Occupy and rapes

I've not seen any analysis of it, but yeah lots of people I know are talking about Glasgow, as obviously it's pretty close to home. It's really, really shit. Whether the perpetrators came from within the occupy groups or outside might change how it's dealt with, but either way it's fucking horrific and my thoughts out to everyone in Glasgow and Cleveland.

Glasgow occupied twitter has just said:

@weoccupyglasgow

This is the first I've heard about the rape in Glasgow, so cant comment but just wanted to say that at the Radical Women meeting at the bookfair, several women expressed concern around these issues about the occupation in London.
Some women had come down for the bookfair from outside London and had planned to stay at the occupation on Friday night. When they got there on Friday evening, there was lots of drinking going on and they felt that they would not feel safe at the occupation and so decided not to stay. Other women at the meeting agreed that some sort of safer-spaces policy was a minimum requirement, perhaps also with women-only camping areas and women patrolling the camp at night.
I have since been down to both camps. I havent as yet seen a safer-spaces policy, but there are women meeting regularly at both sites discussing issues around safety, sexual harrassment and assault and trying to self-organise to make the occupations safer for women.

I can't fucking believe the attitude in that Occupy Glasgow statement:

It seems that as far as some people are concerned, protecting the Occupy randomshit movement's reputation takes priority over supporting somebody who has been raped at their event.

madashell - where's that from? I can't see it on the press release or the Twitter? I heard something on Twitter about a retracted statement, is it from that?

(not defending anything or denying it btw, I just literally can't find it!)

How Occupy’s (non) power structure enables sexism

@ Fall Back - the comment is quoted in the first article linked in the OP.

I really don't know what to say about this. It is disgusting. It reminds us how our own small 'progressive' groups can actually still contain some pretty abhorrent forms of oppression. I think the discussion in Rob Ray's post is quite a good reflection of this reproduction of patriarchy on that small scale. Particularly the pathetic rape apologism of '1'.

Sorry, should have been clearer (posting from my phone)

As jontham says, it's quoted in the article Rob Ray linked to.

My thoughts here are general re occupied camps and the like. I hasten to say I know nothing about the situation mentioned in Glasgow so I will not comment on it.

In terms of what I have been involved in anyway, the camps/squats/social centres etc with sleeping spaces that have most successfully made themselves safer (not safe) have agreed to be alcohol free (in stomach as well as can!) as part of their safer-spaces policy. That's not to say that plenty of people are not capable of doing horrible things to others stone cold sober but folks being drunk only makes it more prevalent. I don't think you need to be straight edge to think this... Beyond the UK there is quite a wide history of excluding alcohol from points of resistance (Indian lower caste feminist movement, EZLN, much of the classical anarchist movement - especially in Spain etc).

I am not in a town with any Occupy stuff but if any folks are who are reading this I would seriously urge them to consider this, maybe in addition to the sensible sounding measures Marigold mentions above. In terms of harm reduction and prevention, making spaces alcohol free is also likely to decrease the potential for other forms of violence within the camp and enable people to better face off/manage threats and attempts of violence from outside. As I said earlier I don't think you need to be straight edge to think this, it’s simply a practical measure and one of the few that can actually be enacted.

As far as I know this was the case for Puerta del Sol and the other 15M square occupations in Spain. I can't remember reading any justifications for this in terms of reducing the potential for violence but that would be an obvious consequence.

Proposals:
* Ban on alcohol
* Rotas staying awake all night to keep a look out
* Recallable delegates elected to administer the occupation web pages & networks
* Boycott facebook

Occupy Glasgow - Safer Spaces Policy

I think they need to be a bit clearer with the policy.
Don't rape, sexually assault or harrass others would be a good starting point.

I've noticed that right-wingers across the net have started using these, as well as other alleged sexual assaults which I hadn't previously heard of (which may well be untrue) to attack the entire occupy movement.

Wow, that statement from Occupy Glasgow has so much wrong with it.

Like madashell said. Their attempts to distance themselves from the woman who was raped "alleged sexual assault on one of the individuals that have been co-inhabiting George Square with the separate Occupy Glasgow movement"

"Individuals" to me (maybe others read this differently) seems kinda dehumanising, like, she was a woman sleeping in George Square. Or a person sleeping in George Square. Whether or not she was 'one of theirs' or whatever is totally irrelevant.

