Working
Through
Harm
Community based methods for addressing harm using transformative justice principles
Content warning: This zine covers topics regarding abuse such as domestic violence and sexual assault. It discusses identifying abusive behaviors, ways community can intervene in harm, ways people who have experienced harm can receive support, and accountability.
Goal of this workbook: Presenting options for you to make your own decisions
This is a workbook with information for you to figure out what type of accountability process might fit you best. The goal is to present options in a matter of fact way with clear descriptions of what they are, how they operate, and what they realistically do. This workbook aims to present each option neutrally, not as better or worse, and to provide reflection questions to see if any of these options fit for the specific situation. This workbook includes options that are violent, nonviolent, address the person who caused harm, only addresses the survivor, and work at a larger collective scale. It is your choice to go to what option feels like it makes the most sense.
The only strong recommendation that I make in this workbook is to listen to the people most directly affected by harm/abuse. I request that you do not take actions on the behalf of a person who has experienced harm that directly affects them or could potentially affect them without their knowledge and consent. This can directly impact their safety, healing, and agency.
On Community: In general, when talking about community based responses to harm, we are meaning a response that is not lead by institutions such as police and court systems. More specifically throughout this workbook we will use the word “community” to mean different things based on the specifics of different accountability methods ranging from a whole scene to a person’s immediate friends and family.
Naming the Roots of This Work
It is important to name that the work of transformative justice originates from groups who’s marginalization impacts their ability to access traditional forms of justice, particularly groups who experience disproportionate amounts of state violence. It is important to recognize the countless and unknown ancestors who have been doing this work before us, namely black and brown queer and trans and street based community members.
A special thanks to the thought leaders who have helped shape the ideas in this zine:
Mia Mingus, Mariamme Cabba, Shira Hassan, Shannon Perez-Darby, Danika Bornstein, Project Nia, Incite!, Creative interventionists toolkit, Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, Mimi Kim, Adrienne Marie Brown, Bay Area Transformative Justice Collective (BATJC), Philly Stands up, Support NY, Kazu Haga, Qui Alexander, and many more.
Glossary to Describe Harm/Abuse
Abuse is: any action or series of actions with the effect of holding power and control over another person. A single behavior can be abusive like sexual assault or there can be a pattern and cycle of abusive behaviors like in domestic violence.
Harm is: any action or series of actions that result in a person feeling hurt or harmed. A single behavior can be harmful or there can be a series of harmful behaviors. The difference is that the harm does not result in wielding power and control over another person.
Manipulation is: When a person tries to achieve a goal through means that were not mutually agreed upon. Manipulation happens all the time and may or may not be abusive or harmful.
All are valid and can receive responses weather or not they qualify as an abusive pattern of power and control. And intervening in hurtful situations can prevent abuse down the road. All of it is important. Deciding something does not fit the definition of abuse here does not belittle the harm in any way.
I will use these term “harm” throughout this workbook because abuse is also harmful. However distinguishing the two is useful because the un-learning is specific to each. A behavior that functions to gain power, and control, requires different un-learning than a behavior that is upsetting but not necessarily inherently about control.
*Certain processes like mediation are not appropriate when there is a one sided level of abuse going on. Mediation is based on the premise that both parties have equal negotiating power which is untrue when one party has power and control in the relationship.
When is it best to apply an accountability process?
It is best to be proactive. It takes less energy and resources to stop harm at the warning sign stage than once something has escalated into full blown abuse. Yes, you can absolutely have a response and intervention to abuse. And I am not discouraging those interventions, they are very necessary for people surviving harm. But if you could catch warning signs and prevent abuse before it even happens, that is all the better.
Holding interventions to more minor behaviors can look like pointing out to a friend that something they said or did was sexist, checking their behavior, letting them know that the group you are in does not accept certain behavior, process with them why the thing they did was harmful and how to make it better, etcetera. Holding each other accountable at a less escalated level can look like mundane and simple conversations.
