Sven Slootweg (soft-deprecated) @joepie91@pixie.town

Several years ago, at Congress I ended up in a conversation with a bunch of other people, who were comfortable throwing around some pretty problematic beliefs and claims.

You probably know the type; not quite *overtly* bigoted, but the kind of misinformation and problematic framing that's so common from people with one foot in the alt-right sphere.

There was not a trace of discomfort or hesitance in expressing these views. Concerns about them being problematic were laughed away. Reframed as a 'difference in opinion'.

So it does not surprise me to see COVID denier rhetoric and disguised ableism floating around in CCC/orga circles.

There are plenty of great people in the CCC scene, to be clear. But there has also always been a problem of shitty views not being pushed back on enough, and being excused away as "that's just how they are".

And this rarely stays confined to one topic - if shitty views are being expressed about trans folks or migrants, the ableist views usually aren't far removed.

(This is just one specific incident I'm describing, but it hasn't been the only one - and even for that one incident, the comfort in which it occurred is an early warning sign of more systemic issues.)

"Just wear a mask if you're vulnerable!"

Even leaving aside that air should be filtered at the input *and* output for most effectiveness (ie. everyone should wear a mask, not just vulnerable people)... and that this is an extremely patronizing comment (do you think we don't already know this??)...

Do you realize that being the only one in a crowd to wear a mask today gets you *actively harassed*? It's been two days since this last happened to me. It's also been two days since I last went somewhere.

"Just wear a mask to protect yourself" is not a genuine reply. It's a cop-out, a cheap attempt to shift off your part of the responsibility to vulnerable people because you can't be bothered to tolerate even the slightest of inconveniences to keep other people safe.

"They might still announce measures in the next few months!"

That is functionally equivalent to not doing so. *Especially* vulnerable people often really need the time to plan and prepare for events, so if you don't specify the safety measures ahead of time, that means they must assume there will be none, and therefore cannot come.

Safety measures should be near the top of the priority list, not a "maybe we'll get around to it eventually".

#37c3

"If we required COVID safety measures, we would lose a bunch of volunteers that we need to make the event happen"

You know how you'll also lose your volunteers? By infecting them with a highly contagious disease that can lead to death or chronic disability, and amplify the negative effects of existing disabilities

#37c3

I really don't like this overly deliberating style that a lot of anarchist literature is written in - it reads like it's just trying to sound smart, and just *assumes* that you are already interested and along for the ride.

IMO a much better writing style for activist/political things is one that actively tries to draw the reader in, catch their interest even if they didn't have it before.

If you're about to tell someone "I don't see why, but <opinion>", then STOP. Take a step back. Ask yourself why you feel qualified to cast an opinion about something you've *just* indicated you don't understand (yet), and what it is going to add to the conversation.

Chances are that you will either
a) talk over someone who *does* understand it,
b) exhaust the people who have to deal with this topic every day, or
c) spread misinformation and gut feelings as fact.

Especially the 'default dudes' (ie. those who are many/all of cis, white, male, abled, and well-paid) need to watch this more closely, since you're especially likely to be just *assuming* that your opinion will add value to the conversation.