Taking Liberties: Sexual Misconduct and Abuse of Power in the age of #metoo

Taking Liberties: Sexual Misconduct and Abuse of Power in the age of #metoo


I want to thank you
all for coming out. We have a very
distinguished panel. A wonderful moderator here for
this evening’s conversation. My name is Firmin DeBrabander. I am the organizer here on
the MICA side of things. In a minute I’m
going to hand it off to the Director of
the ACLU of Maryland who is our co-sponsor
for this event. But before that
happens, I’m going to introduce Abby and Maddie
to talk about an event upcoming here at MICA. [APPLAUSE] Good evening, everyone. So my name is Abby Neyenhouse. I am the Director of the new
Center for Creative Citizenship here at MICA, and we are really
excited for all of our Voter Access Initiative
activities that we have planned for this semester. Our new center is really
going to be focusing on community engagement
in Baltimore and beyond, with civic action. So we’re going to
be working on a lot of different events coming up. But I want to introduce
you to Maddie Wolfe, who is one of our amazing
student leaders, to talk about what
they’re working on. Hello. So I’m really just doing– OK, so I’m the president of the
MICA Political Engagement Club, which is a student
org on campus. Yes, it’s a great time. Come to our meetings, Fridays
4:15 PM, starting next Friday. [LAUGHTER] Anyways, Fox 210. [LAUGHING] But actually, though,
right now what we’re doing is we have two amazing volunteers–
voting coordinators Nick and [INAUDIBLE],, who
are going to be– they were here
earlier today and they will continue to be there
after this ends in the lobby. And they will help you
get registered to vote. They can help you with
getting absentee ballots, getting notifications about
everything that you need. If you have any qualms
about, oh no, voting. What am I going to do? They can help you. They’re amazing. Yeah, so thank you so much. [APPLAUSE] So I wanted to make
sure that Maddie came up to speak about the
Political Engagement Club. Because really,
Maddie has been one of the leaders of bringing this
to the MICA campus community. So kudos to Maddie in really
pushing for us to be more engaged with our Voter
Access Initiative. So I want to plug really
quickly our upcoming amazing celebration. We are participating in the
National Voter Registration Day this coming
Tuesday, September 25. It’s going to be an amazing
party and celebration of all things voting. It’s a great place for people to
get registered to vote and sign on to our TurboVote platform
so you can be notified of all of the upcoming elections,
regardless of what state you’re voting in. And so come visit
us at Cohen Plaza. We’ll have a satellite
location in Lazarus. But we’re going to be having
a photo booth and pizza, and just really
trying to get everyone to remember to vote for the
midterm election coming up on November 6. So thank you all very much. [APPLAUSE] Good evening, and welcome. Welcome to tonight’s important
discussion about women’s rights in the age of gender
inequity, #MeToo, and Trump. Or as I like to call
him affectionately, 45. The ACLU of Maryland is
dedicated to gender justice. For us, this means working
toward a state where women and girls
have equal access to employment, to
health, to housing, and reproductive freedom. Tonight’s discussion
will be intersectional, tying together threads that
impact the rights of women– all women. Indigenous women, black
women, Latinos, Asian, and biracial women, lesbian
and transgender women, immigrant women, and
so many more of us. Women in our country
move through their lives with different identities. These identities can impact
how women experience issues of sexual harassment
and how they are impacted by sexualized
government oppression. From limits to their
freedom to abortion to restrictions on their
access to menstrual products while they’re in
prison, under Trump, threats to women’s
rights have increased. His pattern of
degrading women sets a low bar for the treatment
of women across the country. The movement to defund Planned
Parenthood has gained steam and continuing,
sadly, black girls are being pushed out
of schools and right into the justice system
at a much higher rate than white girls of the
same situation because of zero-tolerance policies. And we’re increasingly
seeing judicial threats to abortion access. On the local level, all of us– myself, you, our participants– and as we learned
from Maddie and Abby, we have the opportunity to
make a real difference on these and so many other issues. Key decisions are made at
the state and local levels. If I weren’t already registered
and if I were a student here at MICA, I would definitely
be showing up on the 25th to register again and
get whatever treats Maddie’s handing out. And the decisions that we made
at the state and local level have a national impact. Be sure you registered
to vote in Maryland. College students, as
you’ve already heard, can register and make an impact. You have the power to
demand that the candidates for public office commit
to protect our democracy, end discrimination,
and expand our rights. I’ll end with a
quote from a national but particularly, a Maryland
shero, Harry Tubman, who reminds us that we
must always keep focused. As she said, “Every great
dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have
the power within you– the strength, the patience, the
passion to reach for the stars and change the world.” Thank you so much, and thank you
for your support this evening. I’ll turn it over
to our moderator. [APPLAUSE] Good evening. We have a great panel, and
we’re going to get to it. But we, like many women,
once we had a job, began to add more to it. And so in addition to
their individual insights and when we talked before, they
wanted to make it very clear that by the end of the
evening, you understood that you had a role to play. And so as you listen
to their presentations, notice that they are speaking
from a very specific location and bringing the insights that
come with that to the work. And it is work. You will also notice
that nobody has a job without a dash to another job. So I’m going to introduce them. You have their full
bios in your program, so I won’t go over that. But first we have Kalima Young,
who is a filmmaker, a scholar, activist, soon to be Dr.
[LAUGHING] Kalima Young– [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] –who is already lecturing
at Towson University. And she used to
work here at MICA, if she seems
familiar, a while ago. Monica Ramirez is
an attorney and also the head of a nonprofit
organization, the Alianza Nacional de Campesinas. And I don’t know if you
need an introduction to Carolee Schneemann. She is a artist,
activist, wise woman. So first, Kalima Young. What will happen is that
they will all speak and have images for about 10 minutes. Then we will begin
a conversation that will include you. [APPLAUSE] Thank you. Hello, everybody. How you doing? Good. Good. Yay. Welcome to Constitution Day. I’ll try not to bore you. [LAUGHING] I would like to
begin with a story. In October 2015, a
viral video emerged of a 14-year-old,
Dajerria Becton, being forcibly restrained
by police officer Eric Casebolt in what now is commonly
described as the McKinney, Texas pool party incident. Fox News’ correspondent
Megyn Kelly proclaimed Dajerria
Becton was no saint. Kelly’s statement exemplifies
mass media’s inability to read the Casebolt
assault of Becton as gender-based violence. Noting Becton did not follow
the officer’s warnings, Kelly continued– “I’m sure he didn’t know
she was 14 at the time.” I’m not going to show the
video of this incident due to its violent nature. So to place this
in visual context, Dajerria Becton is
a black 14-year-old with long brown hair
and a thin build. In the cell phone
footage, she was wearing a bright orange and
red two-piece bathing suit. She wore no shoes. She was armed only with
her skin, her voice, and her indignation. In contrast, Eric
Casebolt, 41 years old, is a heavyset white
male police officer clad in a black police uniform. He was armed with a
service revolver, a utility belt with handcuffs,
and the authority to arrest, restrain,
and wound those on site. In the cell phone
footage, Becton is seen walking away after
exchanging words with Casebolt. Within three minutes after
their exchange of words, Casebolt forcibly grabbed
Becton by the arm and hair and threw her to the ground. Becton cried for her mother. Casebolt forced her
face into the grass and kneeled on her exposed back. Analysis of the citizen
witness’ cellular phone footage elicited several
reactions from me. The first reaction
was indignation. Then, despite already knowing
the outcome of the situation, I felt abject fear for
what would happen next. This feeling was followed by the
recognition of how intimately and violently entwined
Casebolt and Becton’s bodies appeared in the frame. I read this assault as
gender-based violence. Few, if any, media
outlets framed it as such. Gender-based violence
refers to violence that is directed at
an individual based on his or her biological sex,
gender identity, or perceived adherence to socially
defined norms of masculinity and femininity. It includes physical, sexual,
and psychological abuse, threats, coercion, arbitrary
deprivation of liberty, and economic deprivation,
whether occurring in public or in private life. What I would like for
us to focus on tonight is the way gender-based
violence is problematically read and received
in public discourse. There are a host of entry
points to this discussion, so I would like to present
three frameworks that contribute to our
problematic reading of gender-based violence. And in my research,
I’ve identified that language, multiplicity,
and empty empathy read help to obscure
the way that we should read what is happening. So language. Language reflects
culture, and our language reflects a culture that
does not acknowledge gender-based violence. Take, for example, the
phrases “locker room talk” or “rough horseplay.” For Trump and
countless other men, the locker room is the place
where boys can be boys. Their version of
masculinity depends on swagger and aggression,
regardless of who is hurt. This week on CNN,
Carrie Severino, a lawyer for the Judicial
Crisis Network, a group that’s backing Brett Kavanaugh,
said Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations could describe
a whole range of conduct, from boorishness
to rough horseplay, to actual attempted rape. Why are these
phrases problematic? Well, dismissing
violence as play contributes to rape culture,
a climate in which survivors are discouraged
from coming forward and their experiences are
discounted or disbelieved. Teasing out the differences
between the New York Times expose on Harvey Weinstein by
Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey and the expose by Ronan
Farrow for The New Yorker, Constance Grady
suggests, “The vocabulary we have for
gender-based violence tends to be either clinical but
vague or graphic but specific.” It’s hard to talk about sexual
violence without trivializing it, obfuscating the
systems that enable it, or spectacularizing it. The less specific the
language, the more invisible the violence. Example– “He touched
her genitals.” The more specific the
language, the more sensationalized the
language can appear. “He grabbed her genitals.” A survivor reading that
could easily be triggered. Imagine reading the
second, or hearing that second phrase
repeated continually for the last two years. Many of us– many of
us survivors have. The question becomes, how do we
write, research, and create art about gender-based violence in
a way that captures the weight without creating more harm? The second thing I’ve
identified is multiplicity. #MeToo was the culmination
of decades of advocacy. The wave of #MeToo allegations
in the last year and a half, and the varying rigor with
which they’ve been reported, have prompted discourse
about the lines between date rape and bad
sex, between emotional abuse and megalomania. These conversations
are difficult, but they ultimately
strengthen the movement instead of diminishing it. While the conversations
we are having can leave us with more questions
than answers, it still makes us think
