn't the hugest deal in the world at all, but is just a continuation and example of how these ignoring/not seeing personal boundrys are still a problem.
I believe that Joe is capable of addressing these issues and changing his behavior. I believe that it is going to take the work of people around him bringing to attention the small and large examples of these behaviors, as well as Joe's willingness to be open to criticism, constructive or angry.
I don't have any smooth conclusion for this. If the collective could let me know how/if they want to address these issues and who will be the point person for talking with me about it, I would appreciate it.
thanks
cindy
A number of years ago I read Alex's zine Brainscan 21. Alex was Joe's long-term partner and wife and worked with Microcosm. It was about how she came to realize, with the help of her therapist, that he was emotionally abusive and manipulative in their relationship and business. It wasn't a big surprise to me, because when I had seen them together, they really reminded me of me and my former emotionally abusive partner. After I read the zine, I wrote to Alex and asked if she thought I should remove my stuff from Microcosm, and she said she didn't really think I should have to do that. In retrospect, I wish I had.
I believed Alex's zine. I wanted to believe that Joe might change, or that his behavior could possibly be situational and not show up as abusive in other relationships. I also said to myself "all publishers and record store guys are scumbags." I saw that Microcosm had more members than in the past, and was being collectively run, and I hoped that this meant Joe was stepping aside and giving up power in order to deal with his control issues. I had heard he was in therapy.
The truth was, I benefited from being published and distributed by Microcosm. I was overwhelmed by dealing with abuse in my immediate community, and didn't want to look too closely at my complacency regarding Microcosm.
Early this year, I got involved in trying to set up an accountabiliy process for Joe. He had said that he had done all that was requested of him and that he didn't know how to stop rumors or how to communicate with Alex that he had changed, since she didn't want contact.
Attached below is the final statement of the attempted accountability process.
I am trying to figure out what to do about Microcosm and distributing my zines with them. Below the statement from the accountability process is a letter I wrote to Microcosm a few weeks ago.
Microcosm is collectively run by like 8 people or something, and Joe does not have final say in things, however, as I say in my letter, I think collectives have to stand up and confront abuse by members within their collectives. Microcosm as a collective, does not do this.
I don't want people within the Microcosm collective who do believe Alex, and who know that Joe does have abusive and manipulative behaviors, to suffer, however, I can no longer support a collective that will not stand up against abuse.
I won't be publishing my next book with Microcosm. I am going to give them until the end of the year to come up with a collective statement confronting/admitting Joe's abuse and manipulation, and/or for Joe to legally remove himself from the collective. If by the end of the year, this isn't done, I will be removing my zines from Microcosm. I will also be reprinting Support and Learning Good Consent on my own.
Statement from the Athens Support Network:
In January, 2010, we convened to help with the accountability process of Joe Biel. We had been given the understanding, from Joe, that he was in therapy, had met Alex's demands, and didn't know how to proceed since she did not want contact. We confirmed that Joe had met most or all of Alex's logistical/legal demands, but in order to confirm whether or not he had identified and changed his behavior, we set about some written excercises. Our process was straightforward and formal, working on identifying behavior and making amends. Joe cooperated with the "identifying behavior" exercises - vacilating between what we perceived as willingness and defensiveness. We did not make it past the "identifying behavior" section of the process, as it became clear that a much deeper conversation/process needed to happen and we were unable to commit to the time and energy it would take. We think that if another process was to take place, it would need to be face to face and would need to have people in his immediate community actively involved. We believe that these people would need to have professional training and experience, and have a large amount of time to commit to the process. We do not believe it is the community's responsibility to sacrifice themselves for this. We do think that it is the responsibility of Joe's friends and other people who benefit from acquaintance with Joe to recognize that the accusations concerning his abusive behavior are valid, that he still has problems with control and manipulation that he is working on, and to point out to him when he is behaving in these manners, even if it is not negatively affecting them. We also belive it is up to Joe to actively encourage and support this type of dialogue with his friends, co-workers and acquaintances.
Joe is in therapy, and we feel that he is making progress through therapy. He has identifed a large number of behavior issues and has done work and continues to do work to change them. He believes that he honors Alex's experience. We, however, feel that he still has extreme problems with control, manipulation, defensiveness, and portraing himself as the victim. We feel that he often minimizes and belittles Alex's experience, and sometimes seeks to redefine it as communication problems rather than emotional abuse (see blog response post, Feb 5). In Brainscan, Alex's counselor identifed Joe as "using classic examples of distraction while arguing like some sort of sleight of hand trick with words". We also noticed this in our working with him.
Joe has a number of counter-charges against Alex. While we were unable to explore all these charges, they are consistent with the actions of someone trying to regain power when their power has been taken away from them due to emotional abuse.
We do believe Joe is working to understand and change his behaviors. We do not believe this gives him a clean slate.
letter I sent to Microcosm before I got the statement from the accountability team
Dear Microcosm,
I'm sorry about the confusing request for Joe to change the legal ownership to the collective. I guess I was just looking for a simple answer to a complicated question.
