Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 11:43pm

(This letter was initially intended to be read at a recent meeting, which was about the
"black bloc" action my partner and I called for at our home. I have not altered the letter to appear in indy media.

As context to outsiders: Francis had been living in our home for two months and was never on the lease. Additionally, V and I have been part of the radical activist community for over a year. I feel there is further necessary information to include, however, I have mixed feelings about bringing a domestic dispute into a public sphere.)

 Hey everyone,

 

            Thanks for coming to discuss these issues tonight. Sorry V or I couldn’t be there to share this discussion with you. I’ll be meeting up with someone this week when I’m not working, but I still wanted to communicate my ideas in the meantime. Based on the synopses I’ve heard of the last discussion, I have some thoughts I’d like to bring up.

This letter is long, so if you don't make it any further, the most important thing I want to stress is this: communally ignoring Francis’ anger problems in preference to talking about only the black bloc action is imbalanced. In absolutely no way do I want to de-legitimize concerns about the action at our home, but Francis’ actions and our group actions need to be given equal attention. Ideally, I’d like to see him get some sort of help, especially because this is not the first or even third time he has been physically violent with our friends/strangers in the last year. Could we organize community funding for anger management if he agrees to go? Does anyone have suggestions? Furthermore, Francis has still not paid his bills. I heard that at the last meeting we were called classist for asking an unemployed person for money, however, we are working class, and our other two roommates have also declined to pay bills in the last month. We are covering 5 peoples’ bill money between the two of us, and it’s not classist to ask someone to help with their share.

 

To address the group action:

V and I are being excluded from the “queer community,” and that is problematic. The open letter published by Indy Media portrayed the black bloc action as being against the queer community, one that “tattered and tore” it, however, the initial violence was committed by one non-cisgender person against another, and the following action was called for by a queer couple. Does the “queer community” who wrote the letter define itself as including all those oppressed by hetero- and cis-normative societal values, or just as a particular group of friends who happen to be queer? This problem is within the community, not against it, which seems to be the major source of tension. Our personal relationships heavily influenced our opinions, and I am disappointed that my queer comrades—who have a deep understanding of gender and its intricacies—failed to acknowledge and criticize so many aspects of this situation.

When V cited his reason for calling a mass number of people to our aid, he said he felt threatened by being physically assaulted by a white man; one of the signers of the open letter responded, “What’s one white dude going to do to you?” Firstly, V and I both have histories of abuse by men. Second, while V appears masculine, he is currently female-bodied, and his aggressor, be it by hormone therapy, is male. Both aggressor and victim identify as men, but only the aggressor had the upper hand of physical masculinity, and abused it to apply violence. Had I, a feminine cis-woman, been the person Francis had pushed, how would it have been perceived differently? Would the signer have asked the same question of me?

More importantly, were the aggressor a cisgender male, would the queer community have responded to the black bloc with outrage, or would it be a mere consequence of his violent actions? When a non-cis person transitions to what is perceived as male by society—especially a white male, such as in this case—they inevitably gain privilege, and must be held accountable for the actions they take with that privilege, especially because they, unlike most cismen, have first hand experience with masculine oppression. If a cisman had assaulted V, a queer, female bodied person, would someone have asked him “What’s one white dude going to do to you?”

Queer people have the frustrating task of constantly reminding others to legitimize non-cisbodied people’s gender identity, to never treat someone with a female body as less than a biological man—so why is this case an exception? Why is Francis not being held to the same standards expected of progressive cismen? It seems that instead, the queer community is harboring and defending an abuser. I’m not saying by any means that we should ex-communicate abusers. Again, ideally I’d like to see Francis get help. It is just deeply, deeply hurtful that we were accused of lying about a physical assault, that our fellow queer “comrades” never asked if we were okay, or considered our histories with queerness or race or masculine abuse. We too expected better of (what we thought was) our community, but those involved, rather than defining a community by its common struggle—queerness— have instead defined it by a pre-existing friend group, from which we are apparently excluded.

 

Sincerely,

Chelsie

 

 

 

Comments

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 02/09/2012 - 1:29pm

Thanks for this, Chelsie. The original letter repeatedly emphasized that the so-called "black bloc" attacked the "queer community in general," so it's good that you're calling bullshit on that by saying, "This problem is within the community, not against it." I happen to think that a large group of people, with some of them apparently yelling (I wasn't there), is no way to handle a dispute, but that isn't, in my view, what your letter is addressing. Some people who seem to suffer from a lack of reading comprehension seem to think that your letter should be held accountable for every single minute detail in this lengthy discussion. I, for one, appreciate that you have added context and depth, whereas the previous letter, although perhaps correct in opposing some of the actions of the larger group, was full of inaccuracies and contextual ommissions. Thanks again.

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 2:29pm

From what I've heard, this wasn't even a black bloc action. Some people were wearing masks and some were in black.

also, one cannot just "reproduce" state violence. Thats offensive. Did they bomb Francis as a part of this process? What about white phosphorous? "state violence" is a very particular thing that a group of kids, no matter how committed, just cannot reproduce.