more about our behaviors and previously accepted
power dynamics, not less. Gender-based violence
happens to a broad swath of the population. Depending on where
you’re situated, the backlash is
fast and furious. When Terry Crews added his
voice to the #MeToo movement, he was immediately
criticized by other black men like 50 Cent, who
dismissed the ability to claim victimhood status. Shouldn’t it be the job
of cultural producers– the artists, the
thinkers, the activists– to readily create the
containers where a multiplicity of engagements can occur? One of the ways we must
broaden this discussion is by being able to better
recognize the call out, and call out the tactics of
those who have been accused. DARVO refers to a
reaction perpetuators may display in response
to being held accountable for their behavior. DARVO stands for deny,
attack, and reverse victim and offender. The offender may
deny the behavior, attack the individual
doing the confronting, and reverse the roles
of victim and offender such that the offender
assumes the victim role and turns the actual
victim or whistleblower into an alleged offender. We’ve been seeing this happen
readily for the last two years. This occurs, for instance,
when a guilty perpetrator assumes the role of the
falsely accused and attacks the accuser’s
credibility and blames the accuser of being
the perpetrator of a false accusation. So then the question
becomes, how do we allow space for a
multiplicity of stories? And what methods can we
use as cultural producers to call these faulty
rebuttals to question? Finally, the third
thing I’ve identified that I’d like us to
engage with today is the idea of empty empathy. Let’s go back to the misreading
of Dajerria Becton’s assault by Eric Casebolt. We
misread this narrative because we live in a
society of spectacle where media consumption,
media convergence, and the primacy of visual
communication intersect. We make what we see,
we believe what we see, and truth is overshadowed by
dominant media narratives. In The Suffering Will
Not Be Televised, Rebecca Wanzo traces the
invisibility of black women’s suffering to illustrate the way
black women’s pain, wounding, and death have been excluded
from media narratives about social violence
and victimization. Black women have been
denied the ability to tap into what Wanzo
calls sentimental political storytelling– the narrativization of
sympathy for the purposes of political mobilization. Sentimental stories are texts
that represent history, events, people, and/or conflicts in
simplistic emotional binaries. They are designed to produce
tears of joy and wistfulness in the consumer and represent
the emotion in a way that’s far from the complexity of
how affect works in reality. So black women, even
young black girls, are not afforded the
purity of victimhood that garners sentimental
readings of their pain. Sometimes the
sentimental can be used to push for justice and for
the formation of new campaigns, like Say Her Name. But sometimes
sentimental narratives lead to an overabundance of
cartoon villains, cartoon victims, cartoon justice,
and empty empathy. [APPLAUSE] Oh. Right on. Yeah. OK. [LAUGHING] Empty empathy occurs
when we are invited to empathize with individuals
who experience trauma without being
provided the larger context for the existence
of their trauma. We get empathy that’s empty. In a society of
spectacle, we tend to read stories of gender-based
violence as singular episodes rather than evidence
of systemic oppression. But context matters
now more than ever. So the final question I
want us to think about is, how can artists,
thinkers, and activists make work that provides
sociohistorical context for gender-based violence? We are desperate
and it is needed. Thank you. [APPLAUSE AND CHEERING] Thank you, my sister. Thank you, Kalima. Yes. You’re very welcome. Wow. Let’s give her another
round of applause. [APPLAUSE AND CHEERING] Thank you. So my name is Monica
Ramirez and I’m the co-founder of Alianza
Nacional de Campesinas, which is the first and only
National Farmworker women’s organization. And for me, whenever
I speak in any place where I’m speaking
across the country, it’s really important
to make sure that I bring into the
space farmworker women– the women who I serve and
the women from whom I come. I come from a migrant
farmworker family, and my family used to
travel around the United States picking the fruits
and vegetables that we eat, just like the 700,000 farmworker
women across this country continue to do every day. And what we know about the
existence and experiences of farmworkers in this country,
and the farmworker women specifically, is that
many of the problems that farmworker women
faced years ago, when my grandmother
worked in the field, when my mother worked in the field– those problems still continue. And part of the reason that
those problems continue is because farmworkers
have been largely excluded from the legal protections
that exist in this country. And when we think about the
exclusion of protections for individuals like the women
who you see on the slide, we have to ask why. Why are some workers
valued enough to be protected by the
law and other workers not? For example,
farmworkers still today aren’t covered to receive
overtime in this country. Farmworker women who
are living and working in areas where they’re
producing on small farms aren’t protected if
they’re the victims of sexual violence at work. If they work in a place that
has fewer than 15 employees, like many other workers
who work in small places, there’s no protection
under the federal law for individuals who experience
that harm against them. There’s still today
young children, as of the age of 12, working
in the fields legally. Farmworkers in this nation
are the youngest child workers in our country. Why is that? There are children
who are working in the fields
alongside their parents and still today being sprayed
with toxic chemicals, being forced to work under
dangerous conditions, and not being given the
implements that they need to be able to work safely– to eat the food that we eat. And so if you’re a worker,
like the workers who I’ve represented
around the country, and you have fewer
legal protections, fewer rights under the
laws of this country, what expectation of care can
you expect in your workplace? What expectation of respect
and being treated with dignity can you expect in
your workplace? And what I know, and what
many women across this country know who work in the fields, is
that their suffering is great. And their suffering
is continuing. And every day, we consume. And probably very
few times do we think about the
suffering of those who bring the food to our tables. I’m proud to be part
of a movement that’s fighting for individuals
across our country like farmworker
women who deserve rights and protections– whose work is dignified,
whose work is valued, whose work deserves
the same protections as any other worker. There are 90% of
farmworker women who’ve been interviewed
as a part of a poll on the extent of
sexual harassment who indicated that
sexual harassment was a major problem for them. In 2014, another study
was done and eight out of 10 women who
participated in that study said that sexual harassment
was a major problem for them. Sexual harassment is so
rampant in the fields across our country
that the fields have been called the “fields of
panties” and the “green motel.” And farmworker women
talk about the fact that sexual harassment
and violence against them is so common that
they thought it to be a term and condition
of their employment. Whose bodies deserve protection? There are individuals who
employ these women who believe that the
women themselves, not just their labor, but the
women themselves belong to them and that they can be treated
however they want to. And they’re validated
in some ways, because they’re not provided
with the legal protections as every other worker
across our country. And we as a movement, now
for more than three decades, have been fighting
for the dignity and rights of farmworker women. And farmworker women have been
rising up without protections, without money, without
resources to say that our lives matter too. Our bodies belong to us. We deserve safety,
we deserve care, and we don’t want the violence
that we’ve experienced to happen to anyone else. And so we’ve marched,
and we’ve brought cases, and we’ve brought
complaints, and we’ve pushed for changes in the law. And every single woman
who I’ve ever represented talks to me about the fact that
the justice they are seeking is not justice for themselves. The justice that
they’re seeking is justice for all of those
who work with them– for their daughters
and for all of those who will come after them. Farmworker women earn
$11,000 on average a year. More than half of the
farmworkers in this nation are undocumented. Coming forward, marching,
bringing cases, bringing complaints– there are real risks for those
women who are speaking out. But they’re bravely
speaking out, because they know that
their bodies are theirs and the harm against
them is wrong. And they too deserve justice. In our movement, we’ve not
only fought for the rights of farmworker women. We’ve fought for the rights
of other women workers as well, because we know that no
one deserves to be victimized– not in the workplace, not in the
home, and not in the community. And so we’ve been organizing
with other women workers too, like hotel
workers and janitors. And most recently we came into,
I guess, the public spotlight because I wrote a letter that
is now referred to as the “Dear Sisters” letter. The letter was published
in Time magazine last November after Tarana
Burke inspired the world to speak out about the violence
that people were suffering. And women in the
entertainment industry began to talk about the
harm that they suffered. And farmworker women
decided that we should stand with the
women in entertainment and we should speak
out on their behalf, because we didn’t want
them to be silenced and we didn’t want
them to be harmed. And so this letter was
published in Time magazine that went viral and sparked
what is today known as the Time’s Up movement. And as a result of that letter
and as a result of this Time’s Up movement, we’re in
a very different place than we were a year ago. And the reason that we’re
in a very different place than we were a
year ago is we have some of the least-visible
women workers in this country and some of the
most-visible women workers in this country who have come
together in solidarity to say that no one deserves to be
victimized and that all of us deserve equality. We all deserve safe
workplaces, and we all deserve to be in conditions
where we can thrive. And that has been an
extremely monumental victory in my opinion, to see women
workers across the nation in all sectors– tech, law, hospitality–
you name the industry and you have seen women
rising around the country to say this isn’t OK. It’s happening to us and it
isn’t OK and we stand with you and you stand for us. And so today, part of
what I want to talk about is, how do we
leverage the momentum that we’ve seen growing
over the past year? How do we take this
movement moment that we have all witnessed
unfold and turn that into lasting change? How do we ensure that there
is in fact culture shift? And how do we,
those of us who work in different disciplines, those
of us who have different skills and talents– how do we bring our
skills and talents to bear as artivists, as
lawyers, as social workers, as counselors, as organizers? How are we collectively
using those talents to change the world for
the better for all of us? It’s a question, but
it’s also a challenge. Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Oh, I’ll take that one. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. OK. Uh, now they’re going away. You’re good. OK. Hello. I’m Carolee Schneemann
and I’m honored to be participating with this
remarkable, transgressive, transformative group
of activist women. It’s a great privilege for me
as an activist artist working in the thresholds of the fragile
and persistent issues of being a creative and solitary worker. I’m going to just
show images that indicate the position
and the resistance that I encountered
originally as a painter, being told that I
