Editor's note: Kiera Feldman has an important piece up at Alternet on the BDS movement, flashmobs, and the gender politics of the Palestinian solidarity movement. Excerpts:
The real genius of BDS is its big tent appeal: supporters might choose to stick to boycotts of consumer goods made in settlements (e.g. SodaStream); some might launch divestment campaigns aimed at companies involved in the Occupation; or others might support the “full call,” which asks artists and academics to boycott Israeli institutions (as opposed to individuals) that have not hopped on the BDS bandwagon. Notable full BDS supporters include Pink Floyd, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Naomi Klein, and Judith Butler. "If you only want to boycott an egg, we want you to boycott an egg,” Omar Barghouti, a founding member of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, told the Nation, explaining BDS’ grabbag of tactics....
And what is more big tent than a goofy song and dance?
To be sure, it is just one of the tactics that might comprise a larger targeted campaign. CodePink's Rae Abileah and Colleen Kelly, a Catholic Worker and member of St. Louis Justice in Palestine (of Motorola flash mob fame) are borderline flash mob evangelists, who praised the form’s ability to engage a diverse group of people and build community.
Both Abileah and Kelly grew up choreographing Spice Girls dances at slumber parties; in flash mobs, the teen girl consumer culture they were weaned on meets the “don’t buy that” movement of their adulthood. It is, by and large, a movement dominated by women. “I think that’s everywhere though,” not just BDS, Kelly said. “When women are leaders, men are not as present.”
Dalit Baum, a member of the established Israeli feminist organization Coalition of Women for Peace and the founder of whoprofits.org, agreed. “Women do most of the grassroots organizing,” she said. “Always.” What’s more, she added, they’re disproportionately queer.
But, of course, powerhouse women leading the charge—often with gutsy public actions--does not mean the end of the enduring tale of misogyny on the radical left, especially in the private sphere. “There is still sexism within our movements to combat too,” Abileah wrote in an email, stating the obvious, which can’t be said enough when advocating for the liberation of others. In a recent essay, Amirah Mizrahi, an activist with Jewish Voice for Peace, addressed the darker components of justice in Palestine work—that which is hard to reconcile with spectacles of joyful song and dance. “There is a problem with gender violence in this movement,” Mizrahi wrote. “If we cannot respect something so fundamental—the autonomy of another person over her own body—what are we fighting for?”
Counting myself among the BDS supporters, I too have swapped painful stories with female friends of sexism playing out in the most intimate ways, as if reenacting scenes from the early Women’s Movement days. I have been degraded exactly once in my life—by an Israeli BDS activist, a self-professed male feminist who talked of linked struggles, who knew better but did not act better. Knowledge, I learned in a lesson I will not soon forget or forgive, does not necessarily stop someone from violating women’s physical boundaries. It is a notch on a belt I wish no one owned.
Feldman's postscript:
Thankfully, the movement is undergoing a serious reckoning on themes of sexism, sexual violence, and bad consent. I recently learned many women share similar stories about this very same Israeli BDS activist--and that a whole support community has formed to work toward systemic change and individual accountability. Feel free to email kiera dot feldman at gmail dot com to hear what's in the pipes.
she linked to rae and colleen’s flashmob mondoaward entry! it won 2nd place/runner up.
great article. it’s the same in palestine too from what i’ve heard. the women are organizers. helena cobban wrote an excellent article on the women of hamas. they are the ones who mobilized the vote at the last election (from what i have heard).
Is this the article you’re talking about? link to salon.com
Here’s an update if others want to link follow: link to justworldnews.org
thanks kiera, yes that is exactly what i was referencing.
Quick correction – while Roger Waters has come out in favour of BDS, he left the band and signed away any legal claim to the name Pink Floyd back in the 1980s.
Good catch!
Also: I bungled Colleen Kelly’s ID and asked Alternet to correct it, but they haven’t yet. She’s actually with St. Louis Palestine Solidarity Committee (link to stl-psc.org).
So what gf? You think Roger Walters will STOP being associated with Pink Floyd in the minds of MILLIONS of people? A BIG FAT NO!!!!!!