All violence is not statist (not to say that this action was violent.)
The state also uses mediation tools to solve disputes like with the NLRB. Does that mean that all mediation is statist? Of course not. they also use cars to transport their representatives. does that mean that anyone who uses a car is "using the masters tools" so to speak?

From what ive heard, Francis wouldn't let go of chelsie's arm from in between the door jamb and the mostly closed door and she was afraid that he was going to break her arm. That sounds violent.

Clearly there aren't very obvious right and wrong sides on this issue. some of these comments are horrendous, though.

I want to know why V and Chelsie didnt call the members of there community to mediate this if those mediation skills were really so readily available.

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 2:05pm

 As a personal witness of this situation, I would like to state that on multiple occasions I witnessed Francis, in a late night rage, open the fridge and nibble on a roommate's leftovers - once taking three big (meaning mouth-entirely-wide-open) bites into the half of an El Myr burrito.  And he wasn't even on the lease.  Additionally, cardboard rolls of toilet paper were left on the spool.  Starting a fund has been discussed for Francis and his crazed behavior, which can no longer be tolerated in renting situations, and needs to be addressed publicly.

 

Sincerely,

Francis

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 12:37pm

i was there that night.  there are a few things wrong with this statement.

if you're uncomfortable bringing a domestic dispute into the public sphere, you should probably be uncomfortable with discussing what you believe to be one individual's mental health issues with everyone who happens upon this forum.  also, you brought this domestic dispute into the public sphere when you called thirty people to your house to participate.  the incident seemed like entertainment for the group that showed up that night.

apart from that, this letter completely misses the point.  the people who showed up to help Francis did so because it was there was a threatening mob of people who broke into his house and were taking action against him without any understanding of the charges against him.  we did not show up because he is queer, or because he is white, or because he is a man.  yes, i would have shown up for a straight cis-man if a mob of people had come into his house and he felt (understandably) that he was in danger.  think about it.  a mob of 30 people breaking into your house to come after you is fucking scary.  

the incident that night would have been inappropriate no matter what the circumstances might have been.  mob violence results inevitably in violence against innocent people and excessive penalties for the guilty.  it plays on collective emotions and groupthink.  it is not a fair or just way to handle any dispute.

as for the claim that your fellow "comrades" excluded you or lacked consideration for you - that is absurd.  inclusion and fair consideration were our goals when we showed up that night and asked again and again to talk about what was going on.  i myself spoke with you and Vee, got your complete side of the story to make sure i was well informed, and attempted a calm discussion that would not feel like an attack on anyone.  this was a kindness never extended and furthermore rejected repeatedly by the group of people called to action against Francis.

forget the dichotomy of queers v. anarchists or queers v. you and Vee.  i personally don't this that we need to politicize the incident as an attack against all queer people everywhere.  what happened, plain and simple, was a sloppy execution of a violent and potentially very dangerous tactic in lieu of dialogue and mediation.

the fact is,  you two built a wall of 20-30 ill-informed "anarchists" between yourselves and the people who showed up that night.  don't put that blame on us.

 

-Jessie Calmes

 

 

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 11:16am

"Second, while V appears masculine, he is currently female-bodied, and his aggressor, be it by hormone therapy, is male. Both aggressor and victim identify as men, but only the aggressor had the upper hand of physical masculinity, and abused it to apply violence."

 

Does taking T mean that you now have super human strength?

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 11:04am

This response, while admirable, continues to solidify everything that is wrong with blac bloc policies. Where was this dialogue when you called your mob in V? Chelsee? Why could you not talk like this when it was all going down? Instead you brought in a possee to exact vigilante justice against someone who you disagreed with.

This is wrong. You cannot resolve disputes by calling in the man-archist calvary. If u have a fight, legitimate concern, then you bring in mediators.  Violence does not condone violence. The initial letter was not about disempowering your perspective, it was about explaining how others experienced violence because of your foolhardy need to use blac bloc tactics. If you come from a place of defensiveness you'll never understand how your violence creates oppression. You, while being queer bodied people, use the tools of the state against your comrades. Think about that. YOU ARE WRONG.

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 1:29am

Wow, thank you so much for posting this, Chelsie. This really does clear some things up.

I'm sorry the two of you continue to feel excluded by the community you expected to understand your circumstances.

It still seems like something needs to be rectified, something you readily admit, and this letter certainly adds a lot of much needed context.

Re: Re: A Black Bloc Gone Wrong

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 12:06am

this letter does nothing but prove that you all did not grasp the message of the original article. the point is not to deligitimize your experiences and histories, but rather to address black bloc as a tactic of intervention of disputes (as ineffective and dangerous). justifying your choice of how your responded doesn't do you any good because it simply proves that you are not holding yourself accountable for your actions and behavior.

and yes, this was a dispute between three members of the queer community, which is why people who are NOT part of that community should not have been there and should not have been called (when indeed more than half of those in attendance later admitted that they knew nothing of the situation or did not know your or V well enough to have an assessment on it).

seems like you both still have a lot of learning to do.