Trust, Mutuality and Co-Creation Within Feminism: The Art of Building a Movement (originally posted at Feministe 10/27/07)

In the post on Intersecting Identities and Feminist Identification, commenter Tiffany of Houston summed up what I view as the core problem with one salient sentence:

“I can’t take feminism as a movement seriously because I have a lack of trust in it.”

That’s it. Right there. That accurately describes how many women feel towards feminism—a lack of trust. And that lack of trust is a critical barrier to building a movement. A movement that made tremendous strides toward improving the day-to-day lives of women, but whose momentum has withered (in the U.S.) in recent decades. Now, feminism is still kicking ass and taking names; despite the periodic premature announcement of its/our death in the mainstream media. Important work continues to be done concerning domestic violence, (hat tip: brownfemipower, whose blog should be part of your Recommended Daily Requirement of Feminism) reproductive justice, LGBT rights, racial justice, women of color in the media, women in the trades, women at work, motherhood…….all kinds of feminist organizing.

But. Our movement is fragmented. Our power is diffused. Old wounds have been allowed to fester. Old concerns remain current concerns. In fact, many of the same ills that exist within feminist movement also exist within the labor movement (save for one major difference—the labor movement has never been as geographically isolated as the feminist movement). Whining? If so, I’m in damn good company, and plentiful company at that.

And that’s key. Because there is a backlash. We have lost ground. And we cannot return to our former momentum of progress without solidarity. Without critical mass. Healing wounds takes time, and it often hurts. But the benefits outweigh the pain. So, let’s engage in little triage, hmm?

Back when I entered the apprenticeship program in 1988, the IBEW (at the international level, what we call the “I.O”—but don’t get me started on “international” as referring to Canada and the U.S.; that would be a whole ‘nother post) was well aware of losing ground. At the local level, not so much. Oh sure, folks were aware of the nonunion element getting work, but there was a combination of attitudes towards that fact. Among them: an arrogance that we were better electricians, that those who hired nonunion would live to regret their foolishness; a blase, “whaddya gonna do” attitude, a feeling that the pendulum would swing back on its own; a “fuck this shit” attitude amongst the older members close to retirement, ready to jump ship and collect their pension at the earliest opportunity; an apathy endemic to much of the union movement—a sort of just-keep-plugging-along and hope for the best. And of course, the still-present old-school unionism that still believed in organizing the unorganized, as enshrined in the (union) Constitution. In the years before and throughout my apprenticeship, the I.O. took many tacks toward stemming the tide of lost work and lost membership.

And one of them was a novel approach: the COMET classes. Construction Organizing Membership Education Training. The idea being, that the membership within the Locals had to get individualized instruction on what the problem was, why it existed, and how serious it was. COMET II classes were designed to further that education, with tactics for organizing and a framework of strategy to keep the process moving forward. I had my first COMET class with Jeremiah O’Connor, a mercurial Irishman who was the organizer for Local 701 (Brother O’Connor went on to become the Sixth District Vice President, and later the International Secretary-Treasurer. He was instrumental in the creation of the IBEW Women’s Conference).

COMET classes were resisted by the membership, especially by the baby-boom generation. Younger members thought, “yeah, we know, but the political tide has turned and that’s the way it is.” But the boomers? Shit, “we don’t need no stinking COMET classes.” It was bullshit, they said. Buncha blah, blah, blah thought up by too many people who haven’t picked up a set of tools in decades. The goal was for each Local to have every member attend a class. And the boomers unoffically boycotted the classes in droves. But then again, there were some who went—with the purpose of heckling, shouting down, telling why the whole procedure was bogus, why organizing wasn’t going to work.

Yet some people were converted. Even if they didn’t agree with every step in the plan, they saw that the big picture—organizing the unorganized, why that fell by the wayside over the years, and how to return to that critical mass—was central to our survival. Over the ensuing years, the focus changed, and various strategies were developed. Again, it was/is a process. There are organizing initiatives in strategic geographic areas. An army of organizers to carry out the work. The emphasis has switched from “stripping” (taking the workforce away from nonunion contractors) to organizing nonunion shops. There is a greater emphasis on improving the image of the union and its workers—correcting the misconceptions and misinformation perpetuated in the mass media. Also, a greater emphasis on diversity and bilingual information. And it is working. It is having an effect. We are gaining critical mass. Critical mass that will be especially important to political strength. The labor movement has always had its greatest gains—and greatest losses—through legislation.

So, for that matter, have feminists. We need critical mass, and we can get it by taking a few pages out of labor organizing handbooks. What has brought the most historical success for labor organizers? Face time, and a whole lot of it, with the unorganized. Listening to their concerns, and putting their needs on the agenda. Forming coalitions with other labor and/or community groups—and not just by having a few officers sit in on meetings, or take seats on a board—but by rolling up the sleeves and doing the nitty-gritty work. We have to create an atmosphere of trust, mutuality, and co-creation within the movement. Because building a movement is time, labor and money-intensive. It’s a labor of love. If folks feel unloved—well hell, there goes the movement, right out the door.

Again, I cede the floor. What are your thoughts on feminist organizing? If you had two hours a week to devote to feminist organizing, where would you spend it? Who would you spend it with? What area would be your emphasis? How would you fight the negative image of feminism? How would you create a safe space for those who feel like they are on the outside looking in?

I’ll even start: if I had two hours each week to organize for feminism, I’d do it through forming a local group dedicated to getting young women to consider nontraditional work. And because of the strong effects of stereotyping, it would probably be best to start in middle-school/junior high, and continue from there on through high school. And I would talk about feminism within that context, from both a personal, historical, and legislative perspective. I’d want all those young women hungry for the chance to register and vote when they turned eighteen. And I’d want ‘em hungry for a chance to continue the process of desegregating nontraditional fields.