This could only mean that you gf indeed are a bad-vibe merchant.
Stop trolling with your inconsequential anti-intellectual comments.
Exactly, Taxi. Utter irrelevance.
No reason to let accuracy get in the way of your anger.
It’s good to know that even when you’re wrong, you’re right.
Funny how the writer of the article was much more gracious than you. Do you condemn her now too for not conforming to your version of the truth?
I just pointed out a minor mistake, but you act as if the whole of your case rides upon it and defend it with misplaced venom. How silly. Surely it would be easier to say, as Kiera did, “good catch”.
It ain’t a “good catch”, it’s a stupid one.
And you’re trolling off subject again – talking ’bout yourself. Again.
This coming from the gentleman who has been bending over backwards on another thread to fabricate a rationale whereby Israel was justified to use particular force on the Mavi Marmara.
What a nutty comment thread! Any journalist who doesn’t welcome a nitpicky factual correction *from any ideological camp* is a total hack (though I’ll add that supporting evidence like links is ideal). If we don’t put accuracy first and foremost, what’s the point of anything?? GF might have a different ideological bent and we might disagree on positions–I don’t know, I haven’t followed their past comments–but corrections are just a public service. All writers I know appreciate vigilant readers. Alas, I wish Internet outlets like Alternet had factchecking teams…but they don’t.
Where were you when these clowns were saying that the terrorist bombing of the King James Hotel wasn’t terrorism but was, in fact, a “military sanctioned action?”
I do agree, we should have just let GF be with his non-sequiters. When he’s not lying, he’s not relevant.
“No reason to let accuracy get in the way….”
If accuracy means dotting all your i-s, crossing all your t-s and splitting hair, than it has no place in an intelligent discussion.
You can bore people to death with too much correctness, this is not a scientific research referendum, but opinions on current important subjects.
K. Feldman,
GF is treated with scorn and derision because she is a hasbarist, a propagandist, paid by the Israeli government to spew lies.
Pat. You’re still lying. Please stop. Otherwise people will only think of you as a liar.
None of what you have written here is true. I have asked you to provide evidence that it is and you refuse. Please stop lying about me.
gf, i can understand how that could be really offensive to you. obviously the israeli government does not invest the funds to pay every single person who advocates for and explain the zionist pro israel position.
the reality is tho that the zionist lobby does invest millions of dollars on hasbara and we have to listen to it. unless you can think of some compelling reason why they would avoid this site, a site camera has singled out. even dkos (the absurdly named ‘team shalom’ ) has singled it out. it makes no sense they are not here. so i realize it must be a burden for you. i would strongly urge you to advocate hasbarists who do work thru specific organizations lobby groups or the government of israel, or even organized by these elements to out themselves. until hasbarists start outing themselves every single one of you are suspects. it’s the nature of the business. so don’t blame others. there’s a level of hostility, an undercurrent some people feel towards having to listen to unidentified paid trolls. because they are here.
this whole thread has been shot to shit as far as i am concerned. it’s turned into one of those daily kos threads where it all becomes about the characters and nothing on the substance. whatever.
“there’s a level of hostility, an undercurrent some people feel towards having to listen to unidentified paid trolls. because they are here.”
There sure is, annie! They disrupt thread after thread on mondo, and regular commenters have grown to know and despise them.
As for you, gf, you’re the one spewing hasbara lies, and you’ll continue to receive the treatment you deserve from me.
I am not paid for being here. I am not a woman. If you repeat these things then you are a liar.
I believe that my government may employ people to write on sites like this. I personally don’t see the point. I come here because I am compelled to. The overwhelming evidence has changed me and influenced my attitudes more than you know, but I still expect rigor in reporting and integrity from both sides.
I have not told a single lie about myself. If you find one, I will withdraw permanently from the site.
I understand that you want to describe some (all?) of my opinions about Israel as lies. I can’t help you with that, but I wouldn’t consider it offensive. You are perfectly entitled to your opposing opinion.
But when you repeat objective falsehoods with the aim of painting me as a habitual liar, then you cross the line, in my opinion. Please stop.
