RE: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First

Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical
contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people
without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with
it, no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without
getting consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask
a stranger if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's
throat upon meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably
hold out some bacon and ask them if they would like some.

Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a
community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end
up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something
else equally serious, but you get my point. We do not grow if we
don't change. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on
consent the last few years has made a huge difference already.

Caitlin Phillips
Rebound Designs
www.rebound-designs.com

On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:

> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to
> wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before
> hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a
> behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably
> won't work all that well.
>
>
>
>
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>
> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know
> how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can
> be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>
> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best
> thing ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want
> to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb
> sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without
> permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back,
> putting my hands up? It’s not a good feeling either, it feels
> defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just
> asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone
> concerned.
>
> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself
> get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great,
> but that could be torture if you DIDN’T want it.
>
>
> Caitlin Phillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill
> wrote:
>
> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>
> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your
> hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>
> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most
> wonderful things about this community, and I hope it never, ever
> stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try
> new things.
>
> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back
> gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He
> said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>
>
>
>
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>
> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc
> riptions".
> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
> 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 awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 misr eading 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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-ask
> ing 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 exp erience 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 agr ee 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 person al 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" st yle="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-i fication 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/mailingl ist/
> 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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184

Caitlin,

I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.

I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15 years.

In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people, hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery” (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.

Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their family structures.

—Alex

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips wrote:
>
> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it, no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>
> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else equally serious, but you get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last few years has made a huge difference already.
>
> Caitlin Phillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>>
>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>
>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? It’s not a good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.
>>
>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>
>>
>> Caitlin Phillips
>> Rebound Designs
>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill > wrote:
>>
>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>
>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>
>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful things about this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>
>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
>> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>>
>> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
>> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" > wrote:
>> 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 awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 exp lain 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 the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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-ask ing 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 th an 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 exp erience 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 liste n and gain perspective.
>>
>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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 person al 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 < <>cmenocal@gmail.com > 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" st yle="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-i fication 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 growin g 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 >> burners.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/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184

Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds... People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.

Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you are expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with people that want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the cops for assault. Take your pick.

This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South Park episodes, and get over yourselves.

And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.

Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.

Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely derailed from what was important.

This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves part of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of norms.

Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then, isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part. Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being that they're illegal.

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis wrote:
>
> Caitlin,
>
> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>
> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15 years.
>
> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people, hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery” (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>
> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their family structures.
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips wrote:
>>
>> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it, no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>>
>> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else equally serious, but you get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last few years has made a huge difference already.
>>
>> Caitlin P hillips
>> Rebound Designs
>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>>> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>>>
>>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>>
>>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? It’ s not a good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.
>>>
>>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Caitlin Phillips
>>> Rebound Designs
>>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>>
>>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>>
>>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>>
>>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful things about this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>>
>>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
>>> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>>>
>>> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
>>> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
>>> 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 esta blish 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 awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 exp lain 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 the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 th an 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.
>>>
>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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"/"v ictim 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 person al 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 a s 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" st yle="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-i fication 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 growin g 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 subsc riptions: 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://dcburner s.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< br class="">
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184

The last three emails were all victim blaming btw.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:22 AM wrote:

> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as a
> rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about
> appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds...
> People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no
> influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is
> proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting
> the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>
> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the 'rape
> culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you are expected
> to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with people
> that want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You have
> several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault. Take
> your pick.
>
> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like getting
> touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the people
> deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South Park
> episodes, and get over yourselves.
>
> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging
> conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an
> email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>
> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of
> an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the
> standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a
> hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>
> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of
> ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a
> micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely
> derailed from what was important.
>
> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves part
> of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of norms.
>
> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting
> coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever
> been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None
> of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people
> question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with
> socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then,
> isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a
> fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part.
> Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being
> that they're illegal.
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis
> wrote:
>
> Caitlin,
>
>
> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded
> here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>
> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years ago.
> Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they had
> found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of their
> other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture as
> “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as part
> of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I
> didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy
> uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15
> years.
>
> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have had
> a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging as
> a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people, hugging
> is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting community. It is
> possible that some of these people hear a values judgement in the current
> conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only should they
> change their traditions, but that their traditions are a socially
> unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery” (as you
> imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their ability
> to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional
> intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume
> their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>
> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value
> their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you
> questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their
> family structures.
>
>
> —Alex
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips
> wrote:
>
> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical
> contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people
> without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it,
> no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting
> consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger
> if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon
> meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some
> bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>
> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a
> community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up
> equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else
> equally serious, but you get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha
> nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last
> few years has made a huge difference already.
>
>
> Caitlin P hillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a
> pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no
> hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been
> ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>
> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how
> someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very
> traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>
> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing
> ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be
> touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will
> shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger
> some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a
> good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of
> the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet
> ter for everyone concerned.
>
>
> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get
> hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that
> could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>
>
> Caitlin Phillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>
> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up
> and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>
> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful
> things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis
> play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>
> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate
> at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he
> never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>
> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
>
> 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 esta blish 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
> awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 exp lain 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
> the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that
> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor y I might
> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and
> intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual
> perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di
> sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings
> as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help
> them liste n and gain perspective.I understand that this is a very personal
> topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al 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 a s 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. DebbiOn 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"
> st yle="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 t hem cool.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *William/aka DobromirSent 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-i fication 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 growin g 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/178Manage 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 subsc
> riptions: 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://dcburner s.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
> < br class="">*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my
> subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
> --Full
> post: http://dcburners.org/node/182 Manage
> my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
--
Demetrius Marcoulides

Fuld Fellow
SOURCE Governing Board
President, ABSN Class of 2016

Johns Hopkins School of Nursing
525 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205
dmarcou2@jhu.edu - nursing.jhu.edu
@demetriusmarcoulides

So people that don't want to be touched should have to wear a pin or a shirt? Is it really that hard to ask someone if they are ok to be hugged? Maybe all of you who are so insistent about giving it hugs should be wearing shirts that say "I don't care enough to ask consent."

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>
>
>
>
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>
> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>
> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? It’s not a good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.
>
> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that could be torture if you DIDN’T want it.
>
>
> Caitlin Phillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>
> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>
> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful things about this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>
> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>
>
>
>
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>
> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
> 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 awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 misr eading 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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-ask ing 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 exp erience 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 agr ee 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 person al 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" st yle="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-i fication 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/mailingl ist/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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184

This conversation may be a bit tedious but I think it’s raising our awareness. I’m proud to be part of a group that’s so articulate and alert and basically generous.

Linda

If You Want To Go Fast, Go Alone. If You Want To Go Far, Go Together - African Proverb

From: Aysha [mailto:ibaysha@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 7:58 AM
To: dcburners@dcburners.org
Subject: Re: [dcburners] RE: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First

So people that don't want to be touched should have to wear a pin or a shirt? Is it really that hard to ask someone if they are ok to be hugged? Maybe all of you who are so insistent about giving it hugs should be wearing shirts that say "I don't care enough to ask consent."

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:

I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.

_____

To: dcburners@dcburners.org
Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com

No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.

I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it. ;There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? It’s not a good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.

That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that could be torture if you DIDN’T want it.

Caitlin Phillips

Rebound Designs

www.rebound-designs.com

On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:

Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....

If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."

But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful things about this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.

And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.

_____

To: dcburners@dcburners.org
Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
From: sethlongemail@gmail.com

At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".

Go to that page and select "Fax only".

On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:

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 awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 misr eading 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 i t 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 -wanti ng 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-ask ing 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 exp erience 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 agr ee 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 person al 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" st yle="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-i fication 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/mail ingl ist/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/184
Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184

So (not trying to be Capitain Obvious), but one of our principles is
Radical Inclusion.

I bring this up, to point out that there is a spectrum people fall on with
physical greetings, whether it be with people they do know or people they
don't know, whatever culture they come from into whatever culture we're
constantly creating and growing as we all grown as individuals and a
community, whatever kind of hug they like to give or that they actually
don't like to be touched much.