had no authority. And as a young girl,
I was anomalous trying to insist on being available
to cultural history. There was no possibility that
I could ever influence it or be transformative to it. I was conceived
here in Baltimore, and I think that’s funny,
because here we all are. My dad was a medical
student on fellowship and my mom had just
graduated from high school and was pregnant. And there are photographs
of her looking utterly pitiful in a nurse’s uniform
that my dad dressed her in so that they could
continue to live together. So while I have this
very countrified, radical medical environment to grow
up in with my first really interesting book
being Gray’s Anatomy that I was welcome
to pursue, I was not permitted to go to college. That was not useful
for a young woman. By the time I got
to New York City with a series of
miracles that enabled me to go to college with a
full scholarship, room, board, tuition, and I began working
against the conventions of physicality that
I had inherited. As a kid, I was
always bewildered by the possessiveness of
men on their wife’s tummy. Like young pregnant women and
the men that I watched them. They would come and pat the
stomach like, it’s mine. It’s mine. And growing up in the
countryside, my first boyfriend Bert patted my skirt on the
bus and said, “When we grow up, will you breed my babies?” I said, oh, crap. I’m supposed to be
a kind of a cow. And yes, that was the
intention in keeping me from self-determination. So these images are all
about self-determination. I’m taking the issue of the
history of representation of the female nude and
its obsessive persistence in Western culture and
proposing for myself a sequence of
photographic events in which I integrate my body
as part of my own painting constructions. It’s called Eye Body. It’s 1963. It’s a sequence of 36 images
in which I am entranced. It’s not posing. I am moving with
all the materials that surround me that
I’m building with. The paradox will
be that the nude is going to dominate
the constructed work. I never expect that. I think that I’m really going
to become an integrated form as image and image maker. But it will take 30 years before
viewers in the art world cups stop telling me,
this is just crap. If you want to paint, paint. The other area that
I want to address– purity in the ’60s as an
experiment is the lived erotic, and I have to say it’s hom– no. What is normative? Homonorma– what is it? Heteronormative. Yes, yes. It’s normative– sexual. Heteronormative. Hetero. Thank you. That’s it. It’s just so simple. Yeah. [LAUGHTER] But now it’s changing, so I
have to give a qualification. And I’m sorry. I always infuriate
my gay students, but that’s just how it was. But it was a brave attempt in
1964 to borrow [INAUDIBLE].. That’s a wind up
16-millimeter camera that only runs for 30 seconds. So the 30 seconds
would determine the capture of potential
erotic sublime imagery. I’m only showing one
image, and of course it’s a film of 20 minutes and
transformative erotic depiction that’s all about
pleasure and equity. Also at the time,
it was considered that it could only
be pornography or some kind of weird science. And certainly a young
woman had no right to presume that she could
collect and edit and present this as an aesthetic
and relational subject. And so Meat Joy in
1964 takes the work into another static
aspect of improvisation. And again, in the early days,
all my groups were not trained. They were writers, balloon
salesmen, my partner, the composer, James
Tenney, friends. And I wanted to create an
erotic activist theater arena that I called Kinetic
Theater that would eroticize my guilty culture. That was my thought,
and this work is Meat Joy, that has
very strict sequences. But I’m just showing one of the
pleasurable painterly climaxes. At the time, all
my participants are mixed gender and mixed race. That’s very bewildering
to the 1960s culture, but it’s a time of
incredible political violence in which we were able
to work together. The Vietnam War is what’s
going to preoccupy all my work subsequently after 1964. I collect images
of the destruction of the Vietnamese culture. Tenney and I hear
about it from a student at the University of Illinois
where we have fellowships– his in music, mine in painting. And we’ve never
heard of this place. And there’s a young
poet woman who says, well, Vietnam is where all your
military focus is right now, and you’re destroying
our culture. And then we think,
teach us what it’s like. We want your music. We want your theater. We want your agriculture. And I become completely obsessed
with this occluded militarism. And of course, the
occluded militarism which shapes and constructs
all our cultural experiences and social histories
right now sustains itself. It’s a, once again, obviously
a brutalist culture. We have gangsters running
us more overtly than usual, although they’re always there. So one of my next assaults
on conventional culture is a work called
Interior Scroll. It starts with a very simple
little drawing of a dream where I wake up and I draw
this image of a woman figure pulling a text of
information from her vagina and reading it as
interior knowledge. So the drawing remains in a
cigar box for quite a long time until I’m at a festival and
I’m invited to participate. And I say I really don’t have
anything I want to do here. I’m in a quiet moment. And then what I call the
monkey on your back says, remember that little image? If you bring it to life,
if you can enact it, it will have more meaning. Well, of course it’s considered
an absolute disgrace– an obscenity. And in the next– I lose a lot of teaching
jobs because of it. And also support from museums. There were trustees who are
interested in the photos and the painting
constructions, and curators are supporting the work. And there are trustees
who say, we’re not giving a penny
to this obscenity. This is not a real artist. This is a pornographer. But as many of you know,
Interior Scroll has prevailed. It’s in all these art journals
and books and lessons, and it’s been helpful
and inspiring to women to insist on the
integrity of our bodies and the integration of the
complexity of our experiences, erotically and
intellectually and socially. Now what? Oops. [INAUDIBLE] Is that where it stops? OK, that’s it for the imagery. But I’m constantly
researching male violence. I have to reposition
the degree of abuse that I encounter
with my students as a visiting
artist– as a teacher. There’s almost never a
teaching sequence of painting, of sculpture, of
performative principles where one of my students
isn’t brutally raped. And suddenly I have to
have an activist empathy. How do I reintegrate my group
of young men and young women? So that’s something that’s
possible with sensitizing the group and taking
absolutely the position of the abused student
and giving her permission to come back to class. And in some instances,
she’ll come back dressed in combat boots
with knives hanging on her belt and camouflage
outfits, completely defensive. In other instances, in the
University of Massachusetts, there’s another
unexpected violent rape. A guy crawls through
a window with a knife and assaults my student. In this instance,
I want the group that studying
performative principles to be able to help one another. And so we talk about
what’s possible, and I want the women
to feel that they can enact aggressions of their own. And I put out knives
and forks and paint and different material
and say, work together and consider what
you’d like to do with this to express and release
and codify this nightmare. And they astonish me. The women go off together
and they come back in with blankets. They come in with
a lot of blankets. And they ignore the weapons
and the tough material, and they wrap each other
up and they do a healing. The most tender healing,
rolling, and stroking, and napping, and holding
onto one another. So that takes me to
my current obsessions with studying racism,
reading incidents in the life of a slave girl. That amazing biography forbidden
to be written by Harriet. Lala, what’s her name? Anyone know it? [INAUDIBLE] Say it. No, Harriet Jacobs. Yes. Yes, Harriet Jacobs. Harriet Jacobs. She’s locked on top
of a shed for years, because she’s literate
and attractive, and can write and speak. She’s more endangered of
being beaten and subjected to abuse and violence,
which she manages this incredible history. And I require it
for all my students to understand where are we now. Why is this still the basis
of our detestation of labor? Labor is a force
field which capitalism has to control as
part of husbandry, as parts of female
potential for generation. And my worry now is that it
becomes more invisible due to the power of technology,
hiding and further bringing profit to the
detestation of labor. So the discussion will
continue from there. Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Thank you. Fabulous. So I don’t know– OK. Are the mics on? So the way the
questioning will happen– and if you could pull up
the house lights please? I’ll keep talking. You’ll be able see in a
minute that on either aisle there are stand mics,
and you can ask questions in two different ways. We’re not going to have someone
running around with the mics on. I can hear that this
one just came back on. You can line up on either
side to ask questions, or I just realized the
text number is not there. Is there a frame
with the text number? OK. So I have it here. It’s 443-991-0292. 443-991-0292, and the screen I’m
looking at– we’ll pull it up and we’ll read. I’ve been warned that I won’t
be able to read all of them– that there will be a storm of
texts, but we’ll get to as many as we can. And so for that reason, we’ll
try to get as many questions in as we can. Am I double-mic’d? Yes. I’m going to put this over
here so we don’t get feedback. That’s a different number. [LAUGHTER] Yes, I see that. Oh. It’s a different number. [LAUGHTER] OK, so use that. [LAUGHTER] All right. So while people are– can
we pull up some of the house lights so we don’t have people
stumbling in the aisles to get to the– thank you. Yay. Thanks. And while people
are coming, Caolee mentioned the word
authority and began to talk throughout the
talk about authority. So I would like the– we’ll call them younger
women, won’t we? The younger women to
talk about the authority with which you
spoke and where that comes from in a society
that still doesn’t give women often the authority
to take up space and to talk. Because one of the messages
that you said you wanted people to know is that
they have authority. So can you school
them on where– when did you know
you were fierce? [LAUGHTER] Hey, Monica. We need a little fierce. It’s evolving. I found my voice for the first
time when I was 14 years old. I’d come from a very small town,
and every summer farmworkers arrived in my town,
and fisherman. And one summer, there
was a pull-out section of the newspaper that said,
“Welcome back, fisherman.” And I wanted to know
why there wasn’t a “Welcome back, farmworker”
section of the newspaper. And so my dad, we’re not sure. So I rode my bike– because I come from
a very small place. I rode my bike down the
street to the newspaper and I asked why there wasn’t
a “Welcome back, farmworker” section of the newspaper. And from there, they
gave me the authority to start writing about
farmworkers in my little town. So I actually
started writing when I was 14 for area newspaper,
and I had my own beat. [LAUGHTER] It was called “The Voice of
the People,” which at 14, I’m not quite sure if I was
the voice of the people. [LAUGHTER AND APPLAUSE] Well, I say that
because that’s really when I started as an activist. But I actually think
that in the past year, I have really been coming
into my voice truly. And I was at a meeting recently
with some other activists, and we were talking about what
we’ve seen in the past year since the #MeToo
breakthrough moment happened and As our work
has been developing around this cross-sector
movement building. And what I said in the
meeting was what I really feel right now that relates to
this question of fierceness, which is why is it
that for so long we have been asking for changes? We’ve been asking
for better laws. We’ve been asking