Source: Mia Mingus, Bay Area Transformative Justice Collective
Power and Control Wheel for Identifying Abusive Behaviors
RACISM
It takes the average person 7 times to leave an abusive relationship. Every situation is specific but some common reasons are:
If you are supporting a friend trying to leave a situation of interpersonal violence, be patient with them and meet them where they are at regarding their readiness to leave. Respect their agency. Don’t get mad at them if they go back, but instead figure out how to be more ready for the next time they try to leave. Help them gather a “to go bag” if they need to leave quickly with essentials like identity documents.
Journal Questions to Identify Abuse
Abuse is complicated. These are not exhaustive questions.
*Be aware that a person who is a survivor in one relationship can cause harm in a different relationship and a person who harmed in one relationship can be a survivor in the next.
Ally:
Who is holding the power?
Who has control?
What was the effect of a specific behavior or action? - Did it increase a person’s power/control?
Who is afraid? How does fear play a role in holding power and control?
Person Experiencing Harm: (you don’t need a yes to every question for the relationship to be harmful/abusive.)
Do you feel like it is impossible to please your partner?
Are you afraid of what your partner might do if you break up or set a boundary?
Are you doubting and questioning your own reality, choices, judgements, and unsure of what is true?
Is communication difficult with your partner because the things they say are not coming from a rational or truthful place?
Does your partner isolate you? Has your friend network and people you can rely on gotten smaller?
Does your partner threaten harm to you, those close to you, or pets?
Does your partner verbally put you down or intentionally embarrass you in front of others?
Are you able to say no to sex?
Visioning Models for Justice
Justice will look different for every person who has experienced harm. Here are a few general categories that different justice models often fall into. Ask yourself what model of justice fit’s your circumstance. - If you are a ally/support person, please keep in mind that the people who have experienced harm will know best what types of accountability and justice models will/won't work in their situation.
Punitive: responses to harm that often involve punishment for the harm done. This could be state sanctioned punishment such as jail time or other forms of punishment such as vigilantism.
When visioning what justice looks like for you, it is important to differentiate punishment from consequences:
Punishment is an action imposed upon a person intended to cause that person a negative outcome. Punishments are not proportional to the harm or related to reducing the person’s capacity to harm.
Consequences are natural negative outcomes of the harm that are proportional to the harm. Eacmples are: the loss of a relationship, removal of elements that cause abuse of power and control like holding a position of power, etcetera. Sometimes people misperceive any consequences as punitive justice. Consequences can be a part of TJ.
Restorative: responses to harm that want to restore the situation back to the way it once was before the harm occurred. Examples would be re-conciliation or mediation. It is a nostalgic form of justice where things can go back to the way they were before the harm happened.
Transformative: response to harm that recognizes that restoring the situation back to how it once was does not change the conditions that enabled the harm to occur. This response works to transmute the internal and external conditions that enabled the harm into something different than before.
Spiritual: response to harm that leaves justice up to a higher power or relying on spirituality to process the harm on a deeper level.
Transformative Justice (TJ)
Transformative Justice is: a way of addressing harm that asserts that every day people can transform the conditions that enabled interpersonal harm to happen. It is an umbrella term that can mean a variety of things ranging from violence intervention, survivor support, accountability work, or community accountability (explanations of each to follow). TJ looks at the immediate logistical/physical conditions that enable harm, social conditions that enable harm, and personal beliefs that enable harm. A transformative justice process may not address every area or be fully complete but instead have its own unique and specific goals across those areas.
Principles of Transformative Justice (TJ):
TJ is characteristically different from many other forms of justice because it humanizes and prioritizes the safety of all involved, including the person who caused harm. It looks at change work as a supportive process in unlearning harmful behaviors. It tries to make accountability an appealing option that someone would consent into instead of a punitive shameful dehumanizing option that would motivate defensiveness and denial.
*People who cause harm may gravitate towards this type of justice, and sometimes demand and feel entitled to it, when the person harmed has not chosen it or there are not enough social resources to carry out a TJ process successfully. They compare other justice models to the standards of TJ and refuse to comply. Be weary of this.
Limitations of Transformative Justice
Its Consensual: One of the best but also limiting qualities about TJ accountability processes is that they are built to be consensual processes. A person who has caused harm has to choose to do accountability work. Sometimes motivating a person to engage in a TJ process may take a catalyst or some sort of pressure to motivate them to engage in the work but nobody can force a person to genuinely work on themselves. At the end of the day, if the person does not want to work on themselves, they can go through the motions without genuine engagement and real change. It has to be their choice to improve. (Violence intervention, which is different than accountability work, does not need to be done with the consent of the person who caused harm.)