I believe that Joe was emotionally abusive controling and manipulative to Alex. I also believe that he still has these problems, even if they do not show up in his current intimate relationship. I believe that he is working on these issues in therapy. I also believe that he doesn't take as much responsibility as I think he should.
I beleive that collectives, even when they are just collective businesses, are responsible for confronting issues of patriarchy (and other forms of domination) within their collectives, and working on change and transparency with their members. I believe that Joe's behavior stems from patriarchy, even if he is not really sexist - the communication/manipulation models he uses are, in my view, patriarchtical.
In order to feel comfortable continuing to be published by Microcosm, I would need to know either from each collective member or from the collective as a whole (with a minority disenting opinion) that they don't think Alex was crazy or that the attempts to deal with the situation are a witchhunt. I would need to know from each member, or the collective as a whole (with a minority disenting opinion) that the collective recognizes that Joe still has issues with control and manipulation.
I would need to understand better what the collective structure is - like who has the ability to hire and fire.
I would like it if the collective members got involved in a new accountability process or some kind of process where people who are close to Joe can point out, in a constructive way, where they see these issues arising.
I need to feel like the collective takes this seriously and does not put the burden of instigating change on the survivor/s, or on people negatively affected by Joe's behavior.
For the most part, I enjoyed working with Joe at Microcosm. When Brainscan came out, I wanted to ignore it because I liked working with Microcosm. I know that sometimes a person can be abusive in a relationship, and the same behavior can be ok in another relationship, and I just wanted to hope for the best. However, I did have an incident with Joe, back then, that made me doubt that it was an isolated problem. I can't remember the exact specifics, but I think I had been to Portland and SF and had been around to stores, none of which had Doris stuff, so I sold it to them. I think it was right before the SF zine fest, and when Joe went to the Bay Area and found my zines/books in the stores, he got upset (I'm not sure if that's exactly when it was, that's just my vague memory). I do remember clearly having a tense phone conversation, where I felt like he was extremely defensive, and although he probably wasn't actually raising his voice, it felt like he was yelling at me. We made an agreement about where I could/could not sell books, and I decided to never talk to him on the phone again if I had a potentially conflicting issue.
As I'm sure you all probably know, a number of months ago, I got involved in an accountabiliy process with Joe. I'd like you to know how that came about.
Two people had contacted me, expressing concerns over Joe's past behavior. One of these emails had been from someone who was part of an organizaiton that was about to make a public statement about Joe's behavior. I read a blog by Ciara that was very inflamitory. I wrote a blog about how upset I was that Joe was continuing this behavior, then the next morning removed the blog because I realized I didn't know exactly where Ciara had gotten her info. Joe wrote to me and said he was sad about my blog, he explained that he'd been in therapy, that he took responsibility for his actions, and that he didn't know how to resolve things with Alex since there was no accoutability process that could facilitate closure.
I felt that it was important to get an accountability process going imediately. I tried to find people in Portland to do it, and couldn't. I offered to help head of a new accountability process. We were working on the assumption that the behaviors were in the past and resolution would be basic communicating with all parties involved. I know there were problems with the communication between the accountability people and Microcosm, and I apologize.
Early in the accountability process, I sent Joe a personal statement - it was a very personal account of my own experience with an abusive/controling relationship and how I didn't want my experience to color the accountability process, but would like it if my experience could lend understanding, it ended like this:This statement doesn't need a response (and please don't respond telling me how my experience is different from what you are being held accountable for. I know that), but if you have questions that are in a spirit of deeper understanding, feel free to ask.
Joe didn't notice this part of the statement. He went though my statement, adding in where he felt like it was or wasn't what his experience was, and also talking about his own understanding of abuse, with a link to an article he thought I should read, and he wrote about his own experiences in general.
Another instance of disregarding boundries/not noticing boundries happened when we were discussing the cover for the Doris Anthology - he had forwarded me the internal discussion of what people did/didn't like about the cover. I asked him not to forward the internal discussion, because it sucked to have to read everyone not liking something, and would be nicer if he could just sum it up. He said since everyone thought different things, he didn't have any other way to do it except to forward me the whole dialogue.
It is funny because when someone else in the collective said they heard I was having problems with something about it, I explained it to them, and they said they would never send a whole dialoge like that.
This wasn't the hugest deal in the world at all, but is just a continuation and example of how these ignoring/not seeing personal boundrys are still a problem.
I believe that Joe is capable of addressing these issues and changing his behavior. I believe that it is going to take the work of people around him bringing to attention the small and large examples of these behaviors, as well as Joe's willingness to be open to criticism, constructive or angry.
I don't have any smooth conclusion for this. If the collective could let me know how/if they want to address these issues and who will be the point person for talking with me about it, I would appreciate it.
thanks
cindy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