for the opportunity to defend ourselves. And I feel like finally
we’re at this point in time where we’re just not
going to ask anymore. We’re going to tell. [APPLAUSE] And we’re going to do
everything that we can within our power to
actually make that happen. And we’re seeing that. We’re seeing more women
running for office. We’re seeing more people
walking out of places. We’re seeing more people come
forward to talk about some of the worst things
that ever happened to them in their lives. And it’s because I think
that we, and myself included, have finally reached a
point where we’ve said, we’ve done enough asking. And now we’re just
going to do it. And so I think it’s been
started when I was 14, but I think maybe now, I’m
a couple of years older, and I feel like now maybe I’m
coming into that voice truly. Mm, very good. My mom used to say that I came
out of the womb with my fist like this. [LAUGHTER] Yes. I was always calling
everything into question, ever since I was a little girl. But I remember distinctly
being very young. I think maybe
kindergarten or so. And actually paying
attention to gender power dynamics at an early age. Why were certain
boys allowed to play the drum in our little fake
drum thing that we did? You know, the triangle? Yeah. And how come the girls
had to get the triangle? Right? Which is not cool. [LAUGHTER] So I called that to question. And I’m like, this is not cool. And I went to my kindergarten
teacher, Ms. Buckley. I remember her. [LAUGHTER] And I was just
like, Ms. Buckley, how come I can’t have the drum? And she was just like, little
girls play the triangle, and they play the
little flute, and– I was like, nuh-uh. So I saw this dude. [LAUGHING] There was a young fella
in kindergarten, Eric. And he was always trying to
hang out with me, you know? He was always trying to
hang out, and near nap time, he wanted to be hanging
out in your nap time. [LAUGHTER] And I was just
like, Eric, I will let you hang out with me
at nap time for two days if I can have the drum. And he said, yeah. OK. And I got the drum, and I
let him hang out with me. You know, we had the
juice box situation. [LAUGHTER] But then after two days,
he wanted to hang out, and I’m just like, yo. It’s up. Time’s up. [LAUGHING] That’s right. The contract has ended. [LAUGHTER] So– and I tell that story,
and it’s a true story. I’m not joking. To say that growing up as
a young girl in a household with a single mother in
a home of single mothers who had men that came in and
out for various reasons– work, unsteady work,
sometimes incarceration– I found myself very early on
paying attention to the traumas that women were holding. And the dynamics
that were occurring, and the dynamics they
were passing down to us, or the lessons they were
trying to pass down to us about how to operate in the
world to keep ourselves safe. And so I really started
paying attention to those things
as a little girl. And what really prompted
me to actual activism actually wasn’t around
gendered violence. It was actually
around homelessness. I saw that there was this
whole entire burgeoning– a whole lot of homelessness,
lots of people without homes– when I was about
eight years old. And I went to my mom,
and I was just like, there are people who
don’t have places to live. What am I supposed to do? Ah! And her question was always,
well, go and look it up. She was always pushing
me to see the context. Find out why, and find
out what I can do. So I started looking it up
and trying to find out why, and what I could do. And I found out there
was this thing happening called Hands Across America. And I was like, oh, my goodness. I’ve got to sign our
entire apartment complex up to be a part of this. And that was my first
little activist-y campaign when I was eight. But it was really
because my mom said– and every time I came to her
since, when I was a child, she would say, “Look it up. If you don’t like it,
figure out something to do.” Yeah. Thanks. I have two questions
for Carolee. Yeah. First, do you think that we
have come any further in terms of our interpretation
of images of women from when you were working on– I’ll answer that before
the second question. Oh, do you want to answer the– Sure. OK. I thought– Well, given 1,000 years of
patriarchal suppression, we’ve come a long way. Simply changing the
conventions of language, when you had to be Mrs. or Miss. Remember what an outrage
people had about Ms.? That’s meaningless. How dare you? What are you trying to do? Bunch of stupid bitches. But we’re all Ms. now. So that was a major change. And of course, language
for me made me crazy once I was able to get
to libraries and study. Everything was masculine. The artist and his tools. The artist in his model. God and his wisdom. Everything was masculine. So my first basic
intellectual audacity was to take it all back
and make it all feminine. And I’d go through
museums, particularly in Egyptian and
African collections. When I got to the
Brooklyn Museum, I saw that they had
deformed every attribute that I saw was female– feminine. And probably– why not– created by women. So I established my
own radical art history and I maintain it now. And strangely enough, a lot of
it’s being supported finally. So the transformation in
the ’70s that admitted this incredible– first it was separatism. We had to get away
from the men we worked with– our collaborators. And that was really
painful in the ’70s and difficult,
because we thought we needed them to help
clarify our situation. And then we realized
we can’t do that. And it was harsh. We had to form our own
galleries, our own magazines, our own radical petitions,
and our own struggle within the suppressive
militaristic government. So, yes, here we are
discussing all of this. It’s great. Mm-hmm. Did you want to answer
the first question? I think you told us
the way you got– Was that the first one? Well, you– The second. It was the second,
but do you want to– I think you’ve already
talked about where your authority comes from. Do you want– Oh, the authority is
just something stubborn like you guys. [LAUGHTER] And it’s really
explicable, because what I learned was that– well, I like to
tell the story when I was painting in my bedroom,
and my mom had already told me I was not a proper daughter. And I’m the eldest. I was responsible for sharing
and taking care of everything that was her problem. And she was very
disappointed and perplexed. And she sent my dad
in to talk to me. And I was painting a watermelon. And my supportive,
interesting dad opened the door, looked at me,
and said, “Drop the brush!” So I got it. OK. The rest of my life
is going to be, you better fucking
drop the brush. You have no authority. But I take it. I’ll make it. I’m still holding the brush. [LAUGHTER AND APPLAUSE] So we’ve got people who have
been standing very patiently. Thank you. So we’ll start with you. [INAUDIBLE] Are the mics on? While they’re
doing that, can you check and see if yours is on? It is. OK. Oh, here we go. Hello. Hi. So my question actually is
directed towards Kalima Young. First of all, hey, TU. I graduated from
Towson, class 2016. Oh. [LAUGHING] Hi, girl. Mainly I want to direct
my question towards you because you actually
talked about gender. And I guess this #MeToo
movement is great, and I think that women’s voices
being uplifted is beautiful. But I feel like there’s
a certain population that is being left out, and
that’s trans women. And I feel like a lot of times
we put them in a description, and we say they’re
being included, but they’re not
actually visible. And I think what
sometimes needs to be said is, how do we get
cis women to understand that they have this
privilege of being cis women? To actually go and
bring these trans women into these conversations,
because trans women are being raped and murdered every day,
for literally just living in their authentic self. And so I feel like they,
to a certain extent, need to be told
that they’re allowed to be in this conversation,
because a lot of times every day, just living
their everyday life, they’re told that they can’t
be in that conversation. So I guess my question is
how do we get it out there? I don’t even know if
mainstream, or just locally, but letting them
know that they’re allowed to be in
this conversation and that they are seen as women. And I think that’s
where the downfall is of them being different. So it’s just
personally, I think, how do you get cis women to
understand their cis privilege? And bring these women
into this conversation so that their voices
can also be heard, and that they can be
uplifted and given the same rights as women. And then also give the equal
rights as men and everybody, so– yeah. Mm-hmm. That’s– wow. OK. [APPLAUSE] I think one of the most
important things we can always do is understand
our own locations when we’re in activism. So every activist, no matter
where you are located, needs to find out where
they’re socially located. What power they actually
have within themselves to do the work. So that’s the first thing. And then realize you
don’t have the power to answer everything
and address every issue. That means you need to go
outside of your neighborhood and outside of yourself to
find someone else to bring in their particular perspective. I think one of
the things that we have to do to broaden
the conversation is to not speak for other people. That’s right. So we create platforms
where everyone– one, we work with folks to
create the platforms. And then we allow people
to tell their own stories. And I think one of the
things that happens is that when we talk about
gender-based violence, when we talk about these
kinds of violences, we have the tendency to create
our own narrative around who those bodies are and
what those bodies are. And I think that it’s important
that if we are building a platform, that we build with
folks who are not situated in our same social location. Right? Mm-hmm. How we do that, I do not know. But I do know that cis
women with privilege do not have the authority to
speak about the experiences of trans women. That’s right. And that’s the first thing. We don’t own the narrative. We don’t have the
right to the narrative. So build your coalition with
the people you’re bringing in, and figure out where
you’re coming from. Other than that, I don’t– [APPLAUSE] I kind of don’t
know, because we’ve been trying to figure this out
for a really, really long time. Yeah. I’d like to speak of that as
well, because this is actually something we’ve talked a lot
about over the past nine months as it relates also
with Time’s Up. And I think that to your point
about building the coalition and figuring out who
you’re sharing space with, there have to be some
agreements about how you’re going to be doing the work. And so for example, when
the nine of us activists went to the Golden Globes,
that was an action. We didn’t just go
to a fancy party. That was a planned
action on the red carpet. And there was an
agreement that literally, the actresses who took
us to the Golden Globes– they were passing the mic. They passed the mic,
because the voices that needed to be heard at
that moment in time, they were not their voices. They were the voices of people
who represented communities like mine– the
farmworker community. But at the same
time, the agreement had to follow through
past that, right? And so for example, after
our letter went viral and after I went to
the Golden Globes, I was literally
getting media calls from all around the world. And it got to a point where I
stopped taking media requests, because there were
just too many, and I had a lot of
other work to do, and I couldn’t be talking
to the media all the time. So I started setting rules. And one of the
rules that I set was that I would not take an
interview if they did not agree to talk to other people. And I would tell them who they
needed to talk to as well. So it wasn’t enough
for them to interview me to hear about the experiences
of the farmworker women, but they had to speak
with other people. And that was a term
of the agreement in order to be able
to participate. And that isn’t part
of the conversation around, how do we
bring our trans sisters into the conversation too? And not, as you
say, speak for them? We are the only
experts on our lives. Exactly. And so if we have
other people who have learned about our lives