It can’t control: TJ practitioner can’t actually control a person’s actions or guarantee they will never harm. There are elements of a TJ process that can prevent harm such as changing the material conditions that enabled harm to happen, however it is impossible for any person to control another’s behaviors. For this reason, the goal of accountability done well, is that the person should choose not to harm on their own accord.
It requires social resources: No Matter who you are and what level of proximity you have to the harm, do not do this alone! Relational harm is unlearned relationally. It is a lot of stress to put on a sole person/relationship to help someone heal and unlearn harm respectively. You need a team. Also, a person who has been directly harmed should not be the person who does the emotional labor of helping a person unlearn harmful behaviors.
It takes time and may not complete: It takes time to heal. Healing is non-linear. Processing harm and getting the support you need takes time, and healing needs evolve over time. Additionally it takes time for a person to genuinely un-learn the myriad of ways they show up in relationship and replace them with different behaviors. Results from a TJ process involving deep internal transformative work can’t be delivered quickly. Most processes take 6 months - 2 years. It can be exhausting and burnout can happen. It is common for processes to be incomplete.
It can’t undo the harm: A TJ process does not always leave survivors feeling better. Nothing will be able to take back the harm.
Support for Harmed
Survivor Support can take many forms. Please do your best not to make any assumptions about what a person who has been harmed wants or needs. Always ask. Especially when your actions may directly or indirectly affect them.
Be as honest and realistic as you can about your ability to offer things and how they are going to happen. Some things you may not be able to deliver immediately or ever because they are dependant upon the transformation of others like an apology from the person who caused harm. Be clear about what things are goals that folks can be actively working towards and not guaranteed to happen vs.promises of things that will be delivered. Try to get as clear and specific about your goals for support and accountability as possible.
Set up what you offer to be sustainable. It is ok to have limits and boundaries, even if there is a lot of trauma a person went through. A big part of healing relational harm (on both sides) is learning how to set and receive boundaries. Modeling this is healthy and helpful for healing. Even if it is not met enthusiastically. ***Bring in others for support, don’t try to do this all alone.***
Some survivors may want to stay in a relationship where harm has occurred, others may want nothing to do with the person who harmed them. Respect their choices and agency over your own opinions about what is needed always. Pushing someone to leave before they are ready does not work. Abuse is about reducing autonomy, the most important thing you can do is support a person’s agency by allowing them to make their own choices again. If a person does not know what they want, offer several options in a neutral non-judgemental way and help them come to their own conclusion about what they want.
TJ Options to Offer a Person Harmed
Any one individual won’t have the capacity to offer all of these but with communal support, a person can get a variety of needs met. Each person has unique needs and this is not an exhaustive list. Get creative! This is just a jumping off point. Let people pick what fits them.
TJ Options to Offer a Person Harmed Cont.
No one person will need or want all of these options. Ask what they need and let them pick and choose what fits.
Pod Mapping
DON’T DO THIS WORK ALONE! Pod mapping is a tool to map community support and social networks that can be of assistance in both support for the person harmed and in accountability work.
This worksheet can be used by filling in each circle with individual people or by making each circle a “pod” of people with a certain function.The bolded circles close to the person in the center receiving support are those who have close relationships and are invested in supporting. The dotted lines are potential supportive people. The larger circles on the outside are group support and organizational supports. Below is an example of how to use the sheet.
Close Friend
Family Member
Potential Supportive Person
Community Group
Organization
Processing Emotions
Harmed
Survivor Support
Low cost therapy
STI Testing
Drug & alcohol harm reduction
Roommate
Food support
Housing Options
Home Help
Safety Planning
Personal and collective safety is a big consideration when figuring out ways to handle harm for both violence interventions and accountability work. Will intervening in interpersonal violence or trying to hold someone accountable result in retaliation, escalation, or violence? Safety planning is a great tool to take calculated risks assessments to effectively stop violence, harm and abuse.
Each situation is unique and there is no singular way to stay safe. Get as specific as possible and get creative. Involve other support people in your plan and talk through your safety plan with a trusted friend.
