Allyship rule
ID: Drawing of a duck billed platypus underwater, they're wearing a rainbow coloured t shirt and a pink bum-bag, and saying: "Ally is not something you can self-identify as, it's a title that you earn. Let your actions speak for themselves!"
Credit: Sophie Labelle
You're viewing a single thread.
I agree with speaking with your actions here, but at the same time, this seems like some weirdly unnecessary gatekeeping.
If you're not actually doing any allyship, in what sense are you an ally?
Theoretical allyship is irrelevant.
Simply saying out loud you support it IS supporting it.
I mean, it's the minimum amount, but thats more than none.
Posting is not praxis. You have affected nobody's lives or material conditions through posting.
That's not true though. Posting/commenting radical thought is a role that helps. Sure, it's not much, but it's certainly not nothing.
When there's an open investigation against me and I have to lay low for a while, it directly improves my life to have leftist content to enjoy, which in turn keeps me going so I can continue to improve the lives of others
Someone spending their time making a meme for a leftist community is also effectively making propaganda that I'll later text to someone, which may further radicalize them, even if just by a little.
Marx himself literally said:
All social life is essentially practical. All the mysteries which lead theory towards mysticism find their rational solution in human praxis and in the comprehension of this praxis. (8th thesis)
Just because social media didn't exist then doesn't mean it doesn't count now
Edit: also, within this specific context, it definitely can directly improve people's lives to see allyship simply signified both in-person and online. It personally makes me feel safer, and that's important
Hell, you don't even need to be particularly active. Even telling your weird coworker that gay people are people too might help.
You don't get applause for it, but it helps.
I'm not a person with a minority Sexual Orientation/Gender Identity, but here are my two cents: I think upvoting supportive content in a space that's safe and welcoming to people with minority SOGIs is zero impact, online commenting in that same welcoming space is about as impactful as upvoting in a less welcoming space, both of which are directly adjacent to zero impact. I reckon that negatively reacting to an SOGI antagonist (eg the coworker you mentioned), is an appreciable act of allyship, more impact than a token gesture during Pride. I'm not sure if it would be higher or lower than an anonymous complaint to HR about discriminatory language.
You affected my life by causing me to write this stupid comment proving your even stupider comment wrong. And now I've affected your life, because you've been confronted with your own faulty logic, and even if you don't respond, you still thought about it and you can never not have.
What is allyship to you?
Does one need to be overtly politically active or can one simply change minds in their social circles?
Must they sign petitions and call politicians or can they simply be a comforting or understanding shoulder to a marginalised person?
How much legwork is required to be an Ally? Is there a scorecard to keep in order to meet criteria?
Obviously, passive acceptance without any action isn't explicit allyship but must one be openly militant about LGBT issues in order to be considered an ally?
Does the real answer not lie somewhere in between? Maybe on a spectrum or sliding scale?
The real answer is measured in how your actions have affected the lives of the people you claim to be an ally of.
No, this isn't always practical to measure, but if someone is saying "I'm an ally because I identify as an ally", I'm certain they have done absolutely nothing to protect/advance the rights of LGBT+ people.
So in your opinion indirect action may as well be inaction?
Say I have coworkers with certain opinions on gendering people, use of pronouns or who still use dated terms like "Tranny" or "Shemale".
I spend my days correcting them when they misgender or reminding them of acceptable words to describe people. I have political discussions where we come to terms about how LGBT rights are human rights. They've corrected their behaviour and now speak of LGBT folks in a kinder light.
I don't directly see how those actions affect LGBT folks. I don't have tangible evidence I have made a person's life better through my actions.
Am I an Ally or not?
No, indirect action is a form of action, stopping a transphobe from being transphobic is a form of allyship, because presumably, you've saved a trans person from feeling unsafe around that person.
Because you stated that, on the presumption their actions prevented transphobia, that person would be an ally. But that presumption can only be fact checked by themselves anyway; Does this not mean then, that a person should have the right to label themselves an ally if they self-assess their actions as allyship?
Or does someone have to ally-check each of their actions once performed with some sort of... council or committee, as I have here?
It's not that deep, we don't need a rigorous philosophically consistent way to measure allyship.
That's fair.
But this post posits that we do need to get philosophical as does your initial post. By claiming there's "theoretical allyship" we call into question the efficacy of small actions performed by allies and serve to weaken the cause.
Any action is action. No matter how small.
Ok, so proclaiming yourself an ally doesn't make you an ally, unless 1 person notices it?
I feel that someone noticing it is a part of "proclaiming", but I agree with you. I do think you worded it rather strictly and awkwardly. Telling yourself that you're an ally is worthless, telling someone else has value.
Part of it may be identifying as an ally as a first step. If you internaliz "I am an ally" your future actions will probably more align with that identity. People like to be true to themselves, let them identify as good things without gatekeeping it.
I think making it part of your identity rather than something you’re trying to get good at, like an exercise or craft you’ve never done before, makes people more likely to be defensive about the ways they’re not “perfect” allies.
I don’t think what you’re getting at is wrong, it could be helpful to some people to have something like that to tell themselves for motivation. Something like “I will do what I can to be an ally” or “I will be an ally today” might be better; it’s an aspirational thing that needs constant effort, like staying fit.
Which I realize isn’t super fun and sexy the way having a word to put in your social media profile is. But it’s an “any man who must say ‘I am the king’ is no true king” situation, you know?
Counterpoint. Yes, it's anecdotal, but the biggest success my mother has had in kicking her cigarette habit has been identifying herself as a non-smoker. She did that before cutting back at all, and now she's from 35/day to 6. Every other attempt, she's identified as a smoker trying to quit, and it's failed.
Same theory - let them identify as what they want to be. Once they identify as such, the behavior will follow easier than if they're saying "I'm trying to be an ally".
OK, that person is on their way to becoming an ally.
There is still no physical difference in the world brought on by thoughts that exist only in their head. Theory without practice.
And your denying them any openness and acceptance as someone actively trying to become better, even in the smallest of steps, is denying said people reason to grow. Shit doesn't happen overnight.
Values guide action. Humans can use cognitive rules to exhibit entirely new behaviors in entirely new situations, behaviors that are consistent with the cognitive rules. Theory may not be relevant if the situation doesn’t activate the relevant neural networks, but if someone doesn’t have ‘ally values’ how do you think they will behave in the future?
I should have been more clear, I meant it's irrelevant to whether one is an ally or not, because that is determined by practice.
If someone feels like this post (or any other boundary set by the people they claim to want to support) is keeping them from being an ally, they never were one in the first place.
I don't think this post is keeping anyone from being an ally, it just kinda sounds like there is some authority that decides if you are an ally or not.
I think your core message is "don't go around telling people you're an ally, go BE an ally", but it could be misinterpreted.
There IS an authority - it's whatever group you're claiming to help. They're the ones who get to decide if you actually ARE helping or not, and it works like this for a bunch of honorary titles.
Are you saying that everyone who disagrees with you personally isn't an ally of the entire group?
Absolutely unhinged
I'll take that over being a piece of shit bigot.. ¯(ツ)/¯
You live in a fantasy world. Nothing you believe is real