Activists, operatives seem unapproachable, slacktivism or activism?

In the last four years or so Jamaican LGBT rights/visibility has gotten a major boost on many fronts, commendable indeed that public advocacy is on but there is a way in which the more things change the more they stay the same. JFLAG and indeed other new outfits all have a public face to boot and I and other older operatives both locally and abroad did not think for one minute to show our faces back in the day, we all should remember what happened to Gareth Henry when he spoke up on Brian Williamson’s murder, the Monarch Pharmacy/Macey Grey mobbing incident and the subsequent police harassment as he pushed his public advocacy work on behalf of the J, death threats and such.

But there has always been and continues to be issues of perceptions of unapproachable activists, the gulf between the executive types personalities versus the frontline street based grass roots individual and whether who is more valid, credible or qualified to speak on in this case homophobia and related matters. The insulated operative just by virtue of class continue to lead the pack which is understandable to an extent as they can place themselves above the earthy homophobia and not engage the issues directly but from reportage out there but there is a way in which a kind of essentialism if not territorialism or elitism with bouts of condescending tones have set in; they can bring a higher visibility to the issues but my lord!. One blogger on his Facebook page for example recently lamented that he is not a paper pusher sitting at a desk embroiled in preparing studies of the lower classes for intellectual sporting but gets a better feeling by being on the street. Then there is the ongoing but old rift between the newcomer or newer generation of activists, bloggers and volunteers of NGOs versus the still active older far more experienced functionaries; and the appearing resistance from the latter to the former with the latter being somewhat brash and impatient with the former dismissing those valuable sometimes real world experiences as a learning template.

A disturbing report suggested that a present day advocacy officer recently suggested that former operatives who live abroad especially should not comment on local issues; suggesting thus that they do not qualify to do speak on such matters despite their numerous years of real world experience versus the more precky administration restricted advocate. I want someone to directly try that stunt with me and some folks need to remember that they are still on a learning curve. It took a lifetime for some persons to learn and have a grasp of the issues and are still learning as nothing remains constant; but such persons are in a far better position to address some issues with authority than others bearing in mind this is not a competition but more about continuity a virtue that has been starving for some time.

A 2014 article from Big Think spoke to the issue of social media activism and related matters excerpted in part:

"Many of us have fallen victim to it: changing our profile picture to those white equals signs atop a red background because someone said that it meant you support marriage equality, sharing the now-infamous #Kony2012 video that no one ever watched in full, or reposting the Huffington Post article only because the title was too witty and relevant not to.

Social media might be said to revolutionize political activism, connecting us to like-minded peers in previously inconceivable ways. The hive is easier to stir than ever before. But these technologies have a much darker side. Facebook activism amplifies harmful underpinnings of capitalism. It drastically alters how we conceive of ourselves. And ironically, Facebook does harm to the social causes offline that we champion online. Why? Social media platforms transform social issues into cultural capital: issues become labels of political alignment and lend an appearance of social awareness attached to a digitally curated self. They become a means to the end of social gain, rather than of social change. 

Through social media, we engage in personal branding. We cultivate a name and image that we can manipulate for social gain: “likes,” retweets, comments, and shares—rather than real change on the ground—become our primary goal. We choose how we desire to be seen by others and then manipulate that artificial “self” in accord with our known, or desired, audience.

No self-presentation through social media can be fully genuine. The prospect of social rewards always taints that decision-making process. Individuals cultivate their amplified selves on such platforms by sharing a given set of signifiers to attach to their “profile” through the sharing of news articles, the act of ‘liking’ pages, or re-posting other people’s writings. There is a hyper-awareness of our image in the eyes of others; whether consciously or not, our profiles become a self-promoting narrative. 

The Perils of "Slacktivism"

And the end-goal of this online “activism” is typically limited to raising awareness. As valuable as it is to widen people’s understanding of the world, no tangible change flows from awareness alone. In addition, many online activist campaigns reveal their true colors when they raise awareness of convenient untruths.

These examples of “slacktivist” rebellion from current events are prevalent within social media, especially (but not exclusively) among the liberal class who claim to advocate for social justice. The irony lies in the fact that when the labels of “rebel” enters popular culture and “trendiness,” it becomes conformity. The idea of rebellion becomes another commodified modifier to one’s online self. “Rebellion” acts as a signifier to denote a sense of global awareness and a self-directed, educated position within the subject matter. Despite the appearance of rebellion in this public display of a seemingly more radical opinion, the individual is doing just the opposite. We are always keenly aware of our audience; often that audience is one of similar opinion, as that audience is comprised of “friends” or “followers.” 

