🧵The issue with “bystander” effect
Just lately, it feels as though every initiative violence against women centres its intervention with active bystander training.
Got an issue with racism? Bystander training.
Got an issue with sexual harassment? Bystander training.
Just lately, it feels as though every initiative violence against women centres its intervention with active bystander training.
Got an issue with racism? Bystander training.
Got an issue with sexual harassment? Bystander training.
Don’t get me wrong - active bystander training has its place. I cover it briefly in my training too.
It usually focuses on arming individuals with the tools to step in + disrupt situations with a range of resources e.g. the “4 Ds” - “direct”, “distract”, “delay” and “delegate”
It usually focuses on arming individuals with the tools to step in + disrupt situations with a range of resources e.g. the “4 Ds” - “direct”, “distract”, “delay” and “delegate”
We also see it being used in professional training to improve cultures where sexism and racism are an issue. Again, the focus is on speaking up when people see harmful behaviour.
And here is the very problem.
And here is the very problem.
In my experience, and as we now see from @Casey_Review, about the Met, the people we are trying to encourage to step in don’t actually have a good grasp on:
1) what racism and sexism is
2) its impact on those experiencing it
1) what racism and sexism is
2) its impact on those experiencing it
Bystander training makes a HUGE assumption that those taking part have a collective set of values and opinions about what is and isn’t acceptable.
Let’s not forget the patently obvious fact that an organisation of 70% white men are naturally not going to have LIVED EXPERIENCE of either racism or sexism.
Yet, we start from a baseline of assuming everyone is on the same page - ideologically, politically and morally.
Yet, we start from a baseline of assuming everyone is on the same page - ideologically, politically and morally.
And THAT is a dangerous assumption to make.
My research has shown already that the ideological resistance to anti-racist and anti-sexist work is the MAIN objection. At the core, is a group who:
a) don’t want to be told what to do
b) dispute a need for such work
My research has shown already that the ideological resistance to anti-racist and anti-sexist work is the MAIN objection. At the core, is a group who:
a) don’t want to be told what to do
b) dispute a need for such work
Such objections to my work include:
“Women do this too”
“Women just report more”
“It’s just banter”
“This is demonising men”
Which clearly shows an ideological objection to challenging VAWG
“Women do this too”
“Women just report more”
“It’s just banter”
“This is demonising men”
Which clearly shows an ideological objection to challenging VAWG
Unless we educate people FIRST on rape culture and the continuum of violence towards girls and women, until we illustrate the harm it creates, the impact on women; until we teach men WHY to be that active bystander, it will fail.
If individuals can’t recognise the wrong behaviour; if we can’t agree what is and isn’t sexism and misogyny; if it is so institutionalised that it is the norm, they won’t recognise it as anything to be disruptive.
Moving towards an agreement on this isn’t going to be solved by active bystander training. It’s going to take cultural change, a shift in attitude and that can only be achieved by relating it to real, lived experiences of women.
1) UNDERSTAND IT
2) NAME IT
3) STOP IT
You simply can’t jump straight to number 3.
#activebystander #vawg #sexism
2) NAME IT
3) STOP IT
You simply can’t jump straight to number 3.
#activebystander #vawg #sexism
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