I'm a hugger, I'm relatively new to the community, since '13. And no one
taught me consent on any level, as much as the behavior was modeled and
observed. So, at least for me, as the person initiating physical contact, I
take the onus on myself to check in with the person with where they are at
on the spectrum I initially mentioned.

And I don't just ask new people and strangers, I even ask and check in with
friends I already do know if I sense something's off, because for various
reasons (bad day, anxiety, things I don't know and can't assume I know),
they just might not want a hug at the moment. It doesn't mean they don't
want me there/in their life/etc, and I don't take it personally

When hugs are wanted that's great. When hugs aren't wanted that's great,
too. When hugs are wanted but still given that's at the very least awkward,
and possibly a trigger.

No, hugging's not rape, but as a connection between two people it has to be
something you both agree on, not just the person who wants to give the hug,
because it's what they're used to, or what being a Burner means to them.

So let's include everyone, which also means people who don't like to hug as
much as others, and some people who don't like to hug at all. Doesn't make
them any less of a Burner, doesn't make our community any less affectionate
or caring. And maybe you don't want to verbally ask, and want to stand and
pause. Just whatever you need to do to create a space for the other person
to respond, and be okay with whatever the response is. Because at the end
of the day, a hug is a physical dialouge between two people. And it should
never begin with assumptions.
On Dec 3, 2015 6:29 AM, "Demetrius" wrote:

> The last three emails were all victim blaming btw.
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 3:22 AM wrote:
>
>> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as
>> a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about
>> appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds...
>> People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no
>> influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is
>> proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting
>> the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>>
>> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the
>> 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherin gs you are
>> expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with
>> people that want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You
>> have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault.
>> Take your pick.
>>
>> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like
>> getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the
>> people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South
>> Park episodes, and get over yourselves.
>>
>> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging
>> conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an
>> email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>>
>> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of
>> an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the
>> standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a
>> hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>>
>> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of
>> ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a
>> micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely
>> derailed from what was important.
>>
>> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves
>> part of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of
>> norms.
>>
>> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting
>> coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever
>> been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None
>> of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people
>> question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with
>> socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then,
>> isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a
>> fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part.
>> Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being
>> that they're illegal.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis
>> wrote:
>>
>> Caitlin,
>>
>>
>> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded
>> here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>>
>> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years
>> ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they
>> had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of
>> their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture
>> as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as
>> part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I
>> didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy
>> uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15
>> years.
>>
>> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have
>> had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging
>> as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people,
>> hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting
>> community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement
>> in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only
>> should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a
>> socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery”
>> (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their
>> ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional
>> intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume
>> their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>>
>> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value
>> their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you
>> questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their
>> family structures.
>>
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips
>> wrote:
>>
>> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical
>> contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people
>> without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it,
>> no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting
>> consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger
>> if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon
>> meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some
>> bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>>
>> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a
>> community. I' ;m struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end
>> up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else
>> equally serious, but you get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha
>> nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last
>> few years has made a huge difference already.
>>
>>
>> Caitlin P hillips
>> Rebound Designs
>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>
>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a
>> pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no
>> hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been
>> ingrained over the past 12-15 ye ars probably won't work all that well.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>>
>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how
>> someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very
>> traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>
>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing
>> ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be
>> touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will
>> shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger
>> some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a
>> good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of
>> the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet
>> ter for everyone concerned.
>>
>>
>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get
>> hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that
>> could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>
>>
>> Caitlin Phillips
>> Rebound Designs
>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>
>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>
>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands
>> up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>
>> < div>
>>
>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most
>> wonderful things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops.
>> It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>
>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate
> at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he
> never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>
> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
>
> 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 esta blish 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
> awkward ness, 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 universa l 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 ke ep 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 exp lain 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 f or 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
> the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that
> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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, includ ing 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor y I might
> misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and
> intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual
> perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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
> sil ence 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 di
> sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings
> as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help
> them liste n and gain perspective.I understand that this is a very personal
> topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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*
>
>
> *< div>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"/ "v ictim 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 person al 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 r espect 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 a s 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. DebbiOn Tuesday, December 1, 2015, Chris0
> > wrote:*
>
>
> *< blockquote>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"
> st yle="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 y ourself (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 corre ct' group of DC people who
> thing a Burner makes t hem cool.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *William/aka DobromirSent from my iPhone> On Dec 1, 2015, at 8:40 PM,
> jessienewburn >
> wrote:>> Take note, y'all: There is a ramping up, too, of **vici tm
> culture** in our society and a thin-skin-i fication 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 growin g 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 s
> ubscriptions: 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/178Manage 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 subsc
> riptions: 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://dcburner s.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
> < br class="">*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my
> subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
> --Full
> post: http://dcburners.org/node/182 Manage
> my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manag e my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
> --
> Demetrius Marcoulides
>
> Fuld Fellow
> SOURCE Governing Board
> President, ABSN Class of 2016
>
> Johns Hopkins School of Nursing
> 525 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205
> dmarcou2@jhu.edu - nursing.jhu.edu
> @demetriusmarcoulides
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>

Wow, you might want to check your reading comprehension: I have not seen
anyone say that if you hold your arms out to hug, you're assaulting them
and committing coercion. That's actually the precise and exact opposite of
what I was saying and have seen others say. Also no one said hand shaking
was any kind of consent violation. It came up in relation to whether or not
an offer to hug is coercive (which was brought up by someone who is in
favor of not asking, at least verbally).

The idea that a conversation about assault and a conversation about what
people think about asking before hugging someone you don't know are
mutually exclusive appears to say something really ugly about whether one
thinks the validity or worth of the former hinges on whether or not someone
is interested in engaging on the latter. We're turning off people who might
otherwise be interested in a culture of (sexual) consent by merely having a
- relatively civil, especially by internet standards - conversation about
whether or not individuals would prefer or expect to be hugged by people
they don't know without asking? Really?

I do wish people hadn't totally abandoned the other conversation when this
came up (and was threaded), because they absolutely are not the same thing.

I've never before found Burners to be so pearl-clutching about whether a
topic of conversation is acceptable. If you don't like it, don't be in it.
I have seen no one say that hugging people you don't know without asking =
rape. I've seen people say variously they don't like it, that it is
non-consensual (which by definition is true if consent isn't given), that
it is a violation of bodily autonomy (also literally true, whether you
think that's a worthy thing or not), and that it triggers them. That's not
any of it calling it rape.

One person said it was legally assault, which I believe is correct
(rationale: you're grabbing someone (and potentially restraining them,
depending on the hug) without their ok) but I Am Not A Lawyer so can't
confirm. Still not calling it rape or sexual assault.

My definition for "ultra-pc" is when the fundamentally good principle of
"don't hurt people" is used to either silence conversation (ie, "You can't
talk about this thing because it upsets me" instead of just leaving the
conversation) or to try to make rules about how people should behave which
put undue burden on social interaction. This is clearly a fundamental
disagreement about whether putting your arms out for a hug and waiting to
be hugged and/or asking "Do you hug?" instead of just going for it is an
undue burden. That's a really subjective thing, but I would think it's
pretty worth discussing enough to see that people aren't on the same page
about it.

Saying "I think your concerns are stupid" is really disrespectful and not a
lovingly familial way to treat people.

For me, this entire issue boils down to: if a tiny modification in your
behavior (ie, opening your and waiting to be hugged or asking a 3-word
question) would make other people happier, is it worth the inconvenience?
That's a personal question everyone has to answer for themselves. But at
least now you know it would make some people happier and what you can do
about it if you choose.