in some way talking for us, then that diminishes our voices. And also, we fail to
recognize the true strength and authority the
individuals hold about their own experiences. And so I think as activists,
it is our responsibility to make those agreements
to pass the mic. Whether we’re famous or
not, we have an obligation to pass the mic and not
speak on issues that don’t pertain to us specifically. [APPLAUSE] Yeah. I have a thought also. OK. Yeah. I have a more humble
proposition that deals with friends of
mine who have no platform and have no community
around them. And also for my
students who are just emerging with so many impulses
and not feeling that there is a realm open to them. And my sense of it
is that you don’t have to assume power at all. Do whatever small
thing is possible. If you can start a vegetable
garden in the corner plot, if you can help assist
the animal rescue shelter in your little
town, it can be very small when you begin. Because no one is reaching
out overtly to help us. Or we can see the
huge issues and it’s like trying to go to
Wilmington, North Carolina and help drowning
people when you’re sitting in your comfortable
chair looking out the window. So we have to try to do whatever
small thing is really available so that we’re not overwhelmed
with the impossibility of the structure around us. That’s it. And I think the message
is that little Kalima and Monica both said is that to
negotiate from your position. To pull in other
energy by negotiating. You both talked about that. And if little Kalima can
do it, we all can do it. [LAUGHTER] Yes. So first, thank you. It’s so beautiful and empowering
to see you on that stage– to see the different class
and all the different races. I just want to acknowledge that. So my question builds a little
bit on what sister was asking. So the feminist movement
was a white woman’s feminist movement, right? So what does feminism
look like now in 2018? And what’s the
role of white women in this idea of
intersectionality and feminism? And we also had
a text that asked about women of
color and their role right now in continuing
the movement. So if we could combine those
two, since they’re so similar? I have a lot of
thoughts about that one. [LAUGHTER] So first, I think that
we have to acknowledge that women of color
have been carrying these movements on our backs for
a long time with no resources. Yes. [APPLAUSE] Tarana Burke created
her movement in 2006. Our movement was created,
as I said, 30 years ago. And specifically
the work that we’ve been doing with Alianza
in 2011 with no resources. And there are other
groups like ours that have been
carrying this work. And so women of
color are leading. And women of color are helping
to shape these movements. And people sometimes say
to me, women of color are being left behind. And I say, no. The women of color
are actually the ones who are creating the
strategy behind some of the most important social
movements of our time. Mm-hmm. [APPLAUSE] So there’s that. The question about
feminism– it’s interesting because I think
for some women of color, we didn’t necessarily
consider ourselves feminists because we didn’t see ourselves
in the feminist movement. And so now when I’m
in spaces with people talking about how we’re
organizing or the issues that we’re working
on, we don’t actually use the terminology “feminism.” We talk about
women-led initiatives. Women’s power building. If you look at
the Women’s March, the Women’s March organizers
do not refer to the March as a feminist march. It’s a women’s-led march. And so I think that
there are still a lot of conversations that
have to be had about feminism and whether reframing feminism
to include women of color, and how we see our
leadership and how we see our role in this space– those are conversations
that need to happen. I also think, frankly,
that because sometimes in movement spaces,
it’s really hard to make space for new people. And so sometimes
people think about what was created 40
years ago or 50 years ago or however many years ago,
and that is the foundation and it can’t change. And so I think in
the movement space, we have to challenge
ourselves to be open to new ways of thinking,
to new leadership, and to redefining what was maybe
the principle at the beginning, but now looks very different. Because what we know
from women of color like myself and others– we didn’t see ourselves
in that movement. And if we have a
growing number of women of color in this
country, which we do, and if we really
believe that it is women who will change the
world, which we know, then we need to make sure that
the movements that are supposed to be supporting us and
representing us actually look like us and reflect
back the ideals that we hold. Mm-hmm. [APPLAUSE] I completely agree and totally– I totally agree. And I also want to add,
just as an addition, that when we have these
conversations about feminism and we have these conversations
about what the movement looks like, and in any activists
to social justice movement, that we begin to cite the women
and the work that we build on. I am so tired, just anecdotally,
of hearing the phrase “intersectionality” being
spoken by people who don’t understand the origin
story of that concept and how it’s changed. So I think one of
the ways that we can do better work as
women-lead organizations, women organizers, folks who are
organizing around gender, is to actually understand the
theories and the structures that were created, where
they come from, who said it. Don’t you quote Audre
Lorde out your mouth if you don’t know her
whole entire story. [LAUGHTER] Yeah. Don’t just randomly
throw out bell hooks and not know where bell
hooks was building off of. Yeah. Yeah. Right? Yeah. So I really– I don’t know. Is this the teacher in me
that’s all about context? I guess it is. OK. I’m learning. [INAUDIBLE] I think that if we’re going
to do this movement building, we need to not just understand
the surface of the theory that we are using. Understand its origin story. Understand where
it’s problematized and how it’s continuing
to be problematized. And cite people when
you do your work. Cite black women. Mm-hmm. That’s my bit. [APPLAUSE] My issue to support that
it’s our responsibility to teach this history– to not let it get swamped away. That black people build
this goddamn culture. And that has to be
part of our history. The University of Texas has
just taken away Cultural History of Feminist Studies. That’s a place where academics
go and fight for this and put all our muscle
in it, male or female. And we’ve got to establish
a truer history here. This is an
assassination culture, and we live in the privilege
of what survives it. Mm. So– [APPLAUSE] I’ve got to quote that. And just so people know
that they were heard, we had had a couple
of texts asking about the relationship
between theory and action, which I think you’re
beginning to dig into. If you wanted to add
any more about that– I think you just
demonstrated, all of you, how you’re moving through
theory and action, and I’ll use the word
exercise in practice. Yeah. So that people will feel
their questions are addressed. Did you want to add any more? Oh, I just wanted
to say that the two houses are the house of activism
and the house of theory. We like to make
this conversation that academia and
activism are separate, but we all know that
that’s not the case, right? And I think one of
the things that we have to address, especially
in spaces of academia, is the siloed nature
of those platforms, and the siloed nature of the
conversations that happen. And also in activist
circles, the siloed natures that happen
in activist circles. And one thing that I’ve
been thinking about a lot as an academic who likes
to do activist-y stuff is the privileges that I have
currently as an academic. So I have access to journals
that certain activists might need. Give out your email
and your password so that people can get the
journal entries that they need to do the activist-y building. You have a space here
on MICA’s campus. Use some of these rooms
and bring in activists and let them use
those resources. So to understand where we
have resources in academia that we can share and
get out of the silo, and that activists
have resources too. And they are not
mutually exclusive. Mm-hmm. I said I was going to call
on you two minutes ago. Yes. That was good. First of all, good evening. Very good presentation. Tomorrow is the national debut
of the movie Fahrenheit 11/9 with Michael Moore,
and he always does a very good job like
he did for Fahrenheit 9/11. So a two-part question. Do you plan to see the film? Unless you always
saw it in preview. And number two, if you have the
opportunity, if you so choose and if you’re able to, to meet
the current First Lady, what message can you pass
on to her to tell her or to pass on to somebody
else that the blue wave revolution is coming
on November 6 of 2016? Thank you. Wow. You mean besides run? You know– [LAUGHING] [LAUGHTER] I’m sorry about that. I’m supposed to be
moderating here. So, do you have any words for– Oh no. I’ll plead the fifth. [LAUGHTER] Four, five, the fifth. [INAUDIBLE] I’d like to see the movie. [LAUGHTER] Well, and Michael
Moore has talked about how he’s unleashing
humor in this era. And so that’s an
important vehicle. Yes. OK, so I have a question
and I want to partially answer the question
too, even though I want to know your response
first, if that makes sense. So I’m very challenged
by this idea– challenged and
stimulated by this idea of identifying the
sociohistorical context of gender-based violence. OK, so I asked myself where– my question is, where in
the world would you start? Since I can’t even
think back to a time historically when this
wasn’t the case, right? Mm-hmm. But my comment
about– and I do want to know your
thoughts about that. But what I’m hearing already
is that these questions or these issues of dominance
are already changing, obviously. We’re talking about how
we relate to this problem interracial– blacks and whites and
transgender and not. We’re already crossing these
boundaries and becoming, one would say, despite
the fact that there is continual
dominance and there’s a need to confront on this– Do you– What I’m– Do you have a question? What I’m getting
at is that I think human nature seeks dominance,
and seeks submissiveness. I think this it part
of human nature. And if we go back– if we try
to go back to when this started, I think we have to take
a humanist approach to the problem and include men. In other words, I’m
obsessed with this idea that the duality
of human nature is going to rear its ugly head
at some point, all the time. Somebody’s got to dominate. So what– I’m sorry. Can you give them
something to respond to? Yes. So I’m asking, where do
you start with the question that you raised? For, let’s say, artists to place
their work in this context? What’s the question
that you would ask? Or where would you
look to be educated– to educate yourself on this? Can you sum up her question? I’m lost. Does that make sense? Am I making any sense? Do– I think [INAUDIBLE]– She’s asking if we can
sum up the question, but do you want to do
that as you understand it? Yeah. So are you talking
about my call that we make sure that we pay attention
to the sociohistorical and contexts of the situations
we’re talking about? Yeah. I’m saying you raised a
really inspiring question. I think that’s great for
artists to think about that. I wouldn’t even know where
to start, because I think– I think the first
place you start is to realize that
nothing is new. Mm-hmm. That the way certain
things manifest because systems were created. Nothing pops out of the sky. It’s like when my students– we
start talking about capitalism. And I’m just like, you
know we can rethink that whole capitalism idea. And this is in a film class. And sometimes the students
are like, but then– but how? How? And I’m like, anything
that was created can be un-created, right? Like capitalism didn’t
come out of the sky. There were a set of
sociohistorical things and happenings that
occurred that we are now in a capitalist space. So to start
understanding that there are origin stories to every
single incident that you see. So when you’re watching
something, you’re like, you know what? I want to make some art about
