Revised Name: Being Safe, the Bodhisattvas

[reubenshojin]

Since there has been some tension over the name of this working group, and our role and authority, such that we have any, we took a check last night around 9 PM, because we needed to have sufficient stakeholder buy in before folks felt comfortable going to sleep, and ensure that we had a game plan for the overnight. We had about 19 or so folks at the meeting, and the group felt that Peace Facilitation left a bit too much out of the proposed needs that the group was formed to address. Taking a cue from the Rainbow movement, we came to agreement that the title Bodhisattva, a person who chooses to put the welfare of others before themselves, a peaceful warrior, was acceptable to the group. Because there was concern over using a tricky to pronounce Sanskrit word, we decided we are going to also use the name Being Safe for the working group, although the core idea of service to the group needs should remain understood.

We would honestly like to take a chance to get more input from other stakeholders and interested parties, but for the time being, we are operating under this working group name. We need to have a meeting so we can discuss processes and methodologies, get the needed teach-ins or remote trainings scheduled, and address other concerns. We fully encourage everybody in the camp take the opportunity to work with us on Being Safe.

[pinkoblues]

Good ideas! I like that people are gettin shit together more and more. THIS GROUP NEEDS TO HAVE A STATION AT THE PARK. I will definitely be taking part.

[benbrucato]

Two questions:

1) what's the problem with "safety and security"?

2) Is it just me, or doesn't 'Bodhisattva' (disembodied from its cultural and religious origins) seem to reek of cultural appropriation?

[beezus]

I am inclined to agree...I think the name waters down the true meaning of Bodhisattva and, I sincerely hope unintentionally, implies some kind of moral superiority of its members. Yet, the content of this group's ideas are of more interest to me. Names are only names...What's simple is true, my friends.

[joshred]

I'm not a member of the group and ultimately it's your decision, but I'd like you to be easily discovered by new participants. A name that doesn't effectively convey what you do is potentially a safety risk.

[pinkoblues]

When I first heard the name Bodhisattvas I was a little bothered by the religious connotations. When you stated it this way it sounded pretty cool. However I am not sure this is a fully accurate definition of the bodhisattvas in so many ways that it could be culturally insensitive or offensive. We should probably stay away from names related to religion in general(even though THE ARCHANGELS would be cool).

I am happy that this group is coming to fruition. I am hearing concerns about people being available at night for many things. This and many other stations need to be built, supplied and staffed. Any one who is interested please step up and make it happen.

PS Can someone please tell me how to sign up to a wg on here.I have been so busy in the park that I have not spent much time on here. Thank You

[madskeptic]

I too would like to express my objection to the usage of religious terms to describe a group serving a secular purpose.

While, I am ignorant of the cultural significance of the term, I doubt I am in the minority. Having said that, the usage of obscure terms (religious or otherwise) can be alienating to many people and if the group intends to represent the 99%, I believe clear and unambiguous names need to be used. This WG really needs to be called something like Safety and Security.

[benbrucato]

I'm not so worried about alienating secular folks as I am about non-Buddhists and people not from Southeast Asia using it. I'm more concerned about cultural appropriation than those who can't handle religious diversity because of atheist fundamentalism.

All that said, I know Lauren is Pagan, and initiated talk about this, so...

Safety and Security is pretty simple.

[reubenshojin]

The real problem is that we have a lot of tension around the word security. Initial discussions on Saturday morning suggested Peace Facilitation, but that doesn't clearly fit into what all the people who have the necessary skills and training are comfortable with. Being Safe seems to be what it is being called in actual use, so the name Being Safe is what seems to be what we are going to call it. I have no attachment to anything but the actual use. I withdraw Boddhisattva from usage at this time, and I consider such amendment friendly.

At the request of individuals involved previously with Rainbow Gathers, the usage of a term to describe the people responsible for deescalation and incident response was requested. Since this is not a Rainbow Gather, I am uncomfortable appropriating their language. I offered something that I felt approximated the ideal, and the 19 or so there thought it was okay, if hard to pronounce.

A friend of mine who is Mohawk once described my wife with a word that means, approximately, Steadfast Flower. If folks still want a label to apply to individuals, I'll see if I can remember that word. At least it is regionally appropriated, although usage of a Native People's word might have other issues. I'll bring it up as a proposal.

Inasmuch as people object to Bodhisattva, take it up with me on site. The objections are diverse (cultural appropriation, religiousity, inaccuracy of use) and rather than spend time explaining the growth and legitimate expression of Western Buddhism as a new branch of more secular Buddhadharma, I'd rather keep the conversation focussed here on Being Safe, naturally. I apologize if Bodhisattva distracted from that goal.

[madskeptic]

As to the term "security" being problematic. Is it not security that a mother or father provides their child when they hold them close?

[Emma]

Happy to hear this is coming. When & where? How can others help you get started?

