Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First

You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
flightless

From: Kathryn McCulley
To: dcburners@dcburners.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
Subject: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First

I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")Can you clarify for me?
Kat*Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" wrote:

No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
—Alex

On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony wrote:
yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.

also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.

also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?

hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis wrote:

Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
—Alex

On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony wrote:
the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.

even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.

we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.

i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.

consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.

asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis wrote:

Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic. 
I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
—Alex Dancingmantis

On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.  We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere. 
If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive. 
I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better. 
Debbi
On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:

Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there. Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.  Stay classy, and good day. 
Love y ou guys! 
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
< blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!

If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.

William/aka Dobromir

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn wrote:
>
> Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>
> I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>
> I get that.
>
> I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>
> Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>
> Jessie / Mama J
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176

--
**********

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178

--
Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

Yes. I will happily try to clarify:

"Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?”

Respecting other’s culture is part of respecting them as people. As a nurse, I spend a lot of time assessing people and their cultures to establish effective therapeutic relationships. It is important to take cues and adapt appropriately. As I have stated, the DC Burner Culture is not homogenous. I have been a part of the community for well over a decade. Most of the people that I hang out with are huggers, and I have never had someone ask my permission before hugging me, but I am aware that some people aren’t. I think that the non-verbal cues about whether or not someone expects to hug in greeting are usually pretty clear, and if those cues were ambiguous, I would personally err on the side of caution. If I were in doubt, I would refrain from hugging the person until I knew them better, rather than ask to hug them… because as I said, my goal is to greet them, not to get a hug. That said, if I did make a mistake, I would expect that hugging as greeting is common enough in our culture that I would get the benefit of the doubt. If I found out that I made someone uncomfortable, I would apologize. But the fact is that all initial human interactions involve tip-toeing around awkwardness. When I encounter people who’s culture is discordant with mine (for instance they stand too close when talking to me)… I try to subtly negotiate the difference without making them uncomfortable, but I grant them the benefit of the doubt.

"I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?”

In a community of huggers, hugging as greeting indicates acceptance as part of the community. Obviously, if someone is not a hugger, hugging them emphasizes cultural difference. While you and I are probably alike in a lot of ways, this obviously isn’t one of them, so if I were to greet you, I would try to guess ways to emphasis our sameness rather than our differences (as is common in most human “getting to know you”s). Why not ask? What extra meaning is added? You answer this in your next statement, by echoing exactly what I said in my initial message:

"I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?””.

Maybe the alternative that you offer:

""Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?””… should be a cultural norm, but it is not one that I have ever seen… and it seems easily interpreted by someone who is triggered by hugs as being equivalent to the first questions. If I ask someone “do you hug?”, am I putting them on the spot? Will they feel uncomfortable saying no? All the points you make in your postscript about why you accept unwanted hugs apply just as well here.

Anyway… my point throughout the conversation has had little to do with hugs, and more to do with respect. How people interact is based on culture, and is affected by individual perspective and emotional intelligence.

If we want to make productive change, we can’t just talk to the people that already agree with us 100%. We have to acknowledge different cultures and perspectives, and seek mutual understanding. We have to give people the benefit of the doubt. Violence and intimidation (physical or written) is not healthy in a community. Attacking someone’s character if they have different priorities does not make them more likely to listen. The people that are most important to a productive discussion are the people that share you general ethics (autonomy, respect), but may not agree on how to realize those values. Comments that demonize them make things worse because they stop listening.

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:19 PM, Kathryn McCulley wrote:
>
> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>
> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
>
> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>
> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
>
> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>
> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
>
> Can you clarify for me?
> Kat
>
> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>
> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>
>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>
>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>
>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>
>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>
>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>
>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>
>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>
>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>
>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic.
>>>
>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>
>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>
>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>
>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>
>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>
>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>
>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>
>>>> Debbi
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>
>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>> wrote:
>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>
>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>
>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>> >
>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>> >
>>>> > I get that.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>> >
>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>> >
>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>> > --
>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> **********
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

This is a good point, and in reality what happens most of the time. But if you want to be a purist about the consent argument, you could say that someone who sees open arms or an extended hand is being coerced. Are you comfortable “leaving someone hanging”? Kathryn discussed fear of repercussions. Personally, I would would be uncomfortable with not responding to an extended hand, and having this seen as disrespectful.

Human interactions are complicated.

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:25 PM, trepan8 via <> wrote:
>
> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>
> flightless
>
> From: Kathryn McCulley
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
> Subject: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>
> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
> Can you clarify for me?
> Kat
> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>
> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>
>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>
>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>
>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>
>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>
>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>
>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>
>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>
>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>
>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic.
>>>
>>> I personally give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>
>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>
>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>
>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>
>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>
>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>
>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>
>>>> Debbi
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>
>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < > wrote:
>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>
>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>
>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>> >
>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>> >
>>>> > I get that.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>> >
>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>> >
>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>> > --
>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> **********
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

Kathryn,

Yes to all of this. And while I think that the hugging topic is a tangent to the initial conversation, I also think that in most cases, actual discussion (instead of reacting) tends to reveal more areas of agreement than might be initially apparent.

I think that it tends to be pretty obvious if someone is not receptive to hugging. Actively hugging someone who didn’t lean in, and kept their arms at their sides would be pretty awkward…

But to take the other side of the argument… what about people (like you describe yourself) who feel pressure to demonstrate acceptance of an obvious invitation to hug to avoid awkwardness...

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Kathryn McCulley wrote:
>
> Oh, yes, that's a good point, thank you!
>
> I know someone who does that really well; it always feels like an offer rather than a request. The waiting part is key to making it work as asking for consent (pointing that out because I've also seen someone think they had done this but not actually left as much time as they thought they had; subjective time can be weird).
>
> I know when people talk about trying to read whether a hug is welcome, I get uncomfortable because I don't know what they're looking for and so I worry about miscommunications. I worry that they're looking for signs of refusal or disinclination rather than proactive acceptance, which I find concerning for a lot of reasons including that consent should be proactively positive not the absence of a refusal, friendliness being mistakable for receptiveness, and it being much harder socially and psychologically to say no when you want to than yes when you want to.
>
> Personally, the body language / cues I'd think were consent are continuing the hug (opening arms in return, moving in, actually initiating the hug, that kind of thing) and not much else (not a warm smile, for example, or other friendly, open indicators). Are there other things people would look for as positive inductors when we talk body language?
>
> I really like talking specifics like this, because I think it both gives a toolbox to anyone who is unsure what to say and it lets anyone involved in the conversation be clear about their expectations and understanding.
>
> Kat
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:26 PM, <> wrote:
> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>
> flightless
>
> From: Kathryn McCulley >
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
> Subject: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>
> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
> Can you clarify for me?
> Kat
> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>
> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>
>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>
>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>
>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis & gt; wrote:
>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>
>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>
>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>
>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>
>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>
>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>
>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic.
>>>
>>> I personally give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>
>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>
>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>
>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>
>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>
>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>
>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>
>>>> Debbi
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>
>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>> wrote:
>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>
>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>
>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>> >
>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>> >
>>>> > I get that.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>> >
>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>> >
>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>> > --
>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> **********
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

I just want to say that I don't think there's such as thing as being "a
purist about the consent argument", because there are many different people
with different thoughts on consent, and what consent is.*

(My favorite argument on consent was a fellow at burning man who told the
gal who took him there that "it violates my boundaries when you don't pay
attention to me".)