Kat
On Dec 3, 2015 3:23 AM, <> wrote:

> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as a
> rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about
> appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds...
> People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no
> influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is
> proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting
> the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>
> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the 'rape
> culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you are expected
> to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with people
> that want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You have
> several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault. Take
> your pick.
>
> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like getting
> touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the people
> deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South Park
> episodes, and get over yourselves.
>
> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging
> conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an
> email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>
> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of
> an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the
> standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a
> hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>
> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of
> ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a
> micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely
> derailed from what was important.
>
> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves part
> of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of norms.
>
> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting
> coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever
> been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None
> of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people
> question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with
> socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then,
> isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a
> fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part.
> Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being
> that they're illegal.
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis
> wrote:
>
> Caitlin,
>
> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded
> here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>
> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years ago.
> Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they had
> found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of their
> other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture as
> “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as part
> of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I
> didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy
> uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15
> years.
>
> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have had
> a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging as
> a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people, hugging
> is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting community. It is
> possible that some of these people hear a values judgement in the current
> conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only should they
> change their traditions, but that their traditions are a socially
> unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery” (as you
> imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their ability
> to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional
> intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume
> their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>
> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value
> their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you
> questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their
> family structures.
>
> —Alex
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips
> wrote:
>
> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical
> contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people
> without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it,
> no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting
> consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger
> if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon
> meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some
> bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>
> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a
> community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up
> equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else
> equally serious, but you get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha
> nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last
> few years has made a huge difference already.
>
> Caitlin P hillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a
> pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no
> hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been
> ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
> From: cphillips@rebound-designs.com
>
> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how
> someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very
> traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>
> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing
> ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be
> touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will
> shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger
> some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a
> good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of
> the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet
> ter for everyone concerned.
>
> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get
> hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that
> could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>
>
> Caitlin Phillips
> Rebound Designs
> www.rebound-designs.com
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:
>
> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>
> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up
> and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>
> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful
> things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis
> play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>
> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate
> at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he
> never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>
> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
>
> 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 esta blish 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
> awkward ness, 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 ke ep 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 exp lain 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
> the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that
> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor
> y I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an
> 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and
> intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual
> perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe
> acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an
> ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.I understand
> that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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 DancingmantisOn 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al
> 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 a s 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. DebbiOn 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" st yle="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 t hem cool.William/aka DobromirSent 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-i fication
> 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 growin g 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/178Manage 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 subsc
> riptions: 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://dcburner s.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
> < br class="">*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my
> subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
> --Full
> post: http://dcburners.org/node/182 Manage
> my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>

Kat - the person who called touching my (your) body w/out consent assault
IS a lawyer. Thank you Monster!
Momma J - I adore your quips of reasonable balance - it's important - and
even more important that it came from a woman! I shudder to think what
would have happened to any Y chromosome who tried to sprinkle in some
reasonable doubt.
Asha - I have a "No means no" pin somewhere for you!
All - thank you for bringing back DCBurners list! Makes me feel 25 again!
Debbi - you're soooooooooooooooo eloquent! We miss you like whoa!
Jill - love your real world pdf examples - I love getting high on hugs!
Caitlin - thank you for the bacon analogy. as a veg contender I think it's
perfect!

This is why the discussion is needed: https://rainn.org/statistics

The lines are blurry
Discussion provokes Progress
Ask me for a hug!

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Kathryn McCulley
wrote:

> Wow, you might want to check your reading comprehension: I have not seen
> anyone say that if you hold your arms out to hug, you're assaulting them
> and committing coercion. That's actually the precise and exact opposite of
> what I was saying and have seen others say. Also no one said hand shaking
> was any kind of consent violation. It came up in relation to whether or not
> an offer to hug is coercive (which was brought up by someone who is in
> favor of not asking, at least verbally).
>
> The idea that a conversation about assault and a conversation about what
> people think about asking before hugging someone you don't know are
> mutually exclusive appears to say something really ugly about whether one
> thinks the validity or worth of the former hinges on whether or not someone
> is interested in engaging on the latter. We're turning off people who might
> otherwise be interested in a culture of (sexual) consent by merely having a
> - relatively civil, especially by internet standards - conversation about
> whether or not individuals would prefer or expect to be hugged by people
> they don't know without asking? Really?
>
> I do wish people hadn't totally abandoned the other conversation when this
> came up (and was threaded), because they absolutely are not the same thing.
>
> I've never before found Burners to be so pearl-clutching about whether a
> topic of conversation is acceptable. If you don't like it, don't be in it.
> I have seen no one say that hugging people you don't know without asking =
> rape. I've seen people say variously they don't like it, that it is
> non-consensual (which by definition is true if consent isn't given), that
> it is a violation of bodily autonomy (also literally true, whether you
> think that's a worthy thing or not), and that it triggers them. That's not
> any of it calling it rape.
>
> One person said it was legally assault, which I believe is correct
> (rationale: you're grabbing someone (and potentially restraining them,
> depending on the hug) without their ok) but I Am Not A Lawyer so can't
> confirm. Still not calling it rape or sexual assault.
>
> My definition for "ultra-pc" is when the fundamentally good principle of
> "don't hurt people" is used to either silence conversation (ie, "You can't
> talk about this thing because it upsets me" instead of just leaving the
> conversation) or to try to make rules about how people should behave which
> put undue burden on social interaction. This is clearly a fundamental
> disagreement about whether putting your arms out for a hug and waiting to
> be hugged and/or asking "Do you hug?" instead of just going for it is an
> undue burden. That's a really subjective thing, but I would think it's
> pretty worth discussing enough to see that people aren't on the same page
> about it.
>
> Saying "I think your concerns are stupid" is really disrespectful and not
> a lovingly familial way to treat people.
>
> For me, this entire issue boils down to: if a tiny modification in your
> behavior (ie, opening your and waiting to be hugged or asking a 3-word
> question) would make other people happier, is it worth the inconvenience?
> That's a personal question everyone has to answer for themselves. But at
> least now you know it would make some people happier and what you can do
> about it if you choose.
>
> Kat
> On Dec 3, 2015 3:23 AM, <> wrote:
>
>> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as
>> a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about
>> appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds...
>> People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no
>> influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is
>> proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting
>> the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>>
>> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the
>> 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you are
>> expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with
>> people t hat want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You
>> have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault.
>> Take your pick.
>>
>> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like
>> getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the
>> people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South
>> Park episodes, and get over yourselves.
>>
>> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging
>> conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an
>> email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>>
>> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of
>> an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the
>> standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a
>> hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>>
>> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of
>> ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a
>> micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely
>> derailed from what was important.
>>
>> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves
>> part of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of
>> norms.
>>
>> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting
>> coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever
>> been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None
>> of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people
>> question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with
>> socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then,
>> isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a
>> fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part.
>> Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being
>> that they're illegal.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis
>> wrote:
>>
>> Caitlin,
>>
>> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded
>> here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>>
>> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years
>> ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they
>> had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of
>> their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture
>> as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as
>> part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I
>> didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy
>> uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15
>> years.
>>
>> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have
>> had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging
>> as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people,
>> hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting
>> community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement
>> in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only
>> should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a
>> socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery”
>> (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their
>> ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional
>> intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume
>> their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>>
>> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value
>> their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you
>> questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their
>> family structures.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips
>> wrote:
>>
>> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical
>> contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people
>> without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it,
>> no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting
>> consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger
>> if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon
>> meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some
>> bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>>
>> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a
>> community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up
>> equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else
>> equally serious, but y ou get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha
>> nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last
>> few years has made a huge difference already.
>>
>> Caitlin P hillips
>> Rebound Designs
>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>
>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a
>> pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no
>> hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been
>> ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>> From: cphillips@rebound -designs.com
>>
>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how
>> someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very
>> traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>
>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing
>> ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be
>> touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will
>> shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger
>> some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a
>> good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of
>> the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet
>> ter for everyone concerned.
>>
>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get
>> hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that
>> could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>
>>
>> Caitlin Phillips
>> Rebound Designs
>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>
>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>
>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands
>> up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>
>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most
>> wonderful things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops.
>> It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>
>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate
>> at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he
>> never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
>> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>>
>> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
>> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
>>
>> 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 esta blish 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
>> awkward ness, 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 universa l 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 ke ep 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 exp lain 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 f or 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
>> the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that
>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor
>> y I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an
>> 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and
>> intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual
>> perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe
>> acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an
>> ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.I understand
>> that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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 DancingmantisOn 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al
>> 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 a s 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. DebbiOn 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" st yle="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 t hem cool.William/aka DobromirSent 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-i fication
>> 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 growin g cultural shift toward
>> over-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPT ION 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.or g/node/178Manage 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 subsc
>> riptions: 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://dcburner s.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
>> < br class="">*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my
>> subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this
>> post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
>> --Full
>> post: http://dcburners.org/node/182 Manage
>> my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this
>> post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>
>>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>

--
art. science. love.