And yeah, "alleged sexual assualt" wtf. Call it rape if that's what happened.

Aside from all this, the safe spaces policy sounds good but doesn't deal with the fact that most rapists are known to their victims, but I genuinely don't know how you could deal with this. Safe spaces and gender politics is something that keeps coming up at the moment among lots of different groups, the open letter about Omar Hamed is kinda useful as a point of discussion but still, the whole discussion is such a shit one to have to have, and really hard not to come away feeling massively disempowered.

This is a statement from someone who I think has just left the Scottish Socialist Party. It is basically spot on about the Glasgow Occupation and the rape:

De-Occupy Glasgow

I cant honestly say that I was ever that enthused about the “Occupy Movement“. After seeing a live link up from Occupy Wall Street earlier this month, I did feel a frisson of revolutionary excitement, but it faded by the time that 15th October came round. It was genuinely amazing and inspiring to hear from an OWS activist live on video link, and when asked what we could do to support them his immediate response was to bring the Occupy movement to wherever we were. But once the initial rosy glow evaporated, I cant say it was an action which filled me with much enthusiasm.

In Glasgow there was considerable debate within the activist community in the lead up to the global day of action on 15th October. Should we be supporting the better planned Edinburgh Occupy? Should we be looking to set up our own Glasgow Occupy? Or should we be concentrating our activities elsewhere? In the end the decision was kind of made for us when people unknown to the activist community set up a facebook event which attracted considerable support. In such circumstances it would have been horribly elitist of us to stand at the edges shouting “Look, you’re doing it all wrong”, we needed to roll up our sleeves and muck in, at least to some extent.

The launch on the 15th was quite good, if a bit unfocused. Lots of people, good diversity, interesting banners, a few dogs, some leaflets, a gazebo…and that was about it. I said my hellos, shortly followed by my goodbyes and wished it well. From that point onwards I fell firmly into the “Meh, it cant do any harm” camp – not willing to condemn it as pointless (although to be honest I didnt actually see the point), but equally unwilling to give it active support. In the following week and a half, I’ve popped back and forward at various points, asking people’s opinions on it, chatting to bods there that I know from ther activity and some that I met for the first time there, followed the tweets, the blogposts and the news articles, good and bad about the whole Occupy movement. My position remained that I didnt really see a point to it, but it had undeniable potential and may possibly grow into something worthwhile, so didnt write it off, but at the same time the time/benefit ration was in my opinion seriously out of kilter.

Any occupation, particularly long term ones will hit problems. The recent 7-month occupation of the Hetherington Research Club was not without its issues. There we dealt with homelessness, sexual harassment, drug taking and mental health issues on top of onging and constant battles over particularly sexist, but also racist and heteronormative attitudes. In total over the course of the seven months, three people were excluded from the occupation. The only formal sanction that we had within the space to deal with behavour was to determine that we couldnt deal with it and exclude the perpetrator. Despite the existance of a safer spaces policy and later a grievience procedure being developed there was a time when the sexual harassment of female activists within the space became so extensive that some refused to return to the occupation during that period. Some never returned at all.

The Hetherington Occupation was a very different kettle of fish from the Occupy movement. With a clear set of demands, it had seized control of a well equipped secure building and as the occupation had gone beyond its first days and weeks, turned it into a social space opening it up beyond the students and recent graduates who had created it to established activists, community organisations, international activists and individuals from the community who were in the process of becoming radicalised. No occupation exists in a bubble away from wider society – sexism, racism, homelessness, migration issues, violence, drug and alcohol issues, homophobia and mental health issues are all prevalent in Scottish society – it is utopian to believe that they either would not emerge or could be “legislated” out of existance through a safer spaces policy.

The Free Hetherington, however flawed and imperfect did tackle a number of these issues head on, but it did it in a context of a consistant base of empowered and aware individuals. It was never perfect, but safety and security was taken seriously and there was a genuine attempt to overcome some of the issues which led to some of the original occupiers feeling unsafe within the space.

But back to Occupy Glasgow. As I said earlier I cannot claim to have been particularly involved with the occupation – although I kept tabs on it from afar. My initial skepticism seemed ill-founded after a very sucessful public assembly was held on the 23rd October with a high proportion of attendees from the general public, a number of established activists and trade unionists engaging, however problems were becoming apparent.