Maybe it would fit better if one said "taking the thought of preserving
mutual consent to an absurdist conclusion".

Blue
* For me it boils down to actual "agreement" between people.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM, dancingmantis
wrote:

> Kathryn,
>
> Yes to all of this. And while I think that the hugging topic is a tangent
> to the initial conversation, I also think that in most cases, actual
> discussion (instead of reacting) tends to reveal more areas of agreement
> than might be initially apparent.
>
> I think that it tends to be pretty obvious if someone is not receptive to
> hugging. Actively hugging someone who didn’t lean in, and kept their arms
> at their sides would be pretty awkward…
>
> But to take the other side of the argument… what about people (like you
> describe yourself) who feel pressure to demonstrate acceptance of an
> obvious invitation to hug to avoid awkwardness...
>
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Kathryn McCulley wrote:
>
> Oh, yes, that's a good point, thank you!
>
> I know someone who does that really well; it always feels like an offer
> rather than a request. The waiting part is key to making it work as asking
> for consent (pointing that out because I've also seen someone think they
> had done this but not actually left as much time as they thought they had;
> subjective time can be weird).
>
> I know when people talk about trying to read whether a hug is welcome, I
> get uncomfortable because I don't know what they're looking for and so I
> worry about miscommunications. I worry that they're looking for signs of
> refusal or disinclina tion rather than proactive acceptance, which I find
> concerning for a lot of reasons including that consent should be
> proactively positive not the absence of a refusal, friendliness being
> mistakable for receptiveness, and it being much harder socially and
> psychologically to say no when you want to than yes when you want to.
>
> Personally, the body language / cues I'd think were consent are continuing
> the hug (opening arms in return, moving in, actually initiating the hug,
> that kind of thing) and not much else (not a warm smile, for example, or
> other friendly, open indicators). Are there other things people would look
> for as positive inductors when we talk body language?
>
> I really like talking specifics like this, because I think it both gives a
> toolbox to anyone who is unsure what to say and it lets anyone involved in
> the conversation be clear about their expectations and understanding.
>
> Kat
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:26 PM, <> wrote:
>
>> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for
>> further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but
>> grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>>
>> flightless
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Kathryn McCulley
>> *To:* dcburners@dcburners.org
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
>> *Subject:* [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>
>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
>> someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't
>> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
>> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
>> but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely)
>> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
>> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
>> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
>> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
>> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
>> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
>> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
>> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
>> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
>> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
>> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
>> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
>> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
>> varies wildly.
>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
>> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
>> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
>> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
>> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that
>> your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps
>> that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if
>> you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
>> misunderstand?
>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
>> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
>> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
>> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
>> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
>> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
>> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
>> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
>> not "ever.")
>> Can you clarify for me?
>> Kat
>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how
>> people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that
>> they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They
>> may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
>> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
>> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
>> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
>> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
>> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
>> boundaries.
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis"
>> wrote:
>>
>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>> different.
>>
>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to
>> ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s
>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>> to “change c ulture”.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>
>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability
>> to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them --
>> without obtaining consent.
>>
>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the
>> community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>
>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>> where is the issue?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis >> gt; wrote:
>>
>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>
>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a
>> working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by
>> simply askin g.
>>
>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>
>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>> concretely.
>>
>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>> read.
>>
>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>
>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis
>> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an
>> important topic.
>>
>> I persona lly give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly
>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>
>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to acknowledge
>> that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of
>> fear and intimidation have *far* more serious consequences. As for
>> individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may
>> cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is
>> human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>
>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our
>> long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into
>> silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life
>> experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>
>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I
>> agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards
>> positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not
>> from creating divisions.
>>
>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>
>>
>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>
>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is
>> so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision
>> making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>
>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these
>> are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to
>> keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>
>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>
>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you
>> to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>
>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift
>> our culture toward something better.
>>
>> Debbi
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>
>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>
>> Love y ou guys!
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
>> #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>
>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long
>> hug...) and know if wanted.
>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior
>> and say 'no'.
>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner
>> should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who
>> thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>
>> William/aka Dobromir
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in
>> our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's
>> allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to
>> mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>> >
>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key
>> and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than
>> its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>> creepy to outright criminal.
>> >
>> > I get that.
>> >
>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing
>> cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of
>> hurt.
>> >
>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>> >
>> > Jessie / Mama J
>> > --
>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> > Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> **********
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

Fair enough. Purist probably wasn’t the right word choice… In fact, I consider myself a purist when it comes to consent. However, I don’t think absurdist is the right choice either. The idea that the climate of a culture can make a request to an oppressed population seem like a demand is a pretty common one.

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Bluekowski wrote:
>
> I just want to say that I don't think there's such as thing as being "a purist about the consent argument", because there are many different people with different thoughts on consent, and what consent is.*
>
> (My favorite argument on consent was a fellow at burning man who told the gal who took him there that "it violates my boundaries when you don't pay attention to me".)
>
> Maybe it would fit better if one said "taking the thought of preserving mutual consent to an absurdist conclusion".
>
> Blue
> * For me it boils down to actual "agreement" between people.
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
> Kathryn,
>
> Yes to all of this. And while I think that the hugging topic is a tangent to the initial conversation, I also think that in most cases, actual discussion (instead of reacting) tends to reveal more areas of agreement than might be initially apparent.
>
> I think that it tends to be pretty obvious if someone is not receptive to hugging. Actively hugging someone who didn’t lean in, and kept their arms at their sides would be pretty awkward…
>
> But to take the other side of the argument… what about people (like you describe yourself) who feel pressure to demonstrate acceptance of an obvious invitation to hug to avoid awkwardness...
>
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Kathryn McCulley > wrote:
>>
>> Oh, yes, that's a good point, thank you!
>>
>> I know someone who does that really well; it always feels like an offer rather than a request. The waiting part is key to making it work as asking for consent (pointing that out because I've also seen someone think they had done this but not actually left as much time as they thought they had; subjective time can be weird).
>>
>> I know when people talk about trying to read whether a hug is welcome, I get uncomfortable because I don't know what they're looking for and so I worry about miscommunications. I worry that they're looking for signs of refusal or disinclina tion rather than proactive acceptance, which I find concerning for a lot of reasons including that consent should be proactively positive not the absence of a refusal, friendliness being mistakable for receptiveness, and it being much harder socially and psychologically to say no when you want to than yes when you want to.
>>
>> Personally, the body language / cues I'd think were consent are continuing the hug (opening arms in return, moving in, actually initiating the hug, that kind of thing) and not much else (not a warm smile, for example, or other friendly, open indicators). Are there other things people would look for as positive inductors when we talk body language?
>>
>> I really like talking specifics like this, because I think it both gives a toolbox to anyone who is unsure what to say and it lets anyone involved in the conversation be clear about their expectations and understanding.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:26 PM, <> wrote:
>> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>>
>> flightless
>>
>> From: Kathryn McCulley >
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
>> Subject: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>
>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
>> Can you clarify for me?
>> Kat
>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>>
>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>
>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>
>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>>
>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>
>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis & gt; wrote:
>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>>
>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>
>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>>
>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>>
>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>
>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic.
>>>>
>>>> I persona lly give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>
>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>
>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>
>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>
>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>> wrote:
>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>
>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> **********
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

...And Blue… You have hugged me without asking.