this particular viral video that I just saw. Well, actually understand
about the context. Who is that person that you
want to make this art about? How do they get to
that exact space? What’s the nature of the
city that they’re living in? What are the rules and
housing issues that have been going on in the city? Where are the issues that relate
to racism or redlining that created that they’re
in the situation that the law enforcement
officer is about to kill them and we have this on tape? Where did that cell
phone come from, and where did that person live? So you have to not
just be inspired by the empathetic spectacle
that has made you decide to make art about something. You actually have to look
at the person as a human, and then look around and figure
out how they got to that place and how the conditions
were created that they were on the other
side of that policeman’s gun. And that’s where you start. [APPLAUSE] It’s not about how
I feel and this has provoked me to make
art about this thing. It’s about where is the full
humanity of this person? Let me investigate that. and then from that,
you start finding the sociohistorical contexts
that put them in that place and you start
identifying why you’re empathizing with that body that
you want to make art about. So I reckon that’s a loose
way that you could do it. A couple of questions
that we’ve had tie into something else
that was just mentioned as you talk about the
binary, is the role of people who identify as men. And since the sexual terrain
has become more expansive, this person said,
you’re probably going to skip over my question. So of course I’m not going
to skip over your question. [LAUGHTER] Yes. With the BDSM community and
abuse within the BDSM community when power is being
played with and expressed in different ways. So that idea of
the old dichotomies are starting to fall away. And what challenges
does that present? Hmm. Is that– did I not– Yeah. I thought I heard protest. Did I not say your question? OK. So in communities of play,
like communities of sexual play where incidents of rape
occur or racial violence? Or submissiveness that– I mean, there’s no
line necessarily. Different communities
have different lines. Yeah. But the old rules
don’t apply anymore. Mm-hmm. And so what challenges
does that present? Several. [LAUGHTER] I think about language, right? I think about if a part
of your play is language. Calling someone out their name. Right? If a part of your
BDSM play is using a racial slur
against your partner or a transphobic slur
against a partner, and that’s a part of your play– well, someone could be
having a bad day that day. Every day and every
interaction is an opportunity to rewrite the rules and
find out where people are. I think every community– and I hope this– but it’s really about ongoing
conversation and consent. Because the rules can change
from minute to minute and day to day. So if you are
partnering with somebody and there was a particular
way that you interacted with each other on
Saturday, something could change on Sunday. You needs to check in. It’s like that conversation
of enthusiastic consent between two people trying
to have sex, right? You might have
had sex last week, but they don’t want to
have sex on Thursday. Or they don’t want to
have sex an hour later after they had sex again. So in all of our
interactions with one another, to check power, we
need enthusiastic consent at every stage. Re-question, reposition, ask
again, don’t make assumptions. And I feel like that works
with the BDSM movement. I think that works in activist
movements– feminism, academia. I don’t know. While I’m getting my salad. You know. [LAUGHTER] That’s right. Thank you. What I would add to that now– I want to add to that. Just research. When you are in a
conundrum in your culture– something’s bewildering,
something oppressing you, go to your instinctive
area of research. As you say, context. Build it. Deepen it. It should be rigorous. You can’t solve it just
with your own feeling. You have to find out what
is the structure that’s influencing you– your dilemma, your
privilege, and what undermines your own authority. And it’s work. But that’s something
we can all do. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yes. Yes, good evening. Good evening. Evelyn Reed was
an anthropologist who looked at the origins
of women’s oppression in the total of society,
and said it began with the– who took her cue from
Frederick Engels, who took their cues from the
beginning of social class. So the question is, what
do you consider the source of women’s oppression? And how can it be resolved? [LAUGHTER] Carolee, you want
to answer that? Sure. Yeah. [LAUGHTER] I can answer it. She’s getting out the book. She’s getting out a book. Yeah, here’s a new
book that answers it. [LAUGHTER] It’s The Evolution of Beauty. But it’s really about how
Darwin’s forgotten theory of mate choice shapes
the animal world and us. And it’s an anthropologist
and originally a bird watcher. He’s just a brilliant
scientist– theoretician. And one of his issues has to
do with a specific process of aesthetic de-weaponization. De-weaponization is essentially
the reduction of male armaments which have evolved
by the process of male-to-male competition
through female mate choice. But he takes it in such a
lively, vivid present tense, and it helps us understand
the structures around us. That the real battles,
the deepest battles, are between the men– the men who need power
over goods and rights and each other. And the women have always
been collateral damage or a collateral
investment adornment. So I think this will be
enlightening for everyone, because it changes the
whole history of mating and human definition of how they
can mate, how they can love, how they can function together. It’s another fresh
kind of approach. So it’s called The
Evolution of Beauty, and it’s by Richard Prum. P-R-U-M. Not Prune, but Prum. It’s an Alsatian German
name, so I like it. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, I need that book. OK. So when Carolee was speaking
about how women had to– all this time
thinking about it– how women had to
segregate themselves to gain their own artistic voice
and their ability to be seen. I’m curious as to, is
there an end to that? Is there a desegregation
of their artistic voice by a-gender or– Yeah. Who wants one? And maybe– and
let me add to it, because we’ve had several
texts about the role of men. And is there a role, and
what shape should that take? And actually, if I can direct. Monica, can you
talk about the role, if there is one in
your movement, of men? Mm-hmm. So there’s definitely
a role for men. First of all, we have
to acknowledge the fact that sexual violence does
not only impact women. Sexual violence
also impacts men. It impacts children, and we have
to acknowledge that every time we talk about this. We have to talk about how we’re
building power and with who. When I started my
work in 2003, it was organizing women in Florida. I remember that I was trying
to have some organizing meetings with the women
in this one community, and they were really nervous
about meeting with me. Because they knew that if they
met with me in a small group, that the men in their lives were
going to be angry, because they were going to think
that they were gossiping or that they were
doing something they weren’t supposed to. So it was really important
to them to make sure that the men were
also at the meeting so that they wouldn’t
get in trouble. And that’s important for
me to think about in terms of my work, because
I want to make sure that whatever message
I’m delivering is a message that’s going
to resonate with both women and men, because women and men
are a part of the solution. We’ve got to do it together. We’ve got to talk through
what used to be acceptable, what is acceptable now– and really in my work,
I do a lot of work in my community getting
people to envision what the world is that we– what
do we want the world to look like? And how are we working
together to get to that place? So my work is not as– I’m not looking
backward in terms of the history of
violence against women, because we know it’s
always been there. I’m really trying
to figure out, what do we want the
world to look like, and how are we
going to get there? And how are we
going to get there through organizing
in our community? So in my work, it’s
really taken a lot to change the norms
so that when we’re having a meeting
with women that men know that they can come too. And they’re welcome
and we’re going to have a conversation
about these issues. And it’s going to be
the same conversation if they’re in the room or not. But also that women need
to have their own space. And that when we’re organizing,
it isn’t an attack on them. The work that we are doing
to end gender-based violence, the work that we’re doing to
ensure that there’s gender equity– it is not an attack on men. If women are safe
at work and women can produce at work
to their full ability because they’re not constantly
looking over their shoulder because they’re afraid that
they’re going to be victimized, then the women are going
to be able to thrive. And our communities are
going to be able to thrive. Our families are going
to be able to thrive. And so really, it has to be
seen as a mutual interest in being able to end this
problem for the good of all. And I think that we have
to talk about it that way. Because people say
to me, oh, your work is all about the
women’s movement. No, my work is about making
the world better for everyone. Period. [APPLAUSE] And if we’re going to do that,
then we need men at the table. And we need men to
understand that this isn’t a woman’s issue. It’s their issue too. And they shouldn’t only care
about ending sexual violence in the workplace
or any other place because it impacts their mom,
their sister, or their wife. They should care about
it because they just should care about it. It’s the right thing, and we
need everyone to work on it. [APPLAUSE] And we’ve had a message
to please continue to include non-binary
and gender nonconforming people in this conversation. Yeah. And so while we are working
with the dichotomies, we need to recognize that the
dichotomies are themselves– I’m not talking to you. OK then. That those are
manufactured in the way that Kalima was talking
about, and we tend to throw people into corners. You want to say something? Oh, I was just– for
the last five minutes, I’ve just been saying, “explode
the binary” in my brain. Right? Mm-hmm. Because it’s so easy
for these conversations to become so rigid and to
become so binary-focused. And we just have to
keep on working– Challenging ourselves. –in our dialogues
and in ourselves to understand that
these are all constructs that we’ve adhered to. And like I said about
capitalism, it was created. It can be uncreated. And people do. And we need to make
sure that we are just continuing to explode
the binary in every way that we talk about this,
even though it is so very familiar and comforting to
fall back into the thing that you’ve been trained
in or moved through. So that’s all. So I want to say
a minute about how we’re going to manage
the rest of our time so we get in as
much as possible. People have been
standing up a long time. So I’m going to recognize the
people who are standing up now. And then I’m going
to combine some of the texts that have come in,
because there’s some themes. And then we’re going to make
sure that you have last words. Yeah. Is that fair? Yeah? OK. All right. So let’s bounce over to you. Hello. Thank you so much for the
beautiful conversation today. And it kind of relates to what
we were just talking about. I was thinking about the
terminology “feminism,” because terminology
itself does not cover the concept
that we’re trying to break the binary gender. So I was just thinking
a lot about that, because when we
hear the feminism, it sounds like it only covers
people who only defines themselves as a female gender. So I was curious about
how you guys think about what will be a
possible substitution for that terminology. And the second question
is, I’m from South Korea and my country has a
lot of binary gender and very conservative about the
gender roles in the [INAUDIBLE] and the concept of