I do not trust any of you. I am only comfortable when everyone's radical
self expression is conducted with the advance fully informed consent of
everyone present - especially me. It would be preferable if everyone
expressed their affection only in ways that make me comfortable. I have
many triggers and do not wish any of my pre-existing boundaries and social
norms to be challenged without careful consideration. Every discussion on
this topic should be framed via extreme hypothetical strawman examples so
that it is easier for me to dehumanize those who don't agree with me. Also,
many burners smell bad and have poor personal hygiene. The world would be
better place if all of you took a bath and called your mom.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:39 PM, lidz26
wrote:

> Kat - the person who called touching my (your) body w/out consent assault
> IS a lawyer. Thank you Monster!
> Momma J - I adore your quips of reasonable balance - it's important - and
> even more important that it came from a woman! I shudder to think what
> would have happened to any Y chromosome who tried to sprinkle in some
> reasonable doubt.
> Asha - I have a "No means no" pin somewhere for you!
> All - thank you for bringing back DCBurners list! Makes me feel 25 again!
> Debbi - you're soooooooooooooooo eloquent! We miss you like whoa!
> Jill - love your real world pdf examples - I love getting high on hugs!
> Caitlin - thank you for the bacon analogy. as a veg contender I think
> it's perfect!
>
> This is why the discussion is needed: https://rainn.org/statistics
>
>
> The lines are blurry
> Discussion provokes Progress
> Ask me for a hug!
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Kathryn McCulley
> wrote:
>
>> Wow, you might want to check your reading comprehension: I have not seen
>> anyone say that if you hold your arms out to hug, you're assaulting them
>> and committing coercion. That's actually the precise and exact opposite of
>> what I was saying and have seen others say. Also no one said hand shaking
>> was any kind of consent violation. It came up in relation to whether or not
>> an offer to hug is coercive (which was brought up by someone who is in
>> favor of not asking, at least verbally).
>>
>> The idea that a conversation about assault and a conversation about what
>> people think about asking before hugging someone you don't know are
>> mutually exclusive appears to say something really ugly about whether one
>> thinks the validity or worth of the former hinges on whether or not someone
>> is interested in engaging on the latter. We're turning off people who might
>> otherwise be interested in a culture of (sexual) consent by merely having a
>> - relatively civil, especially by internet standards - conversation about
>> whether or not individuals would prefer or expect to be hugged by people
>> they don't know without asking? Really?
>>
>> I do wish people hadn't totally abandoned the other conversation when
>> this came up (and was threaded), because they absolutely are not the same
>> thing.
>>
>> I've never before found Burners to be so pearl-clutching about whether a
>> topic of conversation is acceptable. If you don't like it, don't be in it.
>> I have seen no one say that hugging people you don't know without asking =
>> rape. I've seen people say variously they don't like it, that it is
>> non-consensual (which by definition is true if consent isn't given), that
>> it is a violation of bodily autonomy (also literally true, whether you
>> think that's a worthy thing or not), and that it triggers them. That's not
>> any of it calling it rape.
>>
>> One person said it was legally assault, which I believe is correct
>> (rationale: you're grabbing someone (and potentially restraining them,
>> depending on the hug) without their ok) but I Am Not A Lawyer so can't
>> confirm. Still not calling it rape or sexual assault.
>>
>> My definition for "ultra-pc" is when the fundamentally good principle of
>> "don't hurt people" is used to either silence conversation (ie, "You can't
>> talk about this thing because it upsets me" instead of just leaving the
>> conversation) or to try to make rules about how people should behave which
>> put undue burden on social interaction. This is clearly a fundamental
>> disagreement about whether putting your arms out for a hug and waiting to
>> be hugged and/or asking "Do you hug?" instead of just going for it is an
>> undue burden. That's a really subjective thing, but I would think it's
>> pretty worth discussing enough to see that people aren't on the same page
>> about it.
>>
>> Saying "I think your concerns are stupid" is really disrespectful and not
>> a lovingly familial way to treat people.
>>
>> For me, this entire issue boils down to: if a tiny modification in your
>> behavior (ie, opening your and waiting to be hugged or asking a 3-word
>> question) would make other people happier, is it worth the inconvenience?
>> That's a personal question everyone has to answer for themselves. But at
>> least now you know it would make some people happier and what you can do
>> about it if you choose.
>>
>> Kat
>> On Dec 3, 2015 3:23 AM, <> wrote:
>>
>>> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as
>>> a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about
>>> appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds...
>>> People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no
>>> influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is
>>> proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting
>>> the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>>>
>>> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the
>>> 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you are
>>> expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with
>>> people t hat want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You
>>> have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault.
>>> Take your pick.
>>>
>>> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like
>>> getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the
>>> people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South
>>> Park episodes, and get over yourselves.
>>>
>>> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging
>>> conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an
>>> email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>>>
>>> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part
>>> of an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the
>>> standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a
>>> hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>>> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of
>>> ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a
>>> micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely
>>> derailed from what was important.
>>>
>>> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves
>>> part of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of
>>> norms.
>>>
>>> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting
>>> coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever
>>> been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None
>>> of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people
>>> question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with
>>> socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then,
>>> isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a
>>> fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part.
>>> Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being
>>> that they're illegal.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Caitlin,
>>>
>>> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded
>>> here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>>>
>>> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years
>>> ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they
>>> had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of
>>> their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture
>>> as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as
>>> part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I
>>> didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy
>>> uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15
>>> years.
>>>
>>> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have
>>> had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging
>>> as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people,
>>> hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting
>>> community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement
>>> in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only
>>> should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a
>>> socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery”
>>> (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their
>>> ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional
>>> intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume
>>> their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>>>
>>> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value
>>> their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you
>>> questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their
>>> family structures.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical
>>> contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people
>>> without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it,
>>> no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting
>>> consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger
>>> if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon
>>> meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some
>>> bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>>>
>>> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a
>>> community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up
>>> equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else
>>> equally serious , but y ou get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha
>>> nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last
>>> few years has made a huge difference already.
>>>
>>> Caitlin P hillips
>>> Rebound Designs
>>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a
>>> pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no
>>> hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been
>>> ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>>> F rom: cphillips@rebound -designs.com
>>>
>>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how
>>> someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very
>>> traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>>
>>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing
>>> ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be
>>> touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will
>>> shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger
>>> some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a
>>> good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of
>>> the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet
>>> ter for everyone concerned.
>>>
>>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get
>>> hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that
>>> could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Caitlin Phillips
>>> Rebound Designs
>>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jil ljilljill wrote:
>>>
>>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>>
>>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands
>>> up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>>
>>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most
>>> wonderful things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops.
>>> It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>>
>>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate
>>> at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he
>>> never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
>>> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>>>
>>> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
>>> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>>> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" wrote:
>>>
>>> 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 esta blish 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
>>> awkward ness, 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 no t a universa l 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 ke ep 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 d on't care
>>> if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as
>>> you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you exp lain 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 cl arify f or 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 the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that
>>> within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor
>>> y I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an
>>> 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and
>>> intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual
>>> perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe
>>> acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an
>>> ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.I understand
>>> that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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 DancingmantisOn 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al
>>> 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 a s 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. DebbiOn 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" st yle="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 t hem cool.William/aka DobromirSent 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-i fication
>>> 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 growin g cultural shift toward
>>> ove r-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPT ION 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: < /span>http://dcburners.or g/node/178Manage
>>> 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 subsc
>>> riptions: 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://dcburner s.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
>>> < br class="">*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
>>> Manage my
>>> subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this
>>> post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
>>> --Full
>>> post: http://dcburners.org/node/182 Manage
>>> my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this
>>> post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>>> Stop emails for this post:
>>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post:
>> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> art. science. love.
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>

I am definitely not a lawyer, but I do think that agreeing upon definitions is necessary for communication, and understanding the law is a civic responsibility. Since there is a claim that the person defining assault is a lawyer, maybe we can get a clarification.

