Cohousing-L Mailing List: More Outbursts

[George Krasle (GSKrasle]

Sheila, Stacia, et al:

I, too, have been fascinated with the "Outburst" thread. Rob has chimed-in
with his comments on judging and labeling "dysfunctionals" so I suppose he
includes me in the discussion. The only "outburst" I can recall being
involved in was when I was shouted at "You have NO community spirit, and I
hope you die a miserable death!" by a Senior at one of the early meetings.
There was no particular reaction to this outburst, beyond stunned silence.

But the treatment I received was of a sort that might be applied to someone
themselves prone to outbursts, so I think it appropriate to mention it here.
I would not consider it effective, and would not recommend it as a method of
dealing with either a "Burster" or a "Dysfunctional:"
"...sometimes, you need to band yourself as a group together, and work out a
strategy to survive and thrive with the dysfunctional person."

"In my experience the best ways to work through such problems is to
regularly
evaluate processes, create and empower intervention models, and be proactive
in approaches to maintain group equilibrium."

Exclusion, either as punishment or as an inducement to Good Behavior, or
"sometimes the dysfunctional person moves away." is a very dangerous method;
I much prefer the ones discussed here recently that respect the individual
and the principles that are professed by all the Communities I have heard
of.

I may be pretty sensitive, because this is what I experienced, but here is a
sarcastic, Machiavellian presentation FOR what I experienced (It's easier to
describe IT than to describe each possible "NOT IT"):

<By establishing a strong leader, an authority who can judge a "severely
socially dysfunctional person" and label them for exclusion, equilibrium can
be maintained. Suspension of the bylaws, etc. in this case is necessary, at
least informally, but by banding together, you may be successful in forcing
the one judged "dysfunctional" to move away or otherwise surrender to your
will.>

I have also seen others subjected to exclusion, suspension of the normal
social "rules:" The retarded girl in my neighborhood when I was twelve: She
was seen as "socially dysfunctional," and therefore the usual social rules
were suspended for her. She was trusting and naive, could be lured into the
woods with the promise of a gift of a bicycle or candy, and it seemed that I
was in a very small minority that considered such prurient and opportunistic
actions repulsive. But, then, I have been labeled "severely socially
dysfunctional" too.

"...Trust is one of the two foundation blocks of consensus process.
(humility
being the other). When group members do not trust each other, then consensus
process takes a lot of time, and sometimes can not be accomplished at all. I
have found that it is a very good exercise to have the group brainstorm up
actions which build trust, and actions which erode trust."

Of course, if Power is used as above, to exclude, there is no need for
"trust." Obedience is enough. When trust can be dispensed with, the
community is free to abrogate contracts and "make sure the trains run on
time." On Time in '39.

> Can you say more about "trust"? It gets bandied about with great
regularity
> and in practice seems to be used to mean "don't question".
>
> Questions are interpreted as disagreement and lack of trust.
>
> I tend to think ahead on the consequences of decisions and get anxious.
But
> asking questions about it gets me into a lot of hot water. (It's a given
> that I am too direct, too picky, too opinionated for many people but
asking
> questions indirectly doesn't get answers.)

"Process can be used to avoid dealing with issues just as easily as to deal
with issues. My favorite at the moment is "Process was followed therefore
you can't question the outcome."

In case you are confused, I do not support the Machiavellian techniques I
have experienced, any more than I would the assertion that "once you get her
in the back seat, she can't claim rape." Of course, we all know that the
standard defense of an accused rapist is to claim that his victim is
"dysfunctional -- a Loose Woman," and that it is her own fault, so she
shouldn't be paid attention to. I find THAT repulsive; even if she should
have an outburst, I think she should be heard.

George, who anticipates another wave of mail, but would prefer comments to
be public.
_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l