feminism started. The movement started. But the thing is, how it started
was now the concept of feminism is tilted towards to
a female supremacy. And it’s making a lot of
conflict in my country. And a lot of people who
believes in gender equality, they do not define
themselves as a feminist, because the terminology,
how it’s used in Korea, is they define themselves
like all-female are better than anyone. And it’s just making
a lot of a conflict. And I don’t know how
to approach to it, because a lot of my friends
who believe in gender equality, they’re saying like,
oh, I’m not a feminist. I really can’t say that,
because I can’t do that. And I don’t know how
to handle about it, so I was curious about
how you guys would handle that situation. Ooh. [INAUDIBLE] OK. Sure. Whoever wants to. I feel you. It’s complicated. But it’s always comp–
language is complicated. Language is almost designed to
obscure what we really mean. And– [CHUCKLING] really. If we could all just
touch each other and feel what we were feeling,
it might be a little better. But I don’t know. It still has to
filter through us. I think that what
you’re bringing up is the complication
of language, right? Because that has occurred
across many different ways. So people hear the
phrase “feminism” and they think female supremacy. They hear “anti-male.” They hear “white.” They hear “Western,” right? It’s a term that
needs to be exploded. We talk about gender, but
we understand that gender is really a construct. So what do we call this thing? So I don’t necessarily
have a solution. I’m cosigning with you. [LAUGHING] But I also think that we
need to remember in this– I’m just a context girl. But we also need to
remember that every time that we change language,
we also have the tendency to flatten and invisibalize
the history that created that language,
and the struggles that went into defining that
language in the first place. So if we can find some way to
develop language, or at least allow for the
flexibility of words in ways that do not invisibalize
their origin story– that pays homage to
where it comes from. But then also make
it porous enough that everyone feels like
they’re a part of that language. Then we have done the
work of being good humans. I don’t know how we do that,
and if Mr. Rogers was here, he might be able to
tell us all something. [LAUGHTER] And in the history of
movements, often when you have something that’s
been so dominant for so long, the counter-movement
almost has to swing really far to the extreme
before it hopefully settles into a
more nuanced space, just because the pull
of history is so strong. It’s not a smooth process. No. It’s so conflicted, but that’s
the power and interest of it. Mm-hmm. Yeah. OK. Yes. Thank you. Hi. I don’t feel like my
question is very smart, but I am here representing a
specific artistic community in Baltimore City right
now that’s in crisis. And so my question
is about backlash. So– and several of us
are here this evening. And we are strong,
but we are tired. And so several people here
and myself as well just have experienced backlash in
terms of our artistic work, our ability to work after
coming forward with stories, or our alliedship with survivors
of violence in our community. And I basically am looking
for some words of inspiration, because I know every
person on the stage right now has experienced that in
her life and with her work. So that’s what we came to know. And we’ve had a couple of
messages about backlash and how to survive it
and how to get past it. So how did you do that? I need– Backlash. How did you– –a summary. There are people in
Baltimore– artists who have experienced backlash
because of their art. And she’s asking for
wisdom and inspiration because you talked
about backlash and how you survived
and endured. You can’t anticipate it. I’ve had censorship
from my own culture. I’ve had it from the
CIA, from the Mosad, from the most unexpected
and sinister places. But all those risks
are on the side of having to look at material
that’s taboo, that’s forbidden, that it has to be looked at. And that might be a dead animal,
the viscera, aspects of war. I’m surrounded right
now by a plethora of mutilated, dead
Syrian corpses– all men that have been
starved and tortured, and they’re ordinary
men that were just going about their normal lives. And there’s just piles
of these corpses. The photographs were
smuggled out at great risk to the photographer. I’m not sure if this
is my next work, but it’s certainly in line
with the disturbing parts of destructive culture
that invade me and make it impossible to continue
with the pleasurable aspects that I’d like to work with. So it’s not something
I can control. It just demands attention. Well, and something
that you just said– I moderated another panel. Actually, it was
just one person. It was Angela Davis,
and several women asked her that same question. And her answer is very
consistent with the language that I’m hearing
here at MICA, which is to make sure
that there’s joy, and that the work is something
that even when we think of work that’s highly unpleasant,
that it feels meaningful and it matters to you. Because this is
not a short trip. Yeah. And so you have self-care
is really, really important, and making sure that you
take time to take care of you and to infuse joy
into your life, is how she has endured for
more decades than most of you have been alive. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah It reminds me of that idea
of that idea of friction. [CHUCKLING] Right? The environmental
feminist, Ana, saying she has this idea of friction. One stick just alone
is just a stick. Two sticks that rub together
create heat and light. In spaces where we
have the most friction, we can often have the
most productivity. So when we’re experiencing
these moments of backlash against the things that we hold
dear, to stop and interrogate where it’s productive. And then utilize
that productivity and respect that
productivity that comes from it, while also taking
time to care for yourself. And then also if you’re doing
this in a space with community and movement work– what is that? My wife says it
all the time about don’t go into movement work
expecting to find your milk. Go outside of it. Something like that, I
think it’s Bernice Johnson Reagon or something. But this idea that sometimes
even in the communities that you’re organizing with, you
need to step outside of those and get your milk
someplace else. And we’ve had a
couple of questions about persisting and
surviving within progressive institutions, like
theaters, institutions of higher ed, where the
work and the resistance is often more nuanced. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Creepy. [LAUGHTER] Oh, I can add one thing to that. Rutgers University never had
a woman in the art department. They just didn’t. And I knew a lot
of the guys there, and I was hired for what was
called the Wonder Woman job. And it was atrocious, because
every contemporary woman artist you might have heard
of in the ’90s applied for the job. It was like sitting in
the dentist’s office. So I got the job
and I dismantled all the patriarchal traditions
that my students had inherited. And it went, I
thought, really well. Anyway, then after two years,
I was taken out for drinks by my favorite colleague. And he said. “Well, I have
harsh news for you. Your contract’s not
going to be renewed. I know you think
you were successful, but we think you’re a witch.” [LAUGHTER] And that was 1996. I said, Frederick,
you’re kidding, right? And he said, “No.” [LAUGHTER] And Kalima mentioned bell hooks. And you know we
revere bell hooks, but if you look at her life,
she went from institution to institution to
institution, not getting tenure because of her writing. Right. And so that close-in work– and I want to acknowledge the
person who asked that question. That close-in work costs a
lot, because you’re right here. It’s easier to lob a
grenade over there than to– but again, those sets of
advice that you gave about joy and moving out of that space. That’s particularly important
when the work is close in, to move out of that space
and to people who love you and take care of you. Yeah. And to go away to do that. Yeah, that’s actually
what I wanted to say. And I want to thank you
for bringing that forward. First of all, what
you do matters. And don’t forget that. [APPLAUSE] And we have to acknowledge
that as activists, whether we’re artivists
or whether we’re doing some other
kind of activism, there is pain in the work. And to pretend as
though we’re always standing strong in our
power and to pretend as though there’s always
victories that are being won– that is false. The work is often very
hard, and there is often pain in the work. And so I feel that it’s really
important to build our tribes. And I think it’s
also really important to give ourselves permission
to step away when we need to. Yeah. Yes. We don’t talk enough about
the violence against activists for doing our work and
for being who we are. I don’t talk often about my
own experiences with violence, but I will here, because
I think it’s important. I was subject to
three death threats, and my niece was almost
kidnapped because of my work. Yeah. There are many activists
across our country who are just doing what
we believe is right. What we believe will help
make it better for everyone, and we’re subject to
violence because there are people who are afraid that
we might actually succeed. And it is not wrong for us
to step away and get safe. Yeah. And it is not wrong
for us to take a break. That doesn’t make us any
less effective or any weaker as activists. And so what I have to
say to people who feel backlash and pain in the work– you’re not alone. There are many other
activists who feel that. And it’s really
important to know that there are other
people who might not be the people in your inner
circle who feel what you feel and want to support you. So build your tribe and know
that there are other people who understand where you’re
sitting in this moment, and would be supportive
if you reached out. Yeah. Thank you. Well done. [APPLAUSE] And we did have a text
asking about vulnerability. And I think you addressed
that from one way. And there are several
people who have suggested that the question about
backlash was about, how do you respond to survive
from backlash about creating art? And while there are
lots of answers to that, someone also texted an answer. And answered, “Backlash
always follows progress and is fear-driven. Know that over time,
we go forward.” And that’s not an
immediate response to, how do you survive in that
moment, but it is a response. I’m aware that two
people are still standing to speak or ask questions. Hi, everyone. My name is Brittany Oliver. I am a person who does a lot of
important work in this city– founder of Not
Without Black Women. Previously with my
family at the ACLU, and I’m currently with the
National Organization for Women in Washington D.C. My question– well,
I have a comment and then I have a question. One thing that I want
to uplift here tonight, because oftentimes when we
have these conversations about #MeToo and sexual
violence, they’re often very– I feel kind of down. This stuff is hard. It’s tough stuff to deal with. But what I want everyone
in this room to realize is that you all have to
understand Tarana Burke– uplifting the work that she
has done for over 10 years, and most recently got
recognition for the work that she’s done, and
countless other women who have been doing– foot soldiers who have
been doing this work. What’s happening right
now is a phenomenon. The revolution is
being televised. Literally. Mm-hmm. And it’s because
of women’s work. It’s because of women
who have been doing this work for a long time. So although this is
hard and it’s painful, if there’s no pain, if
there’s no challenges, there’s no progression. Mm-hmm. Tell it. And being an activist
who has been subjected to the same experiences–
backlash, targeting, intimidation– all of it. The work has gotten harder
over the years for me and a lot of other women. A lot of other
folks in this room. And so I just wanted
to uplift that, because we’re doing
important work, no matter how difficult it is. And my question is– I want to go back to Dr.