Individuals craft their public selves and accompanying opinions to obtain social reward from a positive response from their followship. Social issues and critique become buzzwords or clickbait. They function as modifiers for that online public self, and lose their rebellious force. Those issues become objects used to accumulate cultural capital in exchange for social reward. In this process it becomes apparent that both the public self and the social issues become commodified to achieve an end reward that’s external to the function and existence of the commodity.

This isn’t to say that all that happens on these platforms is negative. With this new form of media and communication, there are many liberating and redeeming qualities that arise from these platforms, including the newfound ability to bridge conversational gaps and the opportunity for a larger number of people to engage in a conversation and disseminate knowledge and opinions relatively freely. Social media is fast, easy, cheap and, in one sense, democratic. 

Every now and again present day realities just slaps one in the face as Miss Diana Ross in her song “The Boss” said ‘...stood right up in my face ....’ and such was the case that I was forced again to look at this business of social media to include adulation seeking bordering on a kind of narcissistic complex, persons presenting false bettered images and perfect philosophical positions of themselves than who they are in actual reality, camouflaging reality and an ever increasing patting on the back slaps in the face (in the minds of some onlookers) or applauding activists or activism from just mere announcements, lovely photos at a workshop or conference and such. To put it bluntly one lesbian said it quite boldly in words to the effect as to why some gay rights people inna Jamaica a move so like dem a foreen and a show off so .....? (why are some gay rights activists operating as if they are abroad and being boastful or showing off?)

I think what that lesbian’s comment was alluding to is that human rights activists have become so self absorbed and do not know how to celebrate success or achievement or highlight work done without making it into a song and dance, or without hubris and vain imagery. Such perceptions of bragadociousness/arrogance seems to be rubbing some persons the wrong way an already old challenge of under-reporting issues was another lesbian’s comment that made me take a look at the aforementioned issues more seriously barring mistrust as to where to turn, she reached out to someone regarding an issue she had that individual in turn reached out to me, in our conversation it was clear very quickly that the issues were out of my league in as far as expertise; I suggested to her to make a report at one of the leading NGOs to which she paused as we spoke over the phone; the hesitation was so real to me one could cut it with a knife. The exchange recommenced but she was politely resistant to my suggestion when it was repeated, when I pressed her as to why, then came the bombshell where she said she did not feel that some NGOs or operatives are approachable and indeed would not be able to identify with her issues on the basis of class and perceived lack of experience in other words too young in her eyes to understand matters. I was stunned but I should have expected it as that perception is as old as I can recall; but here I also thought with the myriad of avenues available for reaching out it seems said avenues are occupied by gate blockers (if you will) indeed gate keepers more so than facilitators in terms of perception by those seeking redress or just a listening ear.

How does one celebrate genuine success while sharing them publicly and use it as motivation without it being seen as arrogance is a thin line to me. That is why I am a little selective as to what goes on my wall; filtering who sees what is also practice I use with regards to my Facebook page in particular.

There seems to be some unsupervised social media management on the part of the NGOs and their staff etc even with regards to operatives personal pages; it is also tedious in the line between personal and the professional regarding online personas; the recent tiff between two particular persons though passed for some time has left bitter butter memories in the minds of some I was also told by the respondent as she like many others including myself read the tweets and Facebook battle in shock and some dismay; image is everything and if said operatives are busy suring up professional profiles whilst forgetting that their very actions online and persona can be linked to the organizations they are attached. I never use my personal Facebook page to throw barbs at anyone or group and if I have something to comment on or critique I do so with my blogs and identify for the most part specifics via quotes and related media. I do not even have a personal Twitter page but the GLBTQ Jamaica account where my entries are filtered coupled with my DJ stuff. Owing to the fact that the posts and such are public operatives need to remember ones online mannerisms and behaviour can be scrutinized and seen and help to form impressions from the very populations they are sometimes tasked to engage. One needs to be very circumspect even with one’s personal page, Twitter or Instagram accounts.

A word to the wise is sufficient I guess I am going to hear that bloggers (as said to others as well) are telling others what to do but those who are irked by years of experience brought to bear may have a prickly experience henceforth as such advice, suggestions etc. will continue I imagine.

Peace & tolerance

H