My understanding is that intent is important in assault*. In assault (as opposed to in battery) it is not physical contact or harm that is at issue, but the threat of physical contact or harm. And, assault includes *intentionally* causing the fear of offensive contact. It sounds like from a legal perspective, touching isn’t even necessary for assault to have occurred, BUT, touching is only assault if the toucher *intends* to make the touchee feel uncomfortable.

This is not a comment on how people SHOULD behave… simply an attempt to get clarity on a claim regarding legal obligations. And, as I stated, I am not a lawyer, and am happy to accept evidence that corrects my understanding of this legal definition.

*"Assault is effectuated when one acts intending to cause an imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with another person." Cullison v. Medley, 570 N.E.2d 27, 30 (Ind. 1991).

—Alex

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 10:39 AM, lidz26
wrote:
>
> Kat - the person who called touching my (your) body w/out consent assault IS a lawyer. Thank you Monster!
> Momma J - I adore your quips of reasonable balance - it's important - and even more important that it came from a woman! I shudder to think what would have happened to any Y chromosome who tried to sprinkle in some reasonable doubt.
> Asha - I have a "No means no" pin somewhere for you!
> All - thank you for bringing back DCBurners list! Makes me feel 25 again!
> Debbi - you're soooooooooooooooo eloquent! We miss you like whoa!
> Jill - love your real world pdf examples - I love getting high on hugs!
> Caitlin - thank you for the bacon analogy. as a veg contender I think it's perfect!
>
> This is why the discussion is needed: https://rainn.org/statistics
>
>
> The lines are blurry
> Discussion provokes Progress
> Ask me for a hug!
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Kathryn McCulley > wrote:
> Wow, you might want to check your reading comprehension: I have not seen anyone say that if you hold your arms out to hug, you're assaulting them and committing coercion. That's actually the precise and exact opposite of what I was saying and have seen others say. Also no one said hand shaking was any kind of consent violation. It came up in relation to whether or not an offer to hug is coercive (which was brought up by someone who is in favor of not asking, at least verbally).
>
> The idea that a conversation about assault and a conversation about what people think about asking before hugging someone you don't know are mutually exclusive appears to say something really ugly about whether one thinks the validity or worth of the former hinges on whether or not someone is interested in engaging on the latter. We're turning off people who might otherwise be interested in a culture of (sexual) consent by merely having a - relatively civil, especially by internet standards - conversation about whether or not individuals would prefer or expect to be hugged by people they don't know without asking? Really?
>
> I do wish people hadn't totally abandoned the other conversation when this came up (and was threaded), because they absolutely are not the same thing.
>
> I've never before found Burners to be so pearl-clutching about whether a topic of conversation is acceptable. If you don't like it, don't be in it. I have seen no one say that hugging people you don't know without asking = rape. I've seen people say variously they don't like it, that it is non-consensual (which by definition is true if consent isn't given), that it is a violation of bodily autonomy (also literally true, whether you think that's a worthy thing or not), and that it triggers them. That's not any of it calling it rape.
>
> One person said it was legally assault, which I believe is correct (rationale: you're grabbing someone (and potentially restraining them, depending on the hug) without their ok) but I Am Not A Lawyer so can't confirm. Still not calling it rape or sexual assault.
>
> My definition for "ultra-pc" is when the fundamentally good principle of "don't hurt people" is used to either silence conversation (ie, "You can't talk about this thing because it upsets me" instead of just leaving the conversation) or to try to make rules about how people should behave which put undue burden on social interaction. This is clearly a fundamental disagreement about whether putting your arms out for a hug and waiting to be hugged and/or asking "Do you hug?" instead of just going for it is an undue burden. That's a really subjective thing, but I would think it's pretty worth discussing enough to see that people aren't on the same page about it.
>
> Saying "I think your concerns are stupid" is really disrespectful and not a lovingly familial way to treat people.
>
> For me, this entire issue boils down to: if a tiny modification in your behavior (ie, opening your and waiting to be hugged or asking a 3-word question) would make other people happier, is it worth the inconvenience? That's a personal question everyone has to answer for themselves. But at least now you know it would make some people happier and what you can do about it if you choose.
>
> Kat
>
> On Dec 3, 2015 3:23 AM, <> wrote:
> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds... People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>
> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you are expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with people t hat want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault. Take your pick.
>
> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South Park episodes, and get over yourselves.
>
> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>
> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely derailed from what was important.
>
> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves part of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of norms.
>
> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever been a part of. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then, isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part. Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being that they're illegal.
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>
>> Caitlin,
>>
>> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded here or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>>
>> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15 years.
>>
>> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people, hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery” (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>>
>> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their family structures.
>>
>> —Alex
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips > wrote:
>>>
>>> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it, no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>>>
>>> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suffrage, or something else equally serious , but y ou get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last few years has made a huge difference already.
>>>
>>> Caitlin P hillips
>>> Rebound Designs
>>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>>>> F rom: cphillips@rebound -designs.com
>>>>
>>>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.
>>>>
>>>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Caitlin Phillips
>>>> Rebound Designs
>>>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jil ljilljill > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>>>
>>>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>>>
>>>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>>>
>>>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
>>>> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
>>>> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" > wrote:
>>>> 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 esta blish 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 awkward ness, 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 no t a universa l 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 ke ep 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 d on't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you exp lain 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 cl arify f or 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 the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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 i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor y I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al 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 a s 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 < <>cmenocal@gmail.com > 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" st yle="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 t hem 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-i fication 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 growin g cultural shift toward ove r-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPT ION 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: < /span>http://dcburners.or g/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 subsc riptions: 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://dcburner s.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 < br class="">
>>
>>
>> --
>> Full post: <>http://dcburners.org/node/178
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
>> Manage my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>>
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist <>
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
>
>
> --
> art. science. love.
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184

you are half right/half wrong. (disclaimer - i am licensed in Maryland. the
law varies slightly from state to state, particularly in terms of the names
of crimes)

there are two kinds of assault:
the first is the "putting someone in reasonable fear of imminent bodily
harm" type, which is what you are talking about, and really isn't relevant
to the hugging discussion.

the second (which can be called an assault, or called a battery, depending
on the state), is ANY UNCONSENTED TO TOUCHING. this includes touching
something attached to the other person (grabbing a plate out of thier
hand), or causing something else to touch the person (throwing a rock at
them and hitting them, or spitting on someone). you are correct that
intent is relevant in one sense - you have to intend the touching. so if i
accidentally bump into someone because the metro stopped suddenly, no
assualt. i do NOT have to intend that you get upset, or that you are harmed.
there is implied consent in some cases. i previously mentioned the example
of playing sports, where you are deemed to have consented to some contact
w/ in the parameters of the game. you could make an argument that where
someone has their arms out for a hug, there is implied consent for a hug
(but NOT implied consent for a groping). if the person puts their hands up
and says, "don't" when you go to hug them, and you do it anyway, clearly
that is an assault.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:25 PM, dancingmantis
wrote:

> I am definitely not a lawyer, but I do think that agreeing upon
> definitions is necessary for communication, and understanding the law is a
> civic responsibility. Since there is a claim that the person defining
> assault is a lawyer, maybe we can get a clarification.
>
> My understanding is that intent is important in assault*. In assault (as
> opposed to in battery) it is not physical contact or harm that is at issue,
> but the threat of physical contact or harm. And, assault includes
> *intentionally* causing the fear of offensive contact. It sounds like from
> a legal perspective, touching isn’t even necessary for assault to have
> occurred, BUT, touching is only assault if the toucher *intends* to make
> the touchee feel uncomfortable.
>
> This is not a comment on how people SHOULD behave… simply an attempt to
> get clarity on a claim regarding legal obligations. And, as I stated, I am
> not a lawyer, and am happy to accept evidence that corrects my
> understanding of this legal definition.
>
> *"Assault is effectuated when one acts intending to cause an
> imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with another
> person." Cullison v. Medley, 570 N.E.2d 27, 30 (Ind. 1991).
>
> —Alex
>
> On Dec 3, 2015, at 10:39 AM, lidz26
wrote:
>
> Kat - the person who called touching my (your) body w/out consent assault
> IS a lawyer. Thank you Monster!
> Momma J - I adore your quips of reasonable balance - it's important - and
> even more important that it came from a woman! I shudder to think what
> would have happened to any Y chromosome who tried to sprinkle in some
> reasonable doubt.
> Asha - I have a "No means no" pin somewhere for you!
> All - thank you for bringing back DCBurners list! Makes me feel 25 again!
> Debbi - you're soooooooooooooooo eloquent! We miss you like whoa!
> Jill - love your real world pdf examples - I love getting high on hugs!
> Caitlin - thank you for the bacon analogy. as a veg contender I think
> it's perfect!
>
> This is why the discussion is needed: https://rainn.org/statistics
>
>
> The lines are blurry
> Discussion provokes Progress
> Ask me for a hug!
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Kathryn McCulley
> wrote:
>
>> Wow, you might want to check your reading comprehension: I have not seen
>> anyone say that if you hold your arms out to hug, you're assaulting them
>> and committing coercion. That's actually the precise and exact opposite of
>> what I was saying and have seen others say. Also no one said hand shaking
>> was any kind of consent violation. It came up in relation to whether or not
>> an offer to hug is coercive (which was brought up by someone who is in
>> favor of not asking, at least verbally).
>>
>> The idea that a c onversation about assault and a conversation about what
>> people think about asking before hugging someone you don't know are
>> mutually exclusive appears to say something really ugly about whether one
>> thinks the validity or worth of the former hinges on whether or not someone
>> is interested in engaging on the latter. We're turning off people who might
>> otherwise be interested in a culture of (sexual) consent by merely having a
>> - relatively civil, especially by internet standards - conversation about
>> whether or not individuals would prefer or expect to be hugged by people
>> they don't know without asking? Really?
>>
>> I do wish people hadn't totally abandoned the other conversation when
>> this came up (and was threaded), because they absolutely are not the same
>> thing.
>>
>> I've never before found Burners to be so pearl-clutching about whether a
>> topic of conversation is acceptable. If you don't like it, don't be in it.
>> I have seen no one say that hugging people you don't know without asking =
>> rape. I've seen people say variously they don't like it, that it is
>> non-consensual (which by definition is true if consent isn't given), that
>> it is a violation of bodily autonomy (also literally true, whether you
>> think that's a worthy thing or not), and that it triggers them. That's not
>> any of it calling it rape.
>>
>> One person said it was legally assault, which I believe is correct
>> (rationale: you're grabbing someone (and potentially restraining them,
>> depending on the hug) without their ok) but I Am Not A Lawyer so can't
>> confirm. Still not calling it rape or sexual assault.
>>
>> My definition for "ultra-pc" is when the fundamentally good principle of
>> "don't hurt people" is used to either silence conversation (ie, "You can't
>> talk about this thing because it upsets me" instead of just leaving the
>> conversation) or to try to make rules about how people should behave which
>> put undue burden on social interac tion. This is clearly a fundamental
>> disagreement about whether putting your arms out for a hug and waiting to
>> be hugged and/or asking "Do you hug?" instead of just going for it is an
>> undue burden. That's a really subjective thing, but I would think it's
>> pretty worth discussing enough to see that people aren't on the same page
>> about it.
>>
>> Saying "I think your concerns are stupid" is really disrespectful and not
>> a lovingly familial way to treat people.
>>
>> For me, this entire issue boils down to: if a tiny modification in your
>> behavior (ie, opening your and waiting to be hugged or asking a 3-word
>> question) would make other people happier, is it worth the inconvenience?
>> That's a personal question everyone has to answer for themselves. But at
>> least now you know it would make some people happier and what you can do
>> about it if you choose.
>>
>> Kat
>> On Dec 3, 2015 3:23 AM, <> wrote:
>>
>>> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as
>>> a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about
>>> appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds...
>>> People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no
>>> influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is
>>> proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting
>>> the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>>>
>>> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the
>>> 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you a re
>>> expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with
>>> people t hat want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You
>>> have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault.
>>> Take your pick.
>>>
>>> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like
>>> getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the
>>> people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South
>>> Park episodes, and get over yourselves.
>>>
>>> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging
>>> conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an
>>> email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>>>
>>> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part
>>> of an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the
>>> standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a
>>> hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of
>>> ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a
>>> micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely
>>> derailed from what was important. This whole thing has turned off many
>>> people who considered themselves part of your community, but refuse to
>>> relate to this extremist set of norms. Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug,
>>> I'm assaulting you and commuting coercion... That's extremist, and unlike
>>> the other communities I've ever been a part o f. This whole thing, all 80+
>>> emails, is quite sad really. None of it has changed any assailant's
>>> behavior, but just made innocent people question their socially accepted
>>> behavior. And if you aren't ok with socially accepted behavior, well,
>>> that's ultimately your problem then, isn't it. And don't even come back and
>>> say that's 'rape culture', it's a fucking handshake and a hug, and if you
>>> don't want it then don't be a part. Rape and assault aren't a socially
>>> accepted behavior by definition, being that they're illegal. On Dec 3,
>>> 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis >>> > wrote:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Caitlin,I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have
>>> responded he re or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your
>>> question.I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15
>>> years ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that
>>> they had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of
>>> their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture
>>> as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as
>>> part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I
>>> didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy
>>> uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15
>>> years.In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community
>>> have had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced
>>> hugging as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these
>>> people, hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting
>>> community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement
>>> in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only
>>> should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a
>>> socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery”
>>> (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their
>>> ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional
>>> intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume
>>> their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs. Why do
>>> they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value their
>>> culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you questioned the
>>> morality of their food choices or the propriety of their family
>>> structures.—AlexOn Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips
>>> > wrote:Why
>>> do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical contact is
>>> wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people without
>>> permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it, no one is
>>> saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting consent
>>> first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger if they
>>> want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon meeting
>>> them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some bacon and
>>> ask them if they would like some. Asking people to change problematic
>>> behavior is how we grow as a community. I'm struggling to come up with an
>>> analogy that doesn't end up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suff
>>> rage, or something else equally serious , but y ou get my point. We do not
>>> grow if we don't cha nge. I have great faith in our community, the
>>> emphasis on consent the last few years has made a huge difference already.
>>> Caitlin P hillipsRebound Designswww.rebound-designs.com
>>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill
>>> wrote:I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to
>>> wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging"
>>> or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's
>>> been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that
>>> well. ------------------------------To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or
>>> Not To Ask FirstDate: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500F
>>> rom: cphillips@rebound -designs.com No one
>>> is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone
>>> will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic
>>> for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc. I LOVE hugging. I
>>> think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it.
>>> There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I
>>> haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being
>>> touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping
>>> back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a good feeling either, it feels
>>> defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking
>>> first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.
>>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get
>>> hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that
>>> could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it. Caitlin PhillipsRebound
>>> Designswww.reboun d-designs.com On Dec 2,
>>> 2015, at 10:44 PM, jil ljilljill >>> > wrote:Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....If
>>> you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and
>>> say "sorry" or "no, thank you."But please consider my side -- I see
>>> hugging as one of the most wonderful things ab out this community, and I
>>> hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a
>>> willingness to try new things.And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I
>>> know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200
>>> times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he
>>> was totally sober.------------------------------To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or
>>> Not To Ask FirstDate: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12
>>> -0500From: sethlongemail@gmail.com At the bottom
>>> of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".Go to that page
>>> and select "Fax only". On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1"
>>> > wrote:Stop sending me
>>> e mailsSent from my iPadOn 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 esta
>>> blish 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 awkward ness, 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 no t a universa l 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 ke ep 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 d on't care if you're
>>> making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant
>>> well. I don't understand this. Can you exp lain 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 cl arify f or 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 the y 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 misr eading what I am saying. I am saying
>>> that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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< div class="">On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM ,
>>> beatpony >
>>> wrote:yea i t 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.—AlexOn 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-wanti ng
>>> 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 theor y I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if,
>>> rather th an 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear
>>> and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual
>>> perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe
>>> acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an
>>> ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.I understand
>>> that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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 DancingmantisOn 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al
>>> 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 y ou to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and a s 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. DebbiOn 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.&nbs p;Love y ou guys! On Tue, Dec
>>> 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, <>wrote:< blockquote class= "gmail_quote" st
>>> yle="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 t hem cool.William/aka DobromirSent
>>> 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-i fication 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 growin g cultural shift toward ove r-responding to
>>> anyone's hurt, or PERCEPT ION 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: < /span>http://dcburners.or g/node/178Manage 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 subsc riptions: 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:< span
>>> class=""> 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://dcburner s.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
>> < br class="">*
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my
> subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
> --Full
> post: http://dcburners.org/node/182 Manage
> my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this
> post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/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/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
>
>
>
> *--Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist Stop
> emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> * --Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist Stop
> emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
> * --Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist Stop
> emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
> *
>
>
>
> *-- art. science. love. *
>
>
>
> * --Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist Stop
> emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
> *
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:
> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>

Monster,

Thank you for clarifying this for me. I am a bit of a geek about legal/ethical/social discussions, and appreciate your expert opinion.