Kim Morgan’s question about, what does it look like to
end women’s oppression? And what comes to mind
for me is, locally. I’ve been to these types of
events all over the place. We’re seeing it happen
right now with Dr. Ford and the Kavanaugh hearings. She’s being treated
like she’s on trial. Anita Hill did
this work already. Mm-hmm. Right? And look where we are now. So what these types
of conversations make me think about is
how can institutions such as MICA, ACLU, and
others support survivors? What does that
look like locally? Because there are survivors
sitting in this room right now. And so my question
to the panelists are, what are some
ideas that you all have, whether you live in
Baltimore or not, that you think that the community
at large can assist? What does support look
like for survivors? What are some examples
of what institutions can offer so that we know
that we’re not alone? Survivors know that
they’re not alone. But what is actual support? What can be offered so that
we have some direction? Because a lot of us–
someone made a comment about being tired. You’re damn right. But the work is
going to continue. And it’s clear,
especially what’s happening right now, and
the narratives at large– we’re not going anywhere. The work is going to continue. We are the revolution. We are creating the
change right now. So how can our local
communities support survivors? What are your ideas behind that? If I can weave
together some things that have been said tonight. Part of the exhaustion
comes from some days it feels like the
work doesn’t matter. And to recognize the
worth of the work, and for the community
around you to recognize the worth of the work,
is a type of support. The rest, the actual
physical rest, you have to take
on for yourself. But a lot of the
fatigue comes from being taken for granted, which is
something women are quite used to. Particularly, I’ve written
a lot about black women and their activism and
that sense of you’re doing it by yourself and
everybody lets you step up. But so the community
around you– also, we’ve had questions
specifically about what MICA can do, and they’re actually– I’m new here and part of my job
and the job of Abby and Kevin and other people who
have been hired recently, is to figure out the resources
that MICA brings to the table and how we can co-work– not work for, not work at– the different communities. And so talk to us. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Did you want to add to that? I don’t know what we’re
going to do to me when we– OK. Yeah. [LAUGHTER] Go ahead. I was just going to say that
finding communities or finding ways to have
conversations about what community accountability
looks like are really, really important. So if you have an
institution that has some kind of
power that can help facilitate that conversation– what does community
accountability look like? What does accountability
to other folks look like in the work? I think that that’s
one of the key things that institutions can do. There have been paradigms. There have been ways to
do restorative justice. There have been
ways and strategies that have existed
for a very long time. I think institutions
have the power to bring those things together
and help communities figure out accountability measures. If that is any help. Because I think a lot about it
in terms of the activist work I do with the
Monument Quilt. And we were colleagues with that. And this idea that we
always run into– yes. Force. Do it. And this thing that
we would run into when the Quilt’s on display. What do you do when a survivor
is also a perpetrator? Yeah. Right? When they’re actually a
part of your community. How do we create spaces
and accountability measures and places where
everyone who’s been touched by gender-based
violence is safe? I don’t know what
the answer is, but I do know that institutions that
have a little bit of power– the nonprofits, the schools, the
higher education institutions– can help facilitate and help
organizations figure that out. I noticed that’s another binary
that needs to be destroyed. Yes. Between the victim
and the perpetrator. Yeah. Yes. Speaking of community
on a much smaller level, because I’m a first-grade
teacher here in Baltimore City– how can we provide
resources to students who are at a much younger
age and their families to change the
system of how things will be when they get older? I don’t know if that
question makes sense. But what are the resources for
children and their families? And how to start this at a
much smaller level, instead of taking care of these
things when children grow up and then they’re
faced with these? They don’t have a
platform for conversation. There’s academic
theories and stuff like that on how you can
teach this to children, but it’s also very
unresearched right now, I feel, with how quickly
things are changing. Do you mind if I take this? Go ahead. Yeah. Al right. Actually, there’s a fair amount
of research around gender and racial socialization
of children. One of the strongest
things you can do is to watch the media
that they watch. Actually watch it. Pay attention to it,
and counteract it. Either turn it off
or counter-argue it. Because the strongest
stereotyping that children get comes from the media
that they watch, and that’s one of
the tools that’s it’s not easy, because parents
use TV as a babysitter, or video games as a babysitter. But the adults have
a great deal of power in the lives of children. There was one study where all
the mother did was go “huh.” Meaning that she
didn’t believe it. And the children– this was
in an observed situation– double mirror. And the children looked at
it and then later reported that something that they had
thought was true wasn’t true. And all she did was grunt. And so we often
abdicate that power. And after the parents, the
next credible person is you. Yeah. Yeah, because there’s a
lot of research for sure. But it’s also
changing so rapidly and there’s a lot of limitations
to access for parents, too, I think that’s readily
available, especially in Baltimore. So that’s something that
I’m trying to figure out. Well, parents often abdicate
the power that they have. Yeah. And that’s because of the
stress on their lives, and so that’s a conversation. l don’t want to get too academic
here, but a lot of new research really reinforces some
of the old research. Things like the
way families move don’t change nearly as
much as they seem to when you get underneath the surface. I want to make sure that our
panel has time for last words. I just wanted to say– there
is a new children’s book out called C for Consent. So check it out. And also, I know that there
are new resources that are being developed around
the conversation of the #MeToo movement. The YWCA is working
on some good materials that will be available. So I think there
are going to be more tools available through various
community organizations. The National Sexual
Violence Resource Center has also produced some tools. The Esperanza– or, I’m sorry. I can’t remember their– the
National Latina Organization Against Sexual and
Domestic Violence has also created some tools. They have a video and
a workbook for kids, and those are all
nonprofit organizations. I would check all of
those resources out. And I’m happy to give you
the information after. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. And we have two comments. This is an adult parental
issue to work on for progress. “Children have other work to do. Children can be used by adults
to support the adult’s issues.” I think by “use,” they
mean to cooperate. And another one– “Legislative session 28
made consent education now included in Maryland sex ed.” Mm-hmm. So last comments? I’m thrilled to be part
of this discussion. That’s my only last
thought, so yeah. I just want to say it’s
an honor to be here. I’m grateful to be in this
room with you tonight, and I’m grateful for
the chance to think about how we’re going to work
together to make things better. Because it really is going to
take every single one of us in this room to
make that happen. And I hope that we
continue to see ourselves as partners in the work. And I think I just
want to leave with a– [GRUNTING] strive to leave every
single interaction in the work that you do in this movement
not being diminished and not having diminished
someone else’s truth. I think that is
one of the deepest things we can do as
empathetic human beings is to see one another
and understand that all of our
stories are different, and all of our
locations are different, and how our entering
movements are different. But to never leave our
interactions and the work that we do with each other
having been diminished or having diminished
someone else. [APPLAUSE] Please join me in
thanking our panel. [APPLAUSE] And good night. [LAUGHTER] Good night. Bravo! Do I have somebody’s pen here? You have my pen. Oh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *