The perils of volunteerism ... and of irony

Anitra Again (anitra@speakeasy.org)
Mon, 19 Jan 1998 16:19:02 -0800 (PST) 

Pat and George -- I don't hear you two talking at cross-purposes as
much as you seem to hear each other that way.  I hear both of you
saying what I myself have said a few times -- honestly helping people
get more human dignity and control over their lives *for themselves*
is never easy and has all sorts of pitfalls we have to be alert for.

You can subvert someone else's self-determinism just as easily as a
fellow homeless shelter member telling them what-for "for their own
good" as you can being a sweet and naive volunteer enthusiastically
taking over and running a program that the shelter members wanted to
do for themselves.

And there are pitfalls for us even in email, support-group
communication.  It is much more natural to say "it is like this" than
to say "my experience has been".  It is more natural to say "you
should" or "we should" than to say "what works for me is".   It is
more natural to say "people must not do this" than to say "I've had to
watch out for doing ..."

In my own observation and analysis, Pat has a marked tendency to use
academic language, and George has a marked tendency toward irony and
symbolism.  But I heard George agreeing that we have to be humble in
all our dealings with fellow human beings -- including our speech in
this "room".  I didn't hear an attack on Pat.

Pat, as you know -- I hope -- I agree with a large measure of what you
say.  But I do have two reservations.  

While I think that a large number of volunteers and advocates need
more introspection, self-doubt, and humility, I have found that
another large portion of them are overly dedicated to it already. Like
Adult Children of Alcoholics who question their co-dependency issues
for half an hour whenever they have to decide on the correct tip to
leave the waiter, most of the people who will take your critique to
heart and stop to question their motives and methods *don't* need to
-- they need to stop analyzing and get on with doing.  These questions
of self-management and equity in control tend to work themselves out
in action better than they do in analysis.  I don't mean we should
stop thinking about them and discussing them -- but that they are
more effectively discussed in specific situations, and thought about
"on your feet" while working on a specific goal.

Also, I have seen the call of "poverty pimp" and the accusations of
patronizing advocacy used to divide people.  Rather than say "*they*
aren't doing it *right*; *damn* them" I would rather work on ways to
make *all* people -- rich, poor, borderline or whatever -- more
sensitive to how to appreciate and increase the free-will and creative
expression of the other people around them.  Don't bash those who
don't do it -- figure out how to wake them up.  Because again, I
repeat, I have seen prosperous middle-class churchwomen who can talk
to a homeless woman and make her feel like a citizen of the earth with
good to contribute -- and I have seen homeless women who make each
other out to be idiots and bunglers and bound-for-hell sinners to boot.
The problem does not lie in whether you are a volunteer, a paid
helper, a professional advocate, or a homeless person -- the problem,
or rather the solution, lies in whether or not you have developed a
real passion for being surprised by what *other* people can do with
their lives, and continually learning new things from them.
  
___________________
WRITE ON! -- Anitra
Save America's Vanishing Frompers!  Support Thalia, Muse of Comedy, 
in the Site Fights!  http://www.thesitefights.com/circus/clown1.htm