The start of the occupation was a Saturday, and Saturday night in George Sqare can be a strange place, yet despite my reservations that the occupation would be over before it started, it seemed to pass without incident. None the less given a city the size of Glasgow, the problems that it has and the lack of services to address them it was somewhat inevitable that in time, people in need of food and shelter would find their way to a central location providing both. A number of people with a range of issues found their way to the Occupy camp at the same time as the politics and experience level of the activists involved declined. The semi-cultish “anti-politics” of the Zeigheist Movement and David Ike started appearing associated with Occupy Glasgow – something which I believe has also been found in other Occupy locations. Additionally there were rumours of neo-nazi occupier and a racist element to the camp.

By the Tuesday, I was sufficiently concerned at some of the things that I was hearing about the camp that on one of my regular visits, I drew aside an activist that I knew to express my misgivings, where he confirmed that there was a level of dodgy politics within the camp, but that their overwhelming issue was with vunerable and aggressive people turning up. I grew even more concerned at this but he assured me that while he would take what I had raised on board it was all in hand and a “safer spaces” policy had been implimented that evening.

I first heard the news on Wednesday lunchtime. Reporting was sparce however it was apparent that a rape had occurred within the camp. Later it transpired that she had arrived at the camp and despite the Occupy Glasgow’s efforts to obtain her accomodation, she was not offered anything suitable, despite being six months pregnant. This is absolutely shocking and a disgusting reflection on Glasgow City Council. Occupy Glasgow should be commended for the efforts that they put into attempting to obtain her suitable accomodation in the face of an uncaring beaurocracy, yet must also be held responsible for what happened next. They eventually offered her and her partner a tent for the night – the most prominent tent in the entire camp, right at the front and in full view of the square. From that moment on, fully knowing her vulnerability, her pregnancy and lack of accomodation, they had full responsibility for her safety as with any other member of the camp. Her partner left shortly afterwards then, according to press reports a group of men turned up and started drinking with some of the occupiers, then entered the tent. Occupiers overheard her crying and the men emerged from the tent offering them “shots”. Where upon they called the police.

The first initial statement is below

Occupy Glasgow is shocked and deeply saddened about the alleged sexual assault on one of the individuals that have been co-inhabiting George Square with the separate Occupy Glasgow movement.

“Since October 15, Occupy Glasgow have provided free food, shelter and clothing to some individuals who had none of their own and we immensely regret any harm that may have befallen one of these individuals.

“We are fully committed to working with Strathclyde Police in their current investigation, and in continued improvements to the provision of safety to occupiers, the homeless and the general public that use George Square.

The distancing from this woman, referred to without reference to gender coupled with the implicit benevolence of the camp and lack of responsibility for what has happened is stunning without even mentioning that what later transpired to be a gang rape is referred to as an “alleged sexual assault”.

After work, I went down to Occupy Glasgow for the general assembly that night and talked to some of the participants. I was genuinely shocked by some of the attitudes that I found there. The woman was referred to in one conversation as an “undesirable element”, there were continual references to “alleged” rape/sexual assault, questions were raised about whether she had invited them into the tent and how genuine her claims were and her “vulnerability” was repeated over and over again as evidence of their lack of responsibility for her wellbeing.

The meeting which followed was little better. The overwhelming impression that I gained from that meeting was that this was a terrible tragedy which had befallen the camp due to their kindness and benevolence, but was really nothing to do with them, and that all they needed to do was to recify the security situation.

Horse.

Stable.

Bolted.

I can’t (and don’t want to) remember all of the comments which were made and left unchallenged during that meeting, but I sat there transfixed with anger and my teeth on edge. Online the discourse was little better with a continual stream rape apologism, minimising, othering, denial and victim blaming coming from some of the Occupy Glasgow contingent.

This isnt the first rape that has occured in the Occupy movement, and the victim blaming that has gone on here is replicated in a rape of a 14 year old at Occupy Dallas, while Occupy Baltimore has discouraged victims of sexual offences reporting them to the police. The leaderless nature of the Occupy Movement, and lack of accountability leads to informal hierachies taking hold – and at the top of the heirarchies are generally the straight white males.

When sexist people are allowed to join and define a movement, this drives women away; but, when women stay away, men, including sexist men, become the defining voices within the movement

How Occupy’s (non-)power structures enable sexism

At the moment there is no possible way that Occupy Glasgow can continue. This rape was fully preventable and it is a sobering reflection on the culture of the left that it happened. I am sure that there are many good and genuine people who have been involved in Occupy Glasgow, as with other Occupy camps, however the current situation is untenable. It is perhaps unsurprising that sexual abuse has occured within a movement which started off by welcoming a rapist as a hero. While I continue to support the aims and ambitions of the Occupy Movement, its methods and culture need seriously rethought.

A woman’s place is in the movement and not just as a fucktoy for the menz.

"Worth reading the comments posted in response, and at the Occupy Glasgow facebook page as well - they demonstrate better than anything why Mhairi is spot on."

http://mhairi.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/de-occupy-glasgow/

I just can't stop thinking that all those fuckers who were around and heard the screaming, did not intervene, and kick the shit out of whoever did this. That, in itself tells volumes about those who were present at the that time at the occupation.
Also, highlights a point: activism and a sense of strong community doesn't go well together. To assume that all people who are protesting against banks not necessary are there for building a strong community, is essential but also paralyzing.

This is terrible and the desperate attempts to avoid any responsibility are shameful. I would agree with the earlier comments about making occupations alcohol free spaces, or at least having it set up with social areas so that groups of people are not sat drinking outside tents where others sleep, apart from safety there is basic consideration for others involved here.

From the sound of it this is a structural problem, no one wanted to actually take responsibility for either admitting that they couldn't do anything for her or actually looking after her.

I am pretty surprised by the story about previous occupations, I just didn't think that kind of behaviour would happen.

Fuck.

I've forwarded that blog to a bunch of Edinburgh people I know, really well put. It's so incredibly depressing to have to start from scratch all the time - like, the ease with which people will become rape apologists but still obviously they're like 'not sexist' or whatever...

It just shows how much more work needs doing when those kind of attitudes are SO deeply ingrained even amongst people who would claim to be feminists, or 'activists' of some kind. Just find it kinda... demobilizing. I don't know how you even begin.

Martin, thanks a lot for your account. Made my spine shiver a bit (specifically the victim blaming and the 'alleged' bollocks), but it is a good post!

It is easy to throw in ideas, but perhaps they should have self-defense workshops within the occupation. That would be a good start. What is interesting that I thought there were plenty of those activist circles participating in the occupations who are routinely dealing with this kind of stuff (I mean, organizing women's self-defense, safer spaces, etc). I think the lack of taking responsibility is one of the consequences of their lack of organisation (that is, their structureless movement).

Yeah definitely. And self-defence workshops are great and a really good idea, and it's really empowering (that word makes me do a little lefty vomit but oh well) to feel like you're not so vulnerable.

The only issue is, whilst that's a great and worthwhile idea, it's still focussing on being a potential victim, when the much bigger, trickier problem is about tackling the attitudes that enable this kind of behaviour, or lead people to justify and minimise it. Which in turns prevents people from speaking out, which makes it easier to get away with, and then it's a big horrible circle. That's the bit I don't know how you'd deal with...

Difficult question for sure.

I bring something in that perhaps not exactly related to the matter, but just for demonstration. I always imagined the revolutionary organisation as a organically connected network of communes. And communes would form out of family and friendship relations and also the other way around simultaneously. Communes therefore would provide the safest community that one could wish for. I know, I know, this is kind of an idea for a communist society, but...

Any protest, occupation or even strike is mostly growing out of groups of people who aren't connected in any other terms than their issue which they are fighting for or against. This doesn't provide enough basis to suppose that all other people participating in the action are reliable in other matters, such as sexuality or drunken behaviour. If otherwise alienated people get together, there's always a gamble how you can cope with them on a personal level, especially if it comes to long-term camping. To avoid the trap of setting up a kind of activist police or security force, one must look in to the organisation itself of the encampment. If there's a need, and there are lot of loosely connected people who don't know each other for long time, perhaps there's a need for separation of sexes, where women can maintain their own safety and slowly progressing to understand, get know each other during the public hours and deepen the personal relationships. Rape isn't just simply an inherent behaviour, it is closely related to the phenomena, where men doesn't feel responsible for the safety of the women around. As the personal relationship will form to a more deeper level, commune-like groups will form, and find their way of safe accommodation and harmonic sexual behaviour.

This is a disgusting comment please can action be taken to delete this. Do not ever say alleged sexual assaults this is disgusting rape apologist crap. Precisely what the Occupy Glasgow people are saying.

Lots of people in Glasgow especially women are very upset about not only the tragic event that happened but the disgusting response from occupy Glasgow. We are trying to look for solutions to try and prevent misogynistic culture in our organisations and occupations. We had to deal with crap like this at the Hetherington and frankly people are fucking fed up with it, that misogynistic and often predatory men are tolerated and even supported. That people can not see how rape apologist and sexist crap contributes to making women so uncomfortable that they feel it is not safe for them to be involved is appalling. How many times people involved in Occupy Glasgow have said to women I know that they should thus get involved is disgusting, it is the responsibility of Occupy Glasgow to make there space safe for women(or else stop) not women who feel to unsafe to even go there.

This Facebook page appears like it has a lot of relevant stuff on it. https://www.facebook.com/occupypatriarchy

It's multi-faceted really, some occupations are completely different to others, but let's be honest Glasgow city centre is quite dangerous at the best of times isn't it? It's not really the same as somewhere like central London which yeah, is dangerous in Soho and the like, no one would deny that, but the level and type of random violence is quite different really. Also an occupation like that is definitely going to attract dangerous people, as I'm sure it has done in London too, so having a naive attitude and partaking in something like that is dangerous really and people should be more aware of who they are around, who they mix with and what they should see as warning signs to avoid. In all honesty, outside Charing Cross copshop alone you usually get groups of men shouting at women at a lot of t imes of the night.

Going to an 'event' where things can kick off is always dangerous and there is a level of risk involved, what astounded me was people who took their kids to the G20.. absolutely unbelievable isn't it? I wonder if people took their kids to the occupation itself.. I hope not, it's not safe and it's not on. I am sorry for the people who got abused in this and hope the movement rids itself of the 'wrong people' as they are calling these scumbags.

Edit: By the way, I know people took kids to a rally in George Sq, I presume there was no indication of violence and generally it had a peaceable atmosphere, so I dont really mean stuff like that.

you what?

No one can "ever" say "alleged sexual assaults" as that is apologising for rape? What a ridiculous comment.

I was referring to a quasi-fascist poster on some American news site claiming (or "alleging", a synonym) that people had been raped and attacked at loads of occupations across the US. I hadn't heard of most of them, and seeing as most of the rest of what he was saying was made up I didn't automatically believe him (he was also saying that people at the occupations were just defecating on the ground, that occupy Oakland protesters were violent, and that they deserve to be shot and killed).

So if a right wing nut job alleges that some rapes have happened, you have to automatically assume that they are all true, or else you are an apologist for rape? It is ridiculous attitudes like this that feed people's prejudices against "political correctness", "feminists" and suchlike.

Posted that article martin posted in the Occupy Liverpool facebook group with a suggestion that we needed to have a discussion on how we make occupations safe for all partipants.

My post was deleted. For fuck's sake.

Edit: as it turns out, the post was not deleted, I just couldn't see them due to a balls up on my part. Also, I am a cock.

I don't read american news sites particularly.

I have read of at least one more incident reported where a woman was raped than in the OP.

"these, as well as other alleged sexual assaults" implies these tragic incidents in the OP are alleged too as well as other incidents that may or may not have been reported. Seriously the daily mail covered this story of the tragic rape at occupy Glasgow, does not mean it is false even if the daily mail is questionable a lot of the time.

And still what is the relevance of the right wing going on about such issues? honestly to me it feels like women are being told to shut up because of such associations.

It also does matter how what you have written will be interpreted I read it as essentially not believing in victims and in a context where cunts at occupy Glasgow are implying that their protest is more important than a woman getting raped, that it was oh so convenient that this horrific incident happened when they were going to formulate policy in regards to the homeless people they had in the proximity of their camp, it is really not on.

Be more sensitive, it is ridiculous throw away comments that make women feel uncomfortable and guess what, your intentions aren't all that matter.