GF: You’ve been here a little while now. Which visitors sound to you like they have been employed by your government to write here?
GF
Why don’t you just go back to your country, England? Stop being a colonial. Stop living on occupied territory. Stop stealing water. Stop the delusion of religious supremacy.
So what Taxi? You think all readers of this blog enjoy your mindless hostility at anyone who bucks the party line? Or the mob like ‘me-toos’ that follow so much of the name-calling and nastiness? You’re acting like a middle school bully.
This can only mean that you are out to sabotage this site by making supporters of Palestinian rights look like venom spouting drones. And I know that’s not true. Most of us are actually pleasant people who wouldn’t dream of talking to others as you do.
As a fan of Pink Floyd and Roger Waters, I’m glad GF corrected the error.
clenchner: You strike me as well-meaning but maybe a little too quick to demand perfect behavior from some of our commenters. Israel/Palestine is a hot subject, as I suspect you know even better than I do. You must visit pro-Israel sites from time to time; what kind of reception do dissenting views get over there? On Mondoweiss we regularly see videos of vicious, even violent behavior by some of Israel’s defenders toward people like us.
I don’t think taxi’s comments come anywhere close to that. Do you add your calm voice of reason — I mean that seriously — to pro-Israel sites? If you do, how do they treat you?
You know, for someone who claims to be against the Occupation and on the same side of us you spend like 80% of your posts criticizing (or outright attacking) anyone who isn’t Zionist, clencher
They treat me like Taxi treats GF. And that’s the point: why would a movement I care about tolerate that sort of thing?
There’s a fairly well known body of research into the ‘Right Wing Authoritarian’ personality. It has little to do with politics on a left-right spectrum, and everything to do with faulty reasoning, hostility, mob behavior and a barely repressed thirst to see some deserving person get their (violent, unpleasant) comeuppance. Think of the ‘hate Goldstein’ sessions in ’1984.’ Or the recent AIPAC violence against Rae of JVP/CodePink.
On this site, the high RWA’s write as though the world was full of Israeli government paid social media mercenaries, sneakily fooling OTHER people, but then they get to MondoWeiss and are FOUND OUT.
Once FOUND OUT the mob gathers, pelting veggies and hurling schoolboy insults, all justified because it’s in support of the TRUTH.
This is the mirror image of how the paranoid pro-Israel crowd behaves on ‘their’ turf.
Never mind if opponents of the occupation get caught up as victims in the holy comment war. Never mind if the we/them, insider/outsider stance is demonstrably counterproductive, never mind if the entire tone is the near opposite of the top level articles that folks are responding to. Just pay attention to the barely disguised impotent rage, rising up under the slightest pretext. The calling card? Always an attack on the person speaking and his/her legitimacy and alleged membership in the dark forces.
It’s disgusting, and while lurking here for a long time it made me sick. Now I do my part to point at it, call out those disreputable haters, and in some small way BALANCE out some of the worst excesses.
But in doing so, you’ll notice I’m pretty careful to avoid the hallmarks of RWAniks:
- invent words and positions or quote out of context only to set the stage for a rebuttal
- assault the character of one’s opponent based on whatever tiny snippets of personal data one can glean
- name calling
- the sneering ‘we’ up against the evil ‘they’
- childish efforts to make fun of someone’s name or handle
- purposeful put downs that make use of puns, sarcastic humor (funny only to other RWA’s) and deliberate misinterpretations of what someone wrote or meant.
Again, this is exactly what one finds on super pro-Israel websites. Shameful.
“Most of us….”/clencher.
Multiple personality dude, or a leader of a real gang?
“So what, Taxi?”
Dude, that’s EXACTLY my point!!! Duh!!!!!!!!
Now I’ve seen your name around but I’ve never read your posts – not interested, didn’t even finish the one above.