Last night I was camping in the family area and heard a loud argument in the main area, maybe 10-11pm? It died down, but it definitely made me nervous to hear it because I know we don't have any existing way of dealing with things if they get problematic. My partner also witnessed some folks taunting some folks in an SUV yesterday who'd stopped by to voice their disagreement. Not a good idea, for safety reasons (SUVs are a formidable weapon).

I really hope to see an active (and hopefully constant) presence of this group asap. Seems like one of the key things that's missing from the occupation. The middle of the night when folks are drunk and tired and there's fewer people around seems to be a key time to have plans for dealing with problems.

Do you guys want to talk amongst yourselves about peackeepking plans for Saturday? I think we should expect crowds in the thousands, and having some internal folks who can help with keeping things calm would lead to less liklihood of police involvement.

Thanks for doing this!!!

[nami]

This evening I plan to be there around 8pm. I would love to meet with anyone interested in security. What would people think about meeting at the intersection of the park just behind the tents at 8pm to solidify details?

[reubenshojin]

I'll be on site briefly on Thursday to help run the Basic Non-Violence Class, as well. If there is some tension out there, we need to step past it fast so we can get back to focussing on Being Safe. Maybe if we could get a facilitator or two to help with the meetings, it would help, as we need consensus on our site safety plans.

I am substantially worried about the SUV wielding agressor. We had an incident early Tuesday morning, around 2 AM, but use of a camera, notepad to write down the tag #, and a cell phone to place an appropriate call, kept it from being too much worse than what it was. Perhaps even faking the use of the cellphone could help. I believe those who are handling late night site safety should have all 3 on hand and ready. If we could have a Legal Observer available 24/7, that would cover one part of the set, and be really be helpful, as well.

With Halloween being celebrated this weekend, we need to be ready for whatever comes.

[koffeefrkeleven]

It seems really silly to be arguing over semantics, and whether using a sanskrit term is "cultural appropriation". I was at the meeting with Reuben, and I really liked the idea of a "peaceful warrior." It's fitting, and it's powerful.
I don't even get why there's an argument about this. It seems like those of us that were there at the meeting were pretty accepting of the idea. I'm an atheist, but I see no reason not to use a religious term. Seriously, we have way bigger fish to fry right now. This all seems a little ludicrous to put on some people who are willing to stay up long after you're snoring, to make sure the park is a safe environment.

[joshred]

I don't care about the religious term, but I'd be concerned about calling the safety group something other than safety. I want them to be easily discovered.

[madskeptic]

Rob, while you may not take offence, others will. I, for one am offended by any attempt by religionists to co-opt a secular movement. There's a religious plurality being represented and the only way to avoid alienating people is to use secular terms.

On top of that, the term is in no way self explanatory within the context we're working. How many people do you honestly believe at occupy Albany know Sanskrit or the Hindu religion well enough to natively understand what the term means? I'll tell you who - a select few.

If occupy Albany wants to continue to be taken seriously, it must make concerted effort to avoid an appearance of a leftist elitist intelligencia. Using language like this supports that particular narrative should the press choose to run with it.

[reubenshojin]

Point of Process. Are we really still discussing this? I had no attachment to the term as religious; despite the fact that it is from my practice tradition, I was suggesting only a word that conveyed the idea of service while also engaging in direct action. I'll be happy to do a teach-in on the Bodhisattva this weekend, if folks would like some clarification.

In closure, I'd like to offer one of those stories that my tradition is so fond of. It's an old Zen story, but still cogent. Two monks are walking, a senior monk with his student. They reach a river ford, and the water is high, due to recent rains. A lady is on one side of the river, clearly wanting to cross it. The full monastic vows do not allow contact with women, but the senior monk offers to carry her across the river. 6 miles down the road, the student ask his teacher why he has not done the atonements for a violation of the vows. The senior monk asks his student why he has carried the lady for 6 miles, when he left her on the other side of the river.

[anthony]

I was a part of a meeting last night after the GA and the work group was calling itself, I think, peoples safety. I think this group is the same group except for a few name changes so I believe I am in the right spot.
More importantly, are we going to meet soon to set a schedule for people to do rounds and get set up to deal with this Saturday?

Anthony

[reubenshojin]

Safety, under whatever name, has been working closely with Food and portions of Legal. These working groups have a need to be on site, and have a presence, so I think continued coordination is ideal. Safety is ultimately going to be a site based process, so all the discussions we have on the forums, at the end of the day, are moot. For the time being, if Lauren or myself are offsite, check with Food and Legal, as someone who has been active in the coordination of Being Safe activity should be reachable. Unfortunately, work/life/occupation balance has made it difficult for Lauren or I to be 100% available, especially as we both work through the weekday GAs.

[nami]

As a quick, simple suggestion for a name, would people be open to calling this group Public Safety? We are eliminating the potentially problematic word "security" but presenting ourselves with a name that everyone should be able to recognize fairly easily. Thoughts?