(For the record, I was OK with it.)

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:39 PM, dancingmantis wrote:
>
> Fair enough. Purist probably wasn’t the right word choice… In fact, I consider myself a purist when it comes to consent. However, I don’t think absurdist is the right choice either. The idea that the climate of a culture can make a request to an oppressed population seem like a demand is a pretty common one.
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Bluekowski > wrote:
>>
>> I just want to say that I don't think there's such as thing as being "a purist about the consent argument", because there are many different peop le with different thoughts on consent, and what consent is.*
>>
>> (My favorite argument on consent was a fellow at burning man who told the gal who took him there that "it violates my boundaries when you don't pay attention to me".)
>>
>> Maybe it would fit better if one said "taking the thought of preserving mutual consent to an absurdist conclusion".
>>
>> Blue
>> * For me it boils down to actual "agreement" between people.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>> Kathryn,
>>
>> Yes to all of this. And while I think that the hugging topic is a tangent to the initial conversation, I also think that in most cases, actual discussion (instead of reacting) tends to reveal more areas of agreement than might be initially apparent.
>>
>> I think that it tends to be pretty obvious if someone is not receptive to hugging. Actively hugging someone who didn’t lean in, and kept their arms at their sides would be pretty awkward…
>>
>> But to take the other side of the argument… what about people (like you describe yourself) who feel pressure to demonstrate acceptance of an obvious invitation to hug to avoid awkwardness...
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Kathryn McCulley > wrote:
>>
>> Oh, yes, that's a good point, thank you!
>>
>> I know someone who does that really well; it always feels like an offer rather than a request. The waiting part is key to making it work as asking for consent (pointing that out because I've also seen someone think they had done this but not actually left as much time as they thought they had; subjective time can be weird).
>>
>> I know when people talk about trying to read whether a hug is welcome, I get uncomfortable because I don't know what they're looking for and so I worry about miscommunications. I worry that they're looking for signs of refusal or disinclina tion rather than proactive acceptance, which I find concerning for a lot of reasons including that consent should be proactively positive not the absence of a refusal, friendliness being mistakable for receptiveness, and it being much harder socially and psychologically to say no when you want to than yes when you want to.
>>
>> Personally, the body language / cues I'd think were consent are continuing the hug (opening arms in return, moving in, actually initiating the hug, that kind of thing) and not much else (not a warm smile, for example, or other friendly, open indicators). Are there other things people would look for as positive inductors when we talk body language?
>>
>> I really like talking specifics like this, because I think it both gives a toolbox to anyone who is unsure what to say and it lets anyone involved in the conversation be clear about their expectations and understanding.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:26 PM, <> wrote:
>> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>>
>> flightless
>>
>> From: Kathryn McCulley >
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
>> Subject: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>
>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent fo r hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
>> Can you clarify for me?
>> Kat
>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>>
>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>
>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>
>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>>
>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>
>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis & gt; wrote:
>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>>
>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>
>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>>
>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>>
>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>
>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an i mportant topic.
>>>>
>>>> I persona lly give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>
>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>
>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>
>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>
>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>> wrote:
>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>
>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> **********
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

I may have hugged you without asking -- I used to do it. But I try not to
do that any more. I like the 90% lean-in thing, even if there is the
possibility the other party may feel obligated to do it despite undeclared
reluctance. But I usually only do that with people I know.

With people I don't know, I usually try to verbalize my ask (cause you can
ask without words too). The stakes are low enough with hugs. But I really
try not to hug someone without my knowing I have agreement.

Lots of virtual hugs (and love) to you Alex (with your consent, of course),

~Blue

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:42 PM, dancingmantis
wrote:

> ...And Blue… You have hugged me without asking.
>
> (For the record, I was OK with it.)
>
> —Alex
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:39 PM, dancingmantis
> wrote:
>
> Fair enough. Purist probably wasn’t the right word choice… In fact, I
> consider myself a purist when it comes to consent. However, I do n’t think
> absurdist is the right choice either. The idea that the climate of a
> culture can make a request to an oppressed population seem like a demand is
> a pretty common one.
>
> —Alex
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Bluekowski wrote:
>
> I just want to say that I don't think there's such as thing as being "a
> purist about the consent argument", because there are many different peop
> le with different thoughts on consent, and what consent is.*
>
> (My favorite argument on consent was a fellow at burning man who told the
> gal who took him there that "it violates my boundaries when you don't pay
> attention to me".)
>
> Maybe it would fit better if one said "taking the thought of preserving
> mutual consent to an absurdist conclusion".
>
> Blue
> * For me it boils down to actual "agreement" between people.
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM, dancingmantis
> wrote:
>
>> Kathryn,
>>
>> Yes to all of this. And while I think that the hugging topic is a tangent
>> to the initial conversation, I also think that in most cases, actual
>> discussion (instead of reacting) tends to reveal more areas of agreement
>> than might be initially apparent.
>>
>> I think that it tends to be pretty obvious if someone is not receptive to
>> hugging. Actively hugging someone who didn’t lean in, and kept their arms
>> at their sides would be pretty awkward…
>>
>> But to take the other side of the argument… what about people (like you
>> describe yourself) who feel pressure to demonstrate acceptance of an
>> obvious invitation to hug to avoid awkwardness...
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Kathryn McCulley >> > wrote:
>>
>> Oh, yes, that's a good point, thank you!
>>
>> I know someone who does that really well; it always feels like an offer
>> rather than a request. The waiting part is key to making it work as asking
>> for consent (pointing that out because I've also seen someone think they
>> had done this but not actually left as much time as they thought they had;
>> subjective time can be weird).
>>
>> I know when people talk about trying to read whether a hug is welcome, I
>> get uncomfortable because I don't know what they're looking for and so I
>> worry about miscommunications. I worry that they're looking for signs of
>> refusal or disinclina tion rather than proactive acceptance, which I find
>> concerning for a lot of reasons including that consent should be
>> proactively positive not the absence of a refusal, friendliness being
>> mistakable for receptiveness, and it being much harder socially and
>> psychologically to say no when you want to than yes when you want to.
>>
>> Personally, the body language / cues I'd think were consent are
>> continuing the hug (opening arms in return, moving in, actually initiating
>> the hug, that kind of thing) and not much else (not a warm smile, for
>> example, or other friendly, open indicators). Are there other things people
>> would look for as positive inductors when we talk body language?
>>
>> I really like talking specifics like this, because I think it both gives
>> a toolbox to anyone who is unsure what to say and it lets anyone involved
>> in the conversation be clear about their expectations and understanding.
>>
>> Kat
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:26 PM, <> wrote:
>>
>>> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for
>>> further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but
>>> grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>>>
>>> flightless
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Kathryn McCulley
>>> *To:* dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
>>> *Subject:* [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>>
>>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
>>> someone well and we establish standing consent fo r hugs). I don't
>>> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
>>> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
>>> but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely)
>>> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
>>> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
>>> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
>>> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
>>> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
>>> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
>>> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
>>> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
>>> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
>>> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
>>> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
>>> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
>>> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
>>> varies wildly.
>>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
>>> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
>>> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
>>> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
>>> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying
>>> that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only
>>> trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care
>>> if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
>>> misunderstand?
>>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
>>> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
>>> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
>>> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
>>> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
>>> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
>>> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
>>> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
>>> not "ever.")
>>> Can you clarify for me?
>>> Kat
>>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know
>>> how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told
>>> that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered.
>>> They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
>>> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
>>> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
>>> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
>>> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
>>> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
>>> boundaries.
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>>> different.
>>>
>>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to
>>> ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s
>>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>>> to “change c ulture”.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>>
>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the
>>> ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging
>>> them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>
>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty
>>> straightforward.
>>>
>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the
>>> community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>
>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>>> where is the issue?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis >>> gt; wrote:
>>>
>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>>
>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have
>>> a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped
>>> by simply askin g.
>>>
>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>
>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>>> concretely.
>>>
>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>>> read.
>>>
>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>
>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis >>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an i
>>> mportant topic.
>>>
>>> I persona lly give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly
>>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>
>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to acknowledge
>>> that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of
>>> fear and intimidation have *far* more serious consequences. As for
>>> individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may
>>> cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is
>>> human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>
>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our
>>> long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into
>>> silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life
>>> experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>
>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I
>>> agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards
>>> positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not
>>> from creating divisions.
>>>
>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>>
>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there
>>> is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor
>>> decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>
>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize
>>> these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder
>>> to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>
>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>
>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you
>>> to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>
>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift
>>> our culture toward something better.
>>>
>>> Debbi
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>
>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>
>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
>>> .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>
>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long
>>> hug...) and know if wanted.
>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior
>>> and say 'no'.
>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a
>>> Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who
>>> thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>
>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in
>>> our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's
>>> allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to
>>> mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>> >
>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key
>>> and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than
>>> its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>>> creepy to outright criminal.
>>> >
>>> > I get that.
>>> >
>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing
>>> cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of
>>> hurt.
>>> >
>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>> >
>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>> > --
>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> > Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> **********
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