I have no argument with the examples you provide… the situation is pretty unambiguous if someone expressly denies consent.

Other hypothetical situations point to the fact that the law is constructed by people through a messy process, and doesn’t always have to be rational: Tapping someone on the shoulder in a noisy room to point out that they dropped their keys… Battery?

Some time when I have a little more time on my hands, I will have to do a search of case law for interpretations of how “implied consent” may have previously been applied to cultural norms or reasonable expectations.

Cheers,

—Alex

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 11:35 AM, monster wrote:
>
> you are half right/half wrong. (disclaimer - i am licensed in Maryland. the law varies slightly from state to state, particularly in terms of the names of crimes)
>
> there are two kinds of assault:
> the first is the "putting someone in reasonable fear of imminent bodily harm" type, which is what you are talking about, and really isn't relevant to the hugging discussion.
>
> the second (which can be called an assault, or called a battery, depending on the state), is ANY UNCONSENTED TO TOUCHING. this includes touching something attached to the other person (grabbing a plate out of thier hand), or causing something else to touch the person (throwing a rock at them and hitting them, or spitting on someone). you are correct that intent is relevant in one sense - you have to intend the touching. so if i accidentally bump into someone because the metro stopped suddenly, no assualt. i do NOT have to intend that you get upset, or that you are harmed.
> there is implied consent in some cases. i previously mentioned the example of playing sports, where you are deemed to have consented to some contact w/ in the parameters of the game. you could make an argument that where someone has their arms out for a hug, there is implied consent for a hug (but NOT implied consent for a groping). if the person puts their hands up and says, "don't" when you go to hug them, and you do it anyway, clearly that is an assault.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:25 PM, dancingmantis > wrote:
> I am definitely not a lawyer, but I do think that agreeing upon definitions is nec essary for communication, and understanding the law is a civic responsibility. Since there is a claim that the person defining assault is a lawyer, maybe we can get a clarification.
>
> My understanding is that intent is important in assault*. In assault (as opposed to in battery) it is not physical contact or harm that is at issue, but the threat of physical contact or harm. And, assault includes *intentionally* causing the fear of offensive contact. It sounds like from a legal perspective, touching isn’t even necessary for assault to have occurred, BUT, touching is only assault if the toucher *intends* to make the touchee feel uncomfortable.
>
> This is not a comment on how people SHOULD behave… simply an attempt to get clarity on a claim regarding legal obligations. And, as I stated, I am not a lawyer, and am happy to accept evidence that corrects my understanding of this legal definition.
>
> *"Assault is effectua ted when one acts intending to cause an imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact with another person." Cullison v. Medley, 570 N.E.2d 27, 30 (Ind. 1991).
>
> —Alex
>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 10:39 AM, lidz26
> wrote:
>>
>> Kat - the person who called touching my (your) body w/out consent assault IS a lawyer. Thank you Monster!
>> Momma J - I adore your quips of reasonable balance - it's important - and even more important that it came from a woman! I shudder to think what would have happened to any Y chromosome who tried to sprinkle in some reasonable doubt.
>> Asha - I have a "No means no" pin somewhere for you!
>> All - thank you for bringing back DCBurners list! Makes me feel 25 again!
>> Debbi - you're soooooooooooooooo eloquent! We miss you like whoa!
>> Jill - love your real world pdf examples - I love getting high on hugs!
>> Caitlin - thank you for the bacon analogy. as a veg contender I think it's perfect!
>>
>> This is why the discussion is needed: https://rainn.org/statistics
>>
>>
>> The lines are blurry
>> Discussion provokes Progress
>> Ask me for a hug!
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Kathryn McCulley > wrote:
>> Wow, you might want to check your reading comprehension: I have not seen anyone say that if you hold your arms out to h ug, you're assaulting them and committing coercion. That's actually the precise and exact opposite of what I was saying and have seen others say. Also no one said hand shaking was any kind of consent violation. It came up in relation to whether or not an offer to hug is coercive (which was brought up by someone who is in favor of not asking, at least verbally).
>>
>> The idea that a c onversation about assault and a conversation about what people think about asking before hugging someone you don't know are mutually exclusive appears to say something really ugly about whether one thinks the validity or worth of the former hinges on whether or not someone is interested in engaging on the latter. We're turning off people who might otherwise be interested in a culture of (sexual) consent by merely having a - relatively civil, especially by internet standards - conversation about whether or not individuals would prefer or expect to be hugged by people they don't know without asking? Really?
>>
>> I do wish people hadn't totally abandoned the other conversation when this came up (and was threaded), because they absolutely are not the same thing.
>>
>> I've never before found Burners to be so pearl-clutching about whether a topic of conversation is acceptable. If you don't like it, don't be in it. I have see n no one say that hugging people you don't know without asking = rape. I've seen people say variously they don't like it, that it is non-consensual (which by definition is true if consent isn't given), that it is a violation of bodily autonomy (also literally true, whether you think that's a worthy thing or not), and that it triggers them. That's not any of it calling it rape.
>>
>> One person said it was legally assault, which I believe is correct (rationale: you're grabbing someone (and potentially restraining them, depending on the hug) without their ok) but I Am Not A Lawyer so can't confirm. Still not calling it rape or sexual assault.
>>
>> My definition for "ultra-pc" is when the fundamentally good principle of "don't hurt people" is used to either silence conversation (ie, "You can't talk about this thing because it upsets me" instead of just leaving the conversation) or to try to make rules about how pe ople should behave which put undue burden on social interac tion. This is clearly a fundamental disagreement about whether putting your arms out for a hug and waiting to be hugged and/or asking "Do you hug?" instead of just going for it is an undue burden. That's a really subjective thing, but I would think it's pretty worth discussing enough to see that people aren't on the same page about it.
>>
>> Saying "I think your concerns are stupid" is really disrespectful and not a lovingly familial way to treat people.
>>
>> For me, this entire issue boils down to: if a tiny modification in your behavior (ie, opening your and waiting to be hugged or asking a 3-word question) would make other people happier, is it worth the inconvenience? That's a personal question everyone has to answer for themselves. But at least now you know it would make some people happier and what you can do about it if you choose.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2015 3:23 AM, <> wrote:
>> Take a step back and look at what has happened here. This started out as a rally against sexual harassment, and has devolved into a discussion about appropriate hugging. This discussion isn't changing anyone's minds... People that rape aren't involved in the conversation, thus you have no influence on how they act, especially when all you're talking about now is proper hug behavior. This conversation has turned comical and is polluting the inboxes of people who would otherwise be on your side.
>>
>> Open arms nor a handshake are not coercion, nor are they part of the 'rape culture'. If you participate in American social gatherings you a re expected to handle social interactions, which means appropriately deal with people t hat want to hug you sometimes (much like the France argument). You have several options, take the hug, don't, or call the c ops for assault. Take your pick.
>>
>> This whole thing is ultra PC, and beyond exacerbating. Don't like getting touched? Don't go near people... Problem solved. I implore all the people deeply invested in this conversation to watch the latest few South Park episodes, and get over yourselves.
>>
>> And yes, no one should be sexually assaulted, but this hugging conversation has gone too far. Espousing extreme hugging consent on an email thread will get more detractors than sympathizers.
>>
>> Sure, report the creeps and abusers, but for real, you want to be part of an 'accepting' community then don't get upset at people that live the standard American life. Debating the power balance between asking for a hug, let alone calling open arms coercion, is ridiculous.
>> Yes, fuck rape, but you all have gone too far into an echo chamber of ultra feminism where even asking if it's ok to hug someone is a micro-aggression built on power imbalance. The conversation completely derailed from what was important.
>>
>> This whole thing has turned off many people who considered themselves part of your community, but refuse to relate to this extremist set of norms.
>>
>> Oh, if I hold my arms out to hug, I'm assaulting you and commuting coercion... That's extremist, and unlike the other communities I've ever been a part o f. This whole thing, all 80+ emails, is quite sad really. None of it has changed any assailant's behavior, but just made innocent people question their socially accepted behavior. And if you aren't ok with socially accepted behavior, well, that's ultimately your problem then, isn't it. And don't even come back and say that's 'rape culture', it's a fucking handshake and a hug, and if you don't want it then don't be a part. Rape and assault aren't a socially accepted behavior by definition, being that they're illegal.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 2:01 AM, dancingmantis > wrote:
>>
>>> Caitlin,
>>>
>>> I can’t read minds, but I do know some of the people that have responded he re or on Facebook, and can try to guess at the answer to your question.
>>>
>>> I’m bad with dates, but I think I joined the community about 15 years ago. Many of the people that I met at that time really did feel that they had found a home in the community that was more meaningful than any of their other cultural associations. I personally have identified my culture as “Burner” for a couple school papers. Somebody who self-identified as part of the DC Burner community wasn’t a stranger… they were family that I didn’t know very well yet. (Even if that family ended up being my creepy uncle.) Of course, the community has changed and grown over the past 15 years.
>>>
>>> In spite of the fact that some members of the DC Burner community have had a different experience, many long-term members have experienced hugging as a cultural norm and identifier within our group. For these people, hugging is a symbol of shared membership in a welcoming, trusting community. It is possible that some of these people hear a values judgement in the current conversation, with some voices telling them that, not only should they change their traditions, but that their traditions are a socially unacceptable violation of consent… morally equivalent to “slavery” (as you imply below). They may perceive the dismissal of intent, or their ability to read non-verbal cues as willful devaluation of their emotional intelligence. They may feel that it is cultural appropriation to assume their long-held cultural identity, and then slander their customs.
>>>
>>> Why do they get defensive? They might get defensive because they value their culture… just as another culture might get defensive if you questioned the morality of their food choices or the propriety of their family structures.
>>>
>>> —Alex
>>>
>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:43 PM, cphillips > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Why do people get so defensive about having to ask if their physical contact is wanted? Where does this entitlement to touch other people without permission come from? If you know your friends are cool with it, no one is saying you're a predator if you hug your BFF without getting consent first. What is being taken from you, by having to ask a stranger if they want a hug? Would you force bacon down someone's throat upon meeting them? I seriously doubt it. You would probably hold out some bacon and ask them if they would like some.
>>>>
>>>> Asking people to change problematic behavior is how we grow as a community. I'm struggling to come up with an analogy that doesn't end up equating unwanted hugs to slavery, women's suff rage, or something else equally serious , but y ou get my point. We do not grow if we don't cha nge. I have great faith in our community, the emphasis on consent the last few years has made a huge difference already.
>>>>
>>>> Caitlin P hillips
>>>> Rebound Designs
>>>> www.rebound-designs.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 3, 2015, at 12:03 AM, jilljilljill wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think it'd be best for someone who doesn't want to be hugged to wear a pin or t shirt that says something like"please ask before hugging" or "no hugging." Asking the entire community to change a behavior that's been ingrained over the past 12-15 years probably won't work all that well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask Firs t or Not To Ask First
>>>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 23:05:51 -0500
>>>>> F rom: cphillips@rebound -designs.com
>>>>>
>>>>> No one is saying hugging is a bad thing. But you can’t possibly know how someone will react to a hug, without asking them first. It can be very traumatic for someone who has experienced assault, abuse, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I LOVE hugging. I think it’s wonderful and magic, and the best thing ever. When I want it. There are lots of times I do not want to be touched, especially by people I haven’t met before. &nb sp;Nothing will shut me down faster than being touched without permission, it can trigger some serious PTSD. Stepping back, putting my hands up? &nb sp;It’ s not a good feeling either, it feels defensive and instantly changes the vibe of the interaction. Just asking first, and being gracious if told no, is bet ter for everyone concerned.
>>>>>
>>>>> That ranger who got 200 hugs? He, in your exact words, let himself get hugged. He consented to those hugs. I’m sure it felt great, but that could be tor ture if you DIDN’T want it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Caitlin Phillips
>>>>> Rebound Designs
>>>>> www.reboun d-designs.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 10:44 PM, jil ljilljill > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hugging is a bad thing now? What the....
>>>>>
>>>>> If you don't want to be hugged, just take a step back or put your hands up and say "sorry" or "no, thank you."
>>>>>
>>>>> But please consider my side -- I see hugging as one of the most wonderful things ab out this community, and I hope it never, ever stops. It's a dis play of caring, openness and a willingness to try new things.
>>>>>
>>>>> And it also has a side benefit. A ranger I know working at the back gate at PDF let himself get hugged at least 200 times in one day. He said he never felt so high and so wonderful, and he was totally sober.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To: dcburners@dcburners.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [dcburners] Hugging: To Ask First or Not To Ask First
>>>>> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 21:35:12 -0500
>>>>> From: sethlongemail@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>> At the bottom of this email there's a link to "manage my subsc riptions".
>>>>> Go to that page and select "Fax only".
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015 9:33 PM, "bfisher1" > wrote:
>>>>> 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 esta blish 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 awkward ness, 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 no t a universa l 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 ke ep 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 d on't care if you're making people uncomfortable/violating their boundaries as long as you meant well. I don't understand this. Can you exp lain 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 cl arify f or 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 the y 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:
>>>>> < div class="h5">No. You are intentionally misr eading what I am saying. I am saying that within many groups, people would NOT reasonably ass ume 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
>>>>> < div class="">
>>>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:00 PM , beatpony > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> yea i t 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-wanti ng 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 tabl e. 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 askin g, 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-ask ing 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 > < /span>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 theor y I might misinterpret the signals. I would be upset if, rather th an 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, v ictim blaming, or the creation of an environment of fear and intimidation have far more serious consequences. As for individual perceptions regarding these issues, personal exp erience 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 di sagree with, rather than demonize them. Maybe acknowledging their feelings as personally valid (instead of engaging in an ad hominem attack) will help them liste n and gain perspective.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that this is a very personal topic for a lot of people. I agr ee 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"/ "v ictim 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 person al 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 y ou to reach out, as Patty mentioned, and a s 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 < <>cmenocal@gmail.com > wrote:
>>>>> Wow. Nice rape culture apologia you got there.
>>>>> Too politically correct is the first refuge of assholes.
>>>>> Stay classy, and good day.&nbs p;
>>>>>
>>>>> Love y ou guys!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:05 PM, < <>>wrote:
>>>>> < blockquote class= "gmail_quote" st yle="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 t hem 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-i fication 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 growin g cultural shift toward ove r-responding to anyone's hurt, or PERCEPT ION 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: < /span>http://dcburners.or g/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 subsc riptions: 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:< span class=""> 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://dcburner s.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 < br class="">
>
>
> --
> Full post: <>http://dcburners.org/node/178
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailingl ist/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/mail inglist/unsubscribe/182
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http:/ /dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailing list/unsubscribe/182
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/182
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post:< u> http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/182
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburne rs.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist <>
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>> --
>> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
>> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
>> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
>
>
> --
> art. science. love.
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184
>
>
> --
> Full post: http://dcburners.org/node/184
> Manage my subscriptions: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist
> Stop emails for this post: http://dcburners.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/184