Count me in as someone who thinks Taxi’s comment was very wrong. I know that a lot of the attempts to undermine the cause of justice in Palestine are very subtle, indirect, passive aggressive, like trying to undermine a story by drawing attention to minor flaws. I’ve seen that in many places. But you’d have to really be deluded to think GF’s comment was one of those. It’s not a matter of Taxi “drinking the koolaid” or being too hard-core a supporter, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the intensity of your support, it looks more to me like somebody having an itchy trigger finger WRT pointing out this kind of undermining, and tragicomically not getting how the correction applied to the main point of the original story.
As far as inventing positions of those whose position I oppose, there’s the issue of logical inference. As far as I’m concerned, if you oppose the ROR for Palestinians, then by inference you support their original ethnic cleansing – mass murders targeting innocent civilians, the whole thing. If you take the position that native people of Palestine (that would be the Palestinian Arabs, including refugees) must be barred from citizenship in the land of their origin (now Israel) simply because they aren’t Jews, then you are taking a racist position (using racist in the legal sense which includes discrimination on the basis of religion). I realize a number of zionists don’t see it this way, many seem willfully obtuse, others completely blinded by zionist religious doctrine.
LOL what are you people on about?
Political correctness? LOL!! Want me to be cookie-cut just like you?
Heck gf lives on occupied territory even though this person is a Brit through and through, born there etc. So like get real everyone and don’t expect me to be sympathetic. Enough said.
“As far as I’m concerned, if you oppose the ROR for Palestinians, then by inference you support their original ethnic cleansing – mass murders targeting innocent civilians, the whole thing. ”
So if the official position of someone (say, Yasser Arafat or Abu-Mazen) is that RoR is up for negotiation in some way, as opposed to an absolute, individual right, then do you accuse them of supporting the original ethnic cleansing?
It’s a good question because, as we know from various records, that is precisely how the Palestinian leadership viewed it. They were haggling over numbers, as were the Israelis.
What I’m saying is that the problem with ‘logical inference’ is that the language of logic is used to adopt black and white positioning when the truth is far more nuanced. Inferring that any opponent of RoR ‘logically’ must be in favor of a historical event from before they were born is, at least, merely an opinion and shouldn’t be dressed up or repeated as some kind of fact.
“… A movement I care about” – clencher.
I don’t believe you in the slightest. Hasbara in disguise.
So, clencher… it is your contention that IF any Palestinian leader signs away the rights of refugees, which A) none of them actually ever have, and B) they have no right to do even if they did, you would support the stripping of Palestinians of their international rights if that is the most expedient solution to finalizing Israel’s borders.
That is to say, you aren’t fighting for the rights of Palestinians. You very explicitly aren’t.
Clensher says:
Never mind if opponents of the occupation get caught up as victims in the holy comment war.
Sort of implying that he is an opponent of the occupation. But he spends his time attacking some of the more passionate members of MW who say things that are little over the top. But he remains silent in the face of Cast Lead, or any other Israeli atrocities. Clensher has strange priorities if he really is interested in ending the illegal occupation of the WB.
I didn’t say any such thing. This is exactly what I mean about pretending that someone said X and then opposing it.
My contention is that IF any Palestinian leader compromised on the refugee issue, THEN it would not make them apologists for the Nakba.
You aren’t fighting for reading comprehension. You are opposing this important and useful skill. Why do you hate the English language?
(Of course the para above is silly. But it’s a fair representation of your technique.)
Isn’t that kind of like saying IF any unicorns existed, THEN they might not be carnivorous? And anyway, why bring that up as an example at all?
Also, feel free and clear it up for us. Do you support Palestinian right of return under international law, clencher?
I didn’t bring up that example. Lynne117 did.
I support the Palestinian right of return and whatever deal the Palestinian leaders agree to in the future. I think my opinion on both of these questions is quite irrelevant; it’s not what Jews like me think, it’s what Palestinians do that counts.
It’s much more important to oppose the continuing expulsions of Palestinians taking place right now, with all others who also oppose it. (Referring to expansion of settlements in East Jerusalem for example, or the Al-Arakib issue.)
@Toivos, what a strange comment. If I had something to add about Cast Lead, I would have. At the time I was organizing a Jewish protest against the big rally of the Jewish community in support of Israel. Why assume that my silence on any issue implies consent? Wouldn’t it be just as reasonable to assume I mostly agree with what others have already written?
I’ve been on both sides of this politeness quest, clenchner–that is, I’ve been accused (about an hour ago in another thread, for instance) of being too quick to jump on one particular person and I’ve also done my bit crusading for politeness about a year ago.
And in my latter role, let me say that it doesn’t work. It particularly doesn’t work if you attack someone for being rude, because you tend to become what you are supposedly attacking. You could just say you didn’t find anything wrong with GF’s original post. It was just a correction.
I’ll do that. I didn’t find anything wrong with GF’s original post. It was just a correction.
On whether Mondoweiss should be more friendly to liberal Zionists–it depends on how honest they are about the misdeeds of their own side. For me it’s sort of like accepting a liberal Islamist–a country shouldn’t award a particular religion privileged status, but given that many do, it’s better for an Islamist to be relatively liberal than not liberal at all. Ideally every country in the Mideast would adopt the ideals of secular democracy with no privileges given any religion or ethnicity, but even with the Arab spring that goal seems a little distant.
I wonder how accepting we’d be towards a Hamas member who denied that Hamas deliberately killed Israeli civilians. (I’ve read that on occasion Hamas spokespeople have engaged in the same sort of fatuous rationalizations that Westerners use to justify our war crimes, so it’s not impossible.) I’d find that viewpoint very disturbing. But we get the equivalent sort of thing from some “liberal Zionists” (not all) here.
I actually agree with what much of clencher has to say in his/her longer comment above which started with
They treat me like Taxi treats GF. And that’s the point: why would a movement I care about tolerate that sort of thing?
There is sometimes a mob mentality and a piling on, and I also occasionally read some comments that you could describe as “alpha-male” posturing. GF’s original comment was quite minor. It may have been that they were nitpicking on the Roger Waters / Pink Floyd thing, but it is factually correct all the same.
Now, having said that about piling on, anyone who has read Mondoweiss for more than a few months will have noticed that I and others have links to Richard Witty’s most vile comments, and post them regularly. James North has been providing a very handy RW translation service of late, which is simultaneously comical and deeply tragic, because I think North does have real insight into the way Richard’s mind ticks over.
So does this qualify as mob mentality, and am I being a hypocrite for agreeing with clencher? Perhaps – all views appreciated.
What I find disturbing about RW’s comments is the viciously passive-aggressive content (such as politely advocating ethnic cleansing policies more extreme than Avigdor Lieberman does), his relentless and absurd posturing as a liberal (equal rights for all except Palestinians maketh not a liberal) and an inability to speak honestly about his ethno-religious supremacist ideology. In short, there is a powerful odour of mendacity, and I’m not a drinker.
While I disagree much more with people such eee, GF and even jon s, I don’t find them to be serially dishonest in the way Richard Witty is.
clencher ~ I’m interested to know, if you remember, comments against who made you sick while you were a lurker? Do you think this changed after moderation began following Israel’s hijacking of the Free Gaza Flotilla? What do you think of the way RW is received in the comments section?
I would like to add a few comments of mine on above:
I also find the language in this blog gets sometimes a bit too hard, you can disagree with someone without calling names.
If you want to win the game over your opponent, you must listen to everything he says and watch what he does. Ignoring him puts you at a disadvantage as he will know more about you.
On the other hand, be firm, as appeasing Hitler before WWII did not stop him, but encouraged him, thinking that the west is just too soft. In other words, use sunglasses when the sun shines and a raincoat when it rains. It doesn´t work the other way around.
Clenchner
You are getting very tiresome. If you don’t have anything to say, leave out the ad homs. Israel needs thoughtful non ideological defenders rather than more of the same dreck.
I’ve said my piece and won’t belabor it. I think that if RW is a troll, he’s very very good at it because he provokes so much ugliness. More often than not he presents quite reasonable, making the ugliness stand out all the more.
Supporters of Israeli occupation are very very good as presenting as the ‘reasonable’ side in any debate while provoking emotional outbursts. Why help them? Why bend over backwards to place opponents of Israeli occupation in the enemy camp?
I do value honesty, and there’s value to pointing out RW’s hypocrisy. That said, I think I’ve seen (but can’t point link to) instances where the same tone of unmasking is mis-applied. There’s a beloved trope at work, searching for a place to land, and less concerned with accuracy than the thrill of combat.
Clencher wants us to be ‘polite’ to colonialists like gf who are living off the backs of Palestinian refugees (stealing land, water, freedoms etc).
Well that’s nice of you clencher.
Did I strike the corrrrrrrrect polite note above?
LOL – get your priorities right and STOP being our fake ‘father’ (father has spoken!).
In fact STOP being a fake Palestinian supporter.
“I do value honesty, and there’s value to pointing out RW’s hypocrisy. That said, I think I’ve seen (but can’t point link to) instances where the same tone of unmasking is mis-applied.”
I’ll meet you halfway on that point. I think the tone is misapplied to others, including you and GF. Occasionally it might even be misapplied to RW, but unlike you I don’t think RW is reasonable. I think he comes across that way to people at first–he came across that way to me. But if you follow his views closely enough they are identical to those of, say, Obama. I mean that for better and for worse. Obama wants a two state solution and so does RW. But Obama does not and will not condemn Israeli actions using the same harshness he uses for Palestinian terror and he seems to only want a Palestinian state if it can be arranged on his terms–no going to the UN and no positive acknowledgment of peaceful Palestinian protests. What sort of mediator is he likely to be, leaving aside the fact that Congress is even more firmly on the Israeli side?
off topic … but does not this reek of Michael Oren?:
War dead from 1804 could be repatriated
Congress moves to bring home remains of the ‘earliest Navy SEALs’
The commandos were part of President Thomas Jefferson’s war against the Barbary pirates, who terrorized shipping off the coast of North Africa in the early 1800s.
link to washingtontimes.com
Well said, clenchner.
While we’re on the topic of BDS, I just want to give a heads up to any Canadian readers of Mondoweiss about the JNF in Canada, and sponsorship by Scotiabank for a JNF fundraiser called “Pitch for Israel” in Toronto.
I’ve told them I will be closing my accounts with them(no big loss there, unfortunately), and sent them some info.
Thanks.
correction: “Pitch for Israel” may or may not be a ‘fundraiser’ – I assumed it was, I may be wrong. Regardless, I figure any association with the JNF of any Canadian business is grounds for protest…
‘“There is still sexism within our movements to combat too,” Abileah wrote in an email, stating the obvious, which can’t be said enough…’
‘Amirah Mizrahi, an activist with Jewish Voice for Peace, “There is a problem with gender violence in this movement”’
Note the complete lack of definitions and evidence. These women are just repeating the tired old clichés of the seventies. It’s difficult to see what they are trying to achieve, except maybe weakening the BDS movement by promoting division, and the selection of leaders on criteria other than competetence – ‘speaking as a [member of oppressed group]…’ gives special weight to a person’s argument, as if truth can be derived from identity. This is the kind of leftism which has failed, and in particular, it has failed the Palestinians.
led by women? Why?
a calling?
and in return?
knowing that this time it’ll get done right
This thread seems to be over but of the 50 or so comments there doesn’t seem to be any response to the content of the original post.
Some points of information in the post are that the BDS movement in the US is led by women and they are predominantly lesbian. No problem with that. An Israeli activist hit on one of these women. Bad manners, to be sure. But is that such a crime as to demand a public denunciation, to use public political bandwidth attacking members of your own movement? Wouldn’t direct communication with the individual concerned be more productive? For someone to make a public issue like this, suggests to me that that person has an agenda different than BDS.
i didn’t read the article as stating that the BDS movement in the US is led by women and they are predominantly lesbian. i thought one of the people interviewed had that impression and perhaps it was because of who she is or where she is. i’m in the bay area and that isn’t my impression from my perch, but heck.. i read the whole 3 page article, isolating this particular segment accentuated this aspect of the information. i’ve been around the movement for quite awhile and it simply is not my experience it is a misogynistic community (either on or offline), but again perhaps that’s just me. i would like to read more of rae’s words and the full context in which she wrote them. i really would. try reading the full article. i do find it confusing merging bds w/misogyny, nothing i would have ever thought of. one caveat, i don’t feel nor have i ever felt very repressed (at all) as a result of being a woman so i’m probably not the best judge of what is or is not misogynistic behavior.