I did not consent to so many people hitting reply-all and blowing up my
inbox.

Stahp plz
On Dec 2, 2015 6:19 PM, "Kathryn McCulley" wrote:

> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
> someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't
> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
> but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely)
> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>
> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
> varies wildly.
>
> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>
> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that
> your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps
> that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if
> you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
> misunderstand?
>
> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>
> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
> not "ever.")
>
> Can you clarify for me?
> Kat
>
> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how
> people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that
> they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They
> may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
> boundaries.
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" wrote:
>
>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>> different.
>>
>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to
>> ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s
>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>> to “change c ulture”.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>
>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability
>> to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them --
>> without obtaining consent.
>>
>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the
>> community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>
>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>> where is the issue?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>>
>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have
>>> a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped
>>> by simply askin g.
>>>
>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>
>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>>> concretely.
>>>
>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>>> read.
>>>
>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>
>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis >>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an
>>>> important topic.
>>>>
>>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly
>>>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>>>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>>>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>>>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>>>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>>>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>>>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>>>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>>>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>>>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>>>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>
>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>>>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>>>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>>>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to
>>>> acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an
>>>> environment of fear and intimidation have *far* more serious
>>>> consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues,
>>>> personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it
>>>> actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>
>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what
>>>> our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise
>>>> into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and
>>>> life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>>>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>>>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>>>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>>>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>>>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>>>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I
>>>> agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards
>>>> positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not
>>>> from creating divisions.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there
>>>> is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor
>>>> decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize
>>>> these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder
>>>> to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>
>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>>>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>>>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage
>>>> you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>>>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>>>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>
>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to
>>>> shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>
>>>> Debbi
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
>>>>> .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>
>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a
>>>>> long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior
>>>>> and say 'no'.
>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a
>>>>> Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people
>>>>> who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>
>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture**
>>>>> in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's
>>>>> allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to
>>>>> mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is
>>>>> key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more
>>>>> than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>>>>> creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a
>>>>> growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or
>>>>> PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> > Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> **********
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

My consent is formally granted.

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:55 PM, Bluekowski wrote:
>
> I may have hugged you without asking -- I used to do it. But I try not to do that any more. I like the 90% lean-in thing, even if there is the possibility the other party may feel obligated to do it despite undeclared reluctance. But I usually only do that with people I know.
>
> With people I don't know, I usually try to verbalize my ask (cause you can ask without words too). The stakes are low enough with hugs. But I really try not to hug someone without my knowing I have agreement.
>
> Lots of virtual hugs (and love) to you Alex (with your consent, of course),
>
> ~Blue
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:42 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
> ...And Blue… You have hugged me without asking.
>
> (For the record, I was OK with it.)
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:39 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>
>> Fair enough. Purist probably wasn’t the right word choice… In fact, I consider myself a purist when it comes to consent. However, I do n’t think absurdist is the right choice either. The idea that the climate of a culture can make a request to an oppressed population seem like a demand is a pretty common one.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Bluekowski > wrote:
>>>
>>> I just want to say that I don't think there's such as thing as being "a purist about the consent argument", because there are many different peop le with different thoughts on consent, and what consent is.*
>>>
>>> (My favorite argument on consent was a fellow at burning man who told the gal who took him there that "it violates my boundaries when you don't pay attention to me".)
>>>
>>> Maybe it would fit better if one said "taking the thought of preserving mutual consent to an absurdist conclusion".
>>>
>>> Blue
>>> * For me it boils down to actual "agreement" between people.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:25 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>> Kathryn,
>>>
>>> Yes to all of this. And while I think that the hugging topic is a tangent to the initial conversation, I also think that in most cases, actual discussion (instead of reacting) tends to reveal more areas of agreement than might be initially apparent.
>>>
>>> I think that it tends to be pretty obvious if someone is not receptive to hugging. Actively hugging someone who didn’t lean in, and kept their arms at their sides would be pretty awkward…
>>>
>>> But to take the other side of the argument… what about people (like you describe yourself) who feel pressure to demonstrate acceptance of an obvious invitation to hug to avoid awkwardness...
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:45 PM, Kathryn McCulley > wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh, yes, that's a good point, thank you!
>>>
>>> I know someone who does that really well; it always feels like an offer rather than a request. The waiting part is key to making it work as asking for consent (pointing that out because I've also seen someone think they had done this but not actually left as much time as they thought they had; subjective time can be weird).
>>>
>>> I know when people talk about trying to read whether a hug is welcome, I get uncomfortable because I don't know what they're looking for and so I worry about miscommunications. I worry that they're looking for signs of refusal or disinclina tion rather than proactive acceptance, which I find concerning for a lot of reasons including that consent should be proactively positive not the absence of a refusal, friendliness being mistakable for receptiveness, and it being much harder socially and psychologically to say no when you want to than yes when you want to.
>>>
>>> Personally, the body language / cues I'd think were consent are continuing the hug (opening arms in return, moving in, actually initiating the hug, that kind of thing) and not much else (not a warm smile, for example, or other friendly, open indicators). Are there other things people would look for as positive inductors when we talk body language?
>>>
>>> I really like talking specifics like this, because I think it both gives a toolbox to anyone who is unsure what to say and it lets anyone involved in the conversation be clear about their expectations and understanding.
>>>
>>> Kat
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:26 PM, <> wrote:
>>> You can say "Do you hug" but you can also open your arms and wait for further body language from the other person. Handshaking is a norm, but grabbing someone's hand when it was still down by their side is not.
>>>
>>> flightless
>>>
>>> From: Kathryn McCulley >
>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 6:19 PM
>>> Subject: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>>
>>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent fo r hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which doe s make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
>>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
>>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
>>> Can you clarify for me?
>>> Kat
>>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
>>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>>>
>>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support eff orts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>>
>>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>>>
>>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>>
>>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis & gt; wrote:
>>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>>>
>>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>>>
>>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>>>
>>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>>
>>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an i mportant topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> I persona lly give and recei ve frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>> wrote:
>>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> **********
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