I am glad that the BDS activists I work with in real life are not like some of the commenters of this post. They acknowledge the responsibility of their work, which means accepting criticism. They are mature enough to not confuse political disagreements with criticism of methods, strategy, or fact. They certainly do not stoop to accusing other people of insufficient “devotion to the cause” merely for having criticism. Our activities grow stronger when we factcheck, when we do the hard work of internal critique, when we can discuss things openly without namecalling.
But more importantly, no group I would ever organize with would condone the misogyny of telling a woman who is reporting having her physical boundaries violated by a fellow activist that she is just repeating “the tired old clichés of the seventies” and trying to “weaken” the movement. The disrespect of saying K. Feldman is upset because she was “hit on” inappropriately should not be tolerated.
I normally would ignore this as “merely” the anonymous trash talk of the internet, but I think its very important that these comments, even if they are just comments on a message board, do not go unchallenged.
The only way for women (or queers, or people of color, or anyone who is in a relatively less privileged position) to be safe is for them to be able to trust that when they come forward with information they are met by a supportive environment that respects them and their testimony. The only way for our movement to lead to equality is if we mean equality is for everyone.
The disrespect of saying K. Feldman is upset because she was “hit on” inappropriately should not be tolerated.
thanks for bringing that up ethan, i had to do a reread. for some reason i thought feldman was reporting on another woman saying that. i didn’t realize it happened to her. that’s terrible.
Ethan says:
They certainly do not stoop to accusing other people of insufficient “devotion to the cause” merely for having criticism.
If I am the ‘some other commentator at this site’ you miss my point completely. I did not say criticism is out of order. I said it should not be made in a way that detracts from the bds campaign. What Kiera describes is that one individual did something to her personally (what it was remains undescribed, but it sounded rude, I used the term ‘hit on’). Whatever she was deeply offended. Rather dealing with this problem in private, she decided it was important enough to suspend the public bds discussion and devote it to this rude encounter with another activist.
That sounds to me like someone who has a primary agenda other than bds.
Yes, her primary agenda is being safe among people she considers friends, as all of us have a right to be. We cannot ask people to confront the hatred and physical threat of Zionism if we do not do our best to work for safety within our own group for all members. It is the responsibility of all of us to make sure we are keeping each other safe, it is NOT the responsibility of the victim to confront someone alone.
We are talking about violence (whether physical or implied) and assault here. Even if it is only disrespectful language, it should not be trivialized, as you did. Many examples have been posted on this site of the disrespectful language Zionists use to talk about Arabs or Palestinians–should we condone that sort of behavior in our own groups when directed toward women? It is “rude” but it is also dangerous and if not confronted, time and time again has been shown to only escalate.
To the below commenter: yes, if by the “current values of the Bay Area” you mean respect for everyone, that is what I demand of any movement I am part of. And Palestinians I work with demand the same.
Thank you, Ms. Mizrahi, Ms. Feldman, and others for being brave enough to step forward amidst and start this discussion, which is clearly necessary.
‘No group I would ever organize with would condone the misogyny of telling a woman who is reporting having her physical boundaries violated by a fellow activist that she is just repeating “the tired old clichés of the seventies” and trying to “weaken” the movement’ says Ethan Heitner.
This distorts my and others’ argument. I didn’t say Kiera is repeating ‘tired old clichés’, I said it is true of those who use, without definition, the word ‘sexism’, and without evidence, the word ‘violence’. Ethan adds ‘misogyny’, another discussion-crushing insult.
More important, is the sectarianism. ‘No group I would ever organize with’. In a nutshell, this commenter is saying that the Palestine Solidarity Movement must be 100% compatible with the current values of the Bay Area, or the Palestinians can go to hell.
I rest my case.