Hey all...a reminder than anyone can remove them self from the list at any
time and/or manage their settings using the links at the bottom of every
email.

On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, ivanjdominguez
wrote:

> Please remove me from this list immediately.
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:58 PM, lefkow > <_e>> wrote:
>
> I did not consent to so many people hitting reply-all and blowing up my
> inbox.
>
> Stahp plz
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:19 PM, "Kathryn McCulley" > <_e>> wrote:
>
>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
>> someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't
>> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
>> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
>> but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely)
>> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
>> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
>> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
>> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
>> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
>> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>>
>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
>> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
>> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
>> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
>> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
>> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
>> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
>> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
>> varies wildly.
>>
>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
>> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
>> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
>> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
>> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>>
>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that
>> your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps
>> that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if
>> you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
>> misunderstand?
>>
>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
>> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
>> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
>> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>>
>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
>> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
>> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
>> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
>> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
>> not "ever.")
>>
>> Can you clarify for me?
>> Kat
>>
>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how
>> people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that
>> they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They
>> may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
>> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
>> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
>> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
>> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
>> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
>> boundaries.
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" >> <_e>> wrote:
>>
>>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>>> different.
>>>
>>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to
>>> ensure the respect of consent, and to make violat ions of an indiv idual’s
>>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>>> to “change c ulture”.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony >>> <_e>> wrote:
>>>
>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the
>>> ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging
>>> them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>
>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty
>>> straightforward.
>>>
>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the
>>> community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>
>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>>> where is the issue?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis >>> <_e>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>>>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>>>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>>>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony >>>> <_e>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have
>>>> a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped
>>>> by simply askin g.
>>>>
>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>>>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>>>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>>>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>
>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>>>> concretely.
>>>>
>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>>>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>>>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>>>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>>>> read.
>>>>
>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>>>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>>>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>>>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>
>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>>>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis <
>>>> dancingmantis@comcast.net
>>>> <_e>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an
>>>>> important topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly
>>>>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>>>>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>>>>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>>>>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>>>>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>>>>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>>>>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>>>>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>>>>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>>>>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>>>>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>>>>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>>>>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>>>>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to
>>>>> acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an
>>>>> environment of fear and intimidation have *far* more serious
>>>>> consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues,
>>>>> personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it
>>>>> actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what
>>>>> our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise
>>>>> into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and
>>>>> life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>>>>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>>>>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>>>>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>>>>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>>>>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>>>>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I
>>>>> agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards
>>>>> positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not
>>>>> from creating divisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi >>>>> <_e>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there
>>>>> is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor
>>>>> decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>
>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize
>>>>> these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder
>>>>> to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>>>>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>>>>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage
>>>>> you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>>>>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>>>>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>
>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to
>>>>> shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
>>>>>> .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a
>>>>>> long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted
>>>>>> behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a
>>>>>> Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people
>>>>>> who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture**
>>>>>> in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's
>>>>>> allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to
>>>>>> mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is
>>>>>> key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more
>>>>>> than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>>>>>> creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a
>>>>>> growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or
>>>>>> PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> > Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> **********
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

--
**********

A few years ago this discussion list had over 500 messages a month. Sometimes the discussion was even about the topic of consent. The announce list, on the other hand was restricted to event announcements.

BTW, the list management instructions are at the bottom of every email.

—Ales
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 4:58 PM, lefkow wrote:
>
> I did not consent to so many people hitting reply-all and blowing up my inbox.
>
> Stahp plz
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:19 PM, "Kathryn McCulley" > wrote:
> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>
> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
>
> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>
> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
>
> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>
> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
>
> Can you clarify for me?
> Kat
>
> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" > wrote:
> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>
> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violat ions of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>
>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>
>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>
>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony > wrote:
>>>
>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>
>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>
>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>
>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>
>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>
>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic.
>>>
>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>
>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>
>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>
>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>
>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>
>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>
>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>
>>>> Debbi
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 > wrote:
>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>
>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>> wrote:
>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>
>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>
>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>> >
>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>> >
>>>> > I get that.
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>> >
>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>> >
>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>> > --
>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> **********
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

Lefkow, I don't consent to your not unsubscribing quietly and without
comment. ~Blue

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:58 PM, lefkow wrote:

> I did not consent to so many people hitting reply-all and blowing up my
> inbox.
>
> Stahp plz
> On Dec 2, 2015 6:19 PM, "Kathryn McCulley" wrote:
>
>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
>> someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't
>> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
>> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
>> but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely)
>> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
>> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
>> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
>> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
>> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
>> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>>
>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
>> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
>> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
>> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
>> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
>> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
>> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
>> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
>> varies wildly.
>>
>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
>> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
>> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
>> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
>> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>>
>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that
>> your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps
>> that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if
>> you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
>> misunderstand?
>>
>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
>> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
>> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
>> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>>
>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
>> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
>> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
>> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
>> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
>> not "ever.")
>>
>> Can you clarify for me?
>> Kat
>>
>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how
>> people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that
>> they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They
>> may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
>> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
>> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
>> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
>> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
>> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
>> boundaries.
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>>> different.
>>>
>>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to
>>> ensure the respect of consent, and to make violat ions of an indiv idual’s
>>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>>> to “change c ulture”.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>>
>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the
>>> ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging
>>> them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>
>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty
>>> straightforward.
>>>
>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the
>>> community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>
>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>>> where is the issue?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis >>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>>>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>>>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>>>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have
>>>> a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped
>>>> by simply askin g.
>>>>
>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>>>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>>>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>>>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>
>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>>>> concretely.
>>>>
>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>>>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>>>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>>>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>>>> read.
>>>>
>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>>>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>>>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>>>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>
>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>>>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis <
>>>> dancingmantis@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an
>>>>> important topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly
>>>>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>>>>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>>>>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>>>>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>>>>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>>>>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>>>>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>>>>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>>>>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>>>>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>>>>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>>>>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>>>>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>>>>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to
>>>>> acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an
>>>>> environment of fear and intimidation have *far* more serious
>>>>> consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues,
>>>>> personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it
>>>>> actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what
>>>>> our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise
>>>>> into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and
>>>>> life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>>>>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>>>>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>>>>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>>>>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>>>>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>>>>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I
>>>>> agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards
>>>>> positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not
>>>>> from creating divisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there
>>>>> is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor
>>>>> decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>
>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize
>>>>> these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder
>>>>> to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>>>>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>>>>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage
>>>>> you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>>>>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>>>>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>
>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to
>>>>> shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
>>>>>> .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a
>>>>>> long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted
>>>>>> behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a
>>>>>> Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people
>>>>>> who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture**
>>>>>> in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's
>>>>>> allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to
>>>>>> mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is
>>>>>> key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more
>>>>>> than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>>>>>> creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a
>>>>>> growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or
>>>>>> PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> > Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> **********
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

He's right. This needs to be fixed so people can unsubscribe. Darrell... or
who is the admin?

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:08 PM, ivanjdominguez
wrote:

> No so. Whenever I click on the unsubscribe link at the bottom I reach a
> screen that tells me I lack authorization. For anyone else who wants out of
> this thread, set up a rule using something from the subject line, and
> direct qualifying email to its own folder.
>
> Ivan J. Dominguez
> Sent from my phone, so please forgive any typos.
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Debbi wrote:
>
> Hey all...a reminder than anyone can remove them self from the list at any
> time and/or manage their settings using the links at the bottom of every
> email.
>
> On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, ivanjdominguez
> wrote:
>
>> Please remove me from this list immediately.
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:58 PM, lefkow wrote:
>>
>> I did not consent to so many people hitting reply-all and blowing up my
>> inbox.
>>
>> Stahp plz
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:19 PM, "Kathryn McCulley" wrote:
>>
>>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
>>> someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't
>>> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
>>> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
>>> but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely)
>>> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
>>> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
>>> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
>>> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
>>> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
>>> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>>>
>>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
>>> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
>>> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
>>> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
>>> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
>>> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
>>> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
>>> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
>>> varies wildly.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
>>> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
>>> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
>>> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
>>> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>>>
>>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying
>>> that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only
>>> trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care
>>> if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
>>> misunderstand?
>>>
>>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
>>> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
>>> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
>>> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>>>
>>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
>>> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
>>> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
>>> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
>>> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
>>> not "ever.")
>>>
>>> Can you clarify for me?
>>> Kat
>>>
>>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know
>>> how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told
>>> that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered.
>>> They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
>>> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
>>> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
>>> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
>>> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
>>> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
>>> boundaries.
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>>>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>>>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>>>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>>>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>>>> different.
>>>>
>>>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>>>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>>>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to
>>>> ensure t he respect of consent, and to make violat ions of an indiv idual’s
>>>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>>>> to “change c ulture”.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the
>>>> ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging
>>>> them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>>
>>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty
>>>> straightforward.
>>>>
>>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within
>>>> the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>>
>>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>>>> where is the issue?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis <
>>>> dancingmantis@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>>>>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>>>>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>>>>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>>>
>>>>> —Alex
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't
>>>>> have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily
>>>>> side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>>>
>>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>>>>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>>>>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>>>>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>>>>> concretely.
>>>>>
>>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>>>>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>>>>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>>>>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>>>>> read.
>>>>>
>>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>>>>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>>>>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>>>>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>>
>>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>>>>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis <
>>>>> dancingmantis@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an
>>>>>> important topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly
>>>>>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>>>>>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>>>>>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>>>>>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>>>>>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>>>>>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>>>>>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>>>>>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>>>>>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>>>>>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>>>>>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>>>>>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>>>>>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>>>>>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to
>>>>>> acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an
>>>>>> environment of fear and intimidation have *far* more serious
>>>>>> consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues,
>>>>>> personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it
>>>>>> actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what
>>>>>> our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise
>>>>>> into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and
>>>>>> life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>>>>>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>>>>>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>>>>>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>>>>>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>>>>>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>>>>>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people.
>>>>>> I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion
>>>>>> towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural
>>>>>> allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because
>>>>>> there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor
>>>>>> decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize
>>>>>> these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder
>>>>>> to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>>>>>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>>>>>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage
>>>>>> you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>>>>>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>>>>>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to
>>>>>> shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
>>>>>>> .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a
>>>>>>> long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted
>>>>>>> behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a
>>>>>>> Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people
>>>>>>> who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn <
>>>>>>> newburn.jessie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm
>>>>>>> culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein
>>>>>>> everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs
>>>>>>> seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is
>>>>>>> key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more
>>>>>>> than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>>>>>>> creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a
>>>>>>> growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or
>>>>>>> PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>>> > Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> **********
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>>
>>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
>
> --
> **********
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

Not to be insensitive... Can we have this dialogue on a dedicated forum.
Y'all are blowing up my email.

Much love

Dino

Another friendly reminder, since everyone troubled by all these emails is
replying from a Gmail account - Gmail has a feature called "Mute" for
exactly the purpose of stopping an email you're not interested in from
reappearing in your inbox. Find it under "More" when viewing an email.

-----
Emily

*tu deviens responsable pour toujours de ce que tu as apprivoisé*

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Debbi wrote:

> Hey all...a reminder than anyone can remove them self from the list at any
> time and/or manage their settings using the links at the bottom of every
> email.
>
> On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, ivanjdominguez
> wrote:
>
>> Please remove me from this list immediately.
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:58 PM, lefkow wrote:
>>
>> I did not consent to so many people hitting reply-all and blowing up my
>> inbox.
>>
>> Stahp plz
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:19 PM, "Kathryn McCulley" wrote:
>>
>>> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know
>>> someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't
>>> personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major
>>> a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do,
>>> but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely)
>>> uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid
>>> awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it
>>> is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if
>>> it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference
>>> of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about
>>> not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>>>
>>> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France
>>> where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist
>>> (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also
>>> my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers
>>> without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing
>>> so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case
>>> you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging
>>> and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it
>>> varies wildly.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other
>>> Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find
>>> you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you
>>> may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness
>>> and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>>>
>>> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying
>>> that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only
>>> trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care
>>> if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I
>>> misunderstand?
>>>
>>> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more
>>> meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)?
>>> What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect
>>> the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>>>
>>> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which
>>> creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like
>>> a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to
>>> be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt
>>> this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context,"
>>> not "ever.")
>>>
>>> Can you clarify for me?
>>> Kat
>>>
>>> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know
>>> how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told
>>> that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered.
>>> They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your
>>> boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide
>>> they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may
>>> scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a
>>> person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind
>>> when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their
>>> boundaries.
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that
>>>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would
>>>> “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise
>>>> (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This
>>>> becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are
>>>> different.
>>>>
>>>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this
>>>> conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally
>>>> use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to
>>>> ensure t he respect of consent, and to make violat ions of an indiv idual’s
>>>> sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting
>>>> to “change c ulture”.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the
>>>> ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging
>>>> them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>>
>>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty
>>>> straightforward.
>>>>
>>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within
>>>> the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>>
>>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask.
>>>> where is the issue?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis <
>>>> dancingmantis@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting
>>>>> shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I
>>>>> would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan
>>>>> upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>>>
>>>>> —Alex
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't
>>>>> have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily
>>>>> side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>>>
>>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with
>>>>> someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like
>>>>> 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option,
>>>>> should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected,
>>>>> concretely.
>>>>>
>>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or
>>>>> didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to
>>>>> "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you
>>>>> can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately
>>>>> read.
>>>>>
>>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't
>>>>> have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an
>>>>> affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting
>>>>> it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>>
>>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout
>>>>> way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis <
>>>>> dancingmantis@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an
>>>>>> important topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly
>>>>>> negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where
>>>>>> hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I
>>>>>> think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone
>>>>>> doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might
>>>>>> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly
>>>>>> saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I
>>>>>> placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this
>>>>>> discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am
>>>>>> not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community
>>>>>> standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and
>>>>>> professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social
>>>>>> expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each
>>>>>> other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have
>>>>>> serious social consequences. It is also *very* important to
>>>>>> acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an
>>>>>> environment of fear and intimidation have *far* more serious
>>>>>> consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues,
>>>>>> personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it
>>>>>> actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what
>>>>>> our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise
>>>>>> into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and
>>>>>> life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community,
>>>>>> create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional
>>>>>> intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that
>>>>>> communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we
>>>>>> disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their
>>>>>> feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack)
>>>>>> will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people.
>>>>>> I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion
>>>>>> towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural
>>>>>> allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because
>>>>>> there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor
>>>>>> decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize
>>>>>> these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder
>>>>>> to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and
>>>>>> sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or
>>>>>> the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage
>>>>>> you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be
>>>>>> opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is
>>>>>> productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to
>>>>>> shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
>>>>>>> .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a
>>>>>>> long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted
>>>>>>> behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a
>>>>>>> Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people
>>>>>>> who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn <
>>>>>>> newburn.jessie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm
>>>>>>> culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein
>>>>>>> everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs
>>>>>>> seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is
>>>>>>> key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more
>>>>>>> than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from
>>>>>>> creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a
>>>>>>> growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or
>>>>>>> PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>>> > Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> **********
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>>
>>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
>
> --
> **********
>
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

This list has been really quiet for a long time, as most people seem to have moved their social discussion to Facebook or the like. However, this was historically the “discussion list” that people were referred to when they mucked up the “announce list” with non-event related posts. It was very high traffic, and served the purpose of community socialization… and on multiple occasions, just the sort of discussion of safety and consent issues that we are having now.

The fact that that was the purpose of the list before doesn’t mean that that has to be its purpose going forward… since obviously (based on traffic levels) people have found other forums to meet those needs. But it is worth considering that anyone who actively signed up for the list consented to be on it with the presumed understanding of its purpose. And, anyone who wanted to withdraw consent could un-sub and subscribe to the “announce" list. If we change the purpose of the list, we should make a point of re-negotiating consent with all the existing list members.

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 5:28 PM, Kathryn McCulley wrote:
>
> Genuine question: what would people like this list to be used for, if not reasonable discussion of community social expectations? Announcements only? Something else?
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 8:24 PM, "dino"
> wrote:
> Not to be insensitive... Can we have this dialogue on a dedicated forum. Y'all are blowing up my email.
>
> Much love
>
> Dino
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182

I think the issue is that this list has been offline for quite a while
(just what Alex said), so the sudden appearance of a plethora of messages
with no plug n play way to unsubscribe could be a bit jarring and/or
annoying.

I just went through this so you don't have to dear potential unsubscriber.
Here's how to unsubscribe or change your settings:
1. Click this link: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
2. If and when you see "Access denied", on the lower left of the screen
click "Request new password" and input your email address.
3. go to your email and click the link in the email subject line
"Replacement login information for..."
4. click "Reset password"
5. Under "Manage Group Subscriptions" click "Leave the DC Burners group"
and save settings. You're off the list now!

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:28 PM, Kathryn McCulley
wrote:

> Genuine question: what would people like this list to be used for, if not
> reasonable discussion of community social expectations? Announcements only?
> Something else?
> On Dec 2, 2015 8:24 PM, "dino"
wrote:
>
>> Not to be insensitive... Can we have this dialogue on a dedicated forum.
>> Y'all are blowing up my email.
>>
>> Much love
>>
>> Dino
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>>
>>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
>
>

Stop sending me e mails

Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:19 PM, Kathryn McCulley wrote:
>
> I, personally, prefer not to be hugged without consent (until I know someone well and we establish standing consent for hugs). I don't personally experience someone hugging me without my permission as as major a violation as it is clear to me some other people in this conversation do, but it is definitely a violation which does make me (often intensely) uncomfortable. I'm socialized to generally go along with it to avoid awkwardness, hurt feelings, and unpredictable negative reactions*. Yes, it is my responsibility to enforce my own boundaries by informing people if it's relevant (because how else would they know?), but this is a preference of mine which I care about significantly but often less than I care about not making people feel bad (or risking potential backlash).
>
> Alex, I find your perspective a little confusing. We are not in France where the social norm is cheek-kissing. We are all part of a hippy/leftist (& often Pagan) community, and clearly (based on this conversation and also my experience) there is not a universal norm about whether to hug strangers without asking or not. (In my leftist circles, you ask, period. Not doing so is a definite faux pas and may cause people to keep an eye out in case you violate other boundaries.) It sounds like you think the norm is hugging and to ask first would be changing the norm, while my experience is that it varies wildly.
>
> Are you saying that you find the idea of you, personally, asking other Burners (who you have now been told explicitly at least some of will find you hugging them without asking to be a negative experience) whether you may hug them to be unacceptable because you mean it as a sign of openness and trust and so they ought to take it as you intend it?
>
> If so, that does not sound like actual openness to me. You're saying that your idea of what 'should' be the cultural norn and meaning not only trumps that of other people in this community but ALSO that you don't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you explain it to me? Did I misunderstand?
>
> I was also confused by your statement about it imbuing the act with more meaning. I thought you wanted to mean things with it (honesty, openness)? What additional meaning do you find asking to add, if not that you respect the other person (which is what it means to me)?
>
> I can see that "May I hug you?" might sound like an ask in a way which creates the power imbalance you mentioned, and perhaps even "Would you like a hug?", but "Do you hug?" or "Are you a person who hugs?" seems to me to be simply asking about whether it is a norm to them. (I have always felt this was also very clear from context that you mean "...in this context," not "ever.")
>
> Can you clarify for me?
> Kat
>
> *Reminder here: asserting boundaries can be dangerous! You don't know how people will react to being asked not to do something or to being told that they did something you didn't like. They may be hurt or bewildered. They may get defensive or angry. They may be rude or treat you like your boundaries are unimportant or silly. They may lash out. They may decide they don't like you. They may not want to be your friend anymore. They may scare you or hurt you. Those are all real, valid fears that can affect a person's willingness to enforce their boundaries. Please bear this in mind when judging people for not clearly and consistently enforcing their boundaries.
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015 6:11 PM, "dancingmantis" wrote:
>> No. You are intentionally misreading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably assume that someone would “have an issue with you hugging them” unless they indicated otherwise (verbally or non-verbally), because hugging is a cultural norm. This becomes an issue in cross-cultural interaction where expectations are different.
>>
>> And… I think that “changing cultural modes” is EXACTLY what this conversation is about, and is absolutely necessary. I wouldn’t personally use a phrase as loaded as “rape culture”, but If you support efforts to ensure the respect of consent, and to make violations of an indiv idual’s sense of of safety and autonomy socially unacceptable, you are attempting to “change c ulture”.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>>
>>> yea it continues that the only thing yr tryna do is argue for the ability to hug people who might reasonably have an issue with you hugging them -- without obtaining consent.
>>>
>>> also bodily autonomy, including in sex / play, is pretty straightforward.
>>>
>>> also, isn't this conversation about *changing* cultural modes within the community / our pretty busted national culture?
>>>
>>> hugs are dope. hug people you know want to be hugged. don't know? ask. where is the issue?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:57 PM, dancingmantis wrote:
>>>> Of course, maybe your point is that hugging as a form of greeting shouldn’t be a culturally accepted norm among DC Burners. In that case, I would respect your opinion… but with my personal Euro/hippy/leftist/pagan upbringing I would strongly disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>> —Alex
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 2:15 PM, beatpony wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> the danger of giving a hug that isn't desired to someone you don't have a working understanding of hug-wanting with is pretty easily side-stepped by simply askin g.
>>>>>
>>>>> even a subtle suggestion that non-negotiated hug-giving (again, with someone who you don't already know will want a hug from you within like 99%, and even then you should probly ask, in some way) should be an option, should not be on the table. same goes with 'interpreting', 'reading', etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> we want to know for sure. that is how space and autonomy is respected, concretely.
>>>>>
>>>>> i'd be pretty upset if, instead of asking, someone i didn't know (or didn't know well, or didn't want to hug for seriously any reason) tried to "interpret" what i wanted instead of just asking. not-asking is a thing you can broach with friends, with people who you know, who you can accurately read.
>>>>>
>>>>> consent is super, super duper easy to inquir e after, yal. it doesn't have to interrupt the 'flow' of an event or interaction, and obtaining an affirmative makes it all the better; especially if the alternative, getting it wrong, is traumatizing. THAT is a buzz-kill.
>>>>>
>>>>> asking for consent being argued to be a buzzkill, even in a roundabout way, is bunk. let's not? yea!
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, dancingmantis wrote:
>>>>>> Thank you Debbi for this very measured and rational response to an important topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally give and receive frequent hugs without expli citly negotiating consent beforehand. I belong to multiple communities where hugging as a form o f greeting is a cultural norm (like hand shaking). I think that it is usually pretty easy to tell by body language if someone doesn’t feel comfortable with a hug as a greeting… but in theory I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather than explicitly saying “I don’t want to hug”, someone accused me of assaulting them. Am I placing responsibility on the “victim”? Some of the statements in this discussion would seem to characterize it this way. Does that mean that I am not an ad vocate for a discussion about consent, clearer community standards, and higher accountability? I think that personally and professionally I have been a strong advocate for these things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a simple truth that people have different cultures and social expectations. It is a legitimate concern that people misinterpret each other’s intentions, and that perceptions of predatory behavior may have serious social consequences. It is also very important to acknowledge that rape, assault, victim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal experience may cause one issue to seem bigger or smaller than it actually is. This is human nature, and does not demonstrate evil intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a communit y, and as indiv iduals, I think we need to decide what our long term goal is. Do we want to be reactionary, and exile or chastise into silence anyone who doesn’t already share the same perspectives and life experiences that some of us hold? Or do we want to grow the community, create positive change, educate, and potentiate empathy and emotional intelligence? If we want the second, we need to acknowledge that communication is a two way street and try to understand the people we disagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them listen and gain perspective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agree with Debbi that we benefit most from channeling that passion towards positive change, and that change comes from recruiting natural allies, not from creating divisions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> —Alex Dancingmantis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 6:48 PM, Debbi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Aaaaand this is why we need to have these conversations. Because there is so much gray in between "rape apologist"/"victim blaming" and poor decision making and attending to the needs of actual assault survivors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I appreciate everyone who has expressed an opinion, and I recognize these are often rooted in personal experiences, which makes it even harder to keep perspective. Thank you to everyone who has, and who will, speak up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have to be able to navigate these gray areas with respect and sensitivity without default ing to extreme corners and personal attacks or the conversation will go nowhere.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you want to help steer these difficult conversations, I encourage you to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and as leaders emerge there will be opportunities to come together and hopefully engage in dialogue that is productive and proactive, rather than reactive and divisive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I truly love this community and I believe we have the potential to shift our culture toward something better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Debbi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0 wrote:
>>>>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <> wrote:
>>>>>>>> < blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Thank you, Mama J!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should have to fear expressing yourself (a long hug...) and know if wanted.
>>>>>>>> If you are a Burner you should know how to handle an unwanted behavior and say 'no'.
>>>>>>>> And I get it too - assault is not cool but this is not something a Burner should ever do or he/she be part of this group.
>>>>>>>> I'm afraid of we turning to a 'political correct' group of DC people who thing a Burner makes them cool.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> William/aka Dobromir
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM, jessienewburn wrote:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vicitm culture** in our society and a thin-skin-ification all around wherein everyone's allergy, food sensitivity, mood of the day and particular needs seem to mandate institutional level support to ensure non-victimhood.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I *get* a thousand times over that assault ain't cool, consent is key and our community, in its embracing of all, gets its share (or more than its share) of people whose vibe -- and sometimes actions -- range from creepy to outright criminal.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I get that.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I'm simply being the voice of a perspective: There has been a growing cultural shift toward over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPTION of hurt.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Just sayin'. Beware the culture change and keep a level head.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Jessie / Mama J
>>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>>> > Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>>>> > Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>>>> > Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/176
>>>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/176
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> **********
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/178
>>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182