What are you trying to protect or prevent?: This will be unique to each person.
What are risk factors?: Consider weapons, suicidality, relapse, extent of violence, history & types of harm, threats to kill, choking, etcetera. Choking is an indicator of lethality and should be taken seriously.
Past Knowledge: What has worked in the past? What were previous responses to boundaries set that can be anticipated & planned for? Was there anything in particular that made things worse? Is the dynamic different with another person there? In a different setting? What has de-escalated in the past?
Before: What can be done proactively and preventatively to reduce the effects of the harm? Consider coping skills, setting & people involved.
During: What can be done in the moment to de-escalate the harm? What responses do we want to have ready in case harm does occur? How can you stay grounded & cope emotionally?
After: Who can you go to for emotional & processing support? How can we mitigate any harmful lasting effects as a result of the events?
Escape Plan Checklist
Interpersonal Violence Intervention
This is an extremely necessary form of survivor support and can be particularly dangerous.Please visit the page on safety planning and thoroughly assess and take calculated risks to stop violence. As the person causing harm is losing power, it is possible for them to seriously escalate their violence to a new level in a desperate attempt to regain power.The most severe violence in DV relationships often happens within the last 7 days of a person leaving. Here is an incomplete list of some tactics for violence intervention:
De-escalation
Most people who are in the process of actively having a big harmful response are acting out of a place of insecurity and hurt. What de-escolares is listening to them and helping them to feel heard. You want to balance a fine line of validating what they are feeling and/or saying without validating something outright harmful.Try to look for the emotions underneath the behavior to validate.
The person needs to actually feel heard so you really have to listen. Use reflective listening by saying back to them: I hear you are really upset about …” A quick escalator is doing this poorly and using reflective listening to say what you want: “I hear that you want to take a step away from the situation”
Things that are important to consider is your body language, how close/far you are from a person, your tone of voice, and avoiding sudden motions, being non-threatening, maybe (if you feel safe enough to) talking to the person 1:1 so they don’t feel ganged up on by a group. Other times a group of witnesses is de-escalatory. Every person will need something different. Some people need a calm firm assertive grounded voice, other’s need a small passive voice that does not challenge their power.
Anyone can do this! A lot of time people think that we need a big cis man to de-escolate harm but some of the people I know who are great at de-escelation are small non-threatening people.The most important qualities of a person de-escolating is that they aren’t trying to take charge of the situation and are present to listen. A single person can do it or a group can be planned & ready or a group can be formed on the fly to de-escalate with people in different roles. It is best done with multiple people. Think about forming a desolation team!
Bystander Intervention
This is useful for instances of harm such as microaggressions, harassment, etcetera. It can be used with people you know or not. With people you don’t know, attempt to get consent to intervene if possible. There is 4 D’s of bystander intervention.
Direct: Respond directly to the aggressor or physically intervene if necessary. Be confident, assertive, calm. Walk up to the person and directly ask them to stop.
Delegate: Bring in a 3rd party to help, people are safer in numbers. Consider someone with more perceived authority or a person with a relationship with the person that they might listen to.
Distract: Distraction is a subtle and creative way to intervene if you are concerned that direct action or delegating will escalate the situation. Distract either the harasser or the target with a conversation unrelated to the harassment to derail and de-escalate the situation. While doing this, try to put your body between the two people. Examples: pretend you know them, ask for directions, tell them their friend is calling them over.
Delay: If you can’t figure out how to intervene in the moment or freeze you can check in with the person after the fact. This illustrates they are not alone, validates their experience, and minimize the extent the harm is internalized afterwards. Examples are asking if they are ok, if there is anything you can do, if there is anyone you should call. Additionally, think about how you can call the person causing harm in about after the fact through a conversation.
Ask yourself: What is most natural for me? In what situations would I use each of them?
Source: Adapted from the People’s Response Team in Chicago.
Mediation
*Avoid mediation in instances of abuse where there is power and control dynamics. Mediation assumes both parties are on a level playing field but abuse means one person has power and control over the other which makes their voices not equal. It should never be forced onto a person or group who has experienced harm. Only their choice in harm not abuse.
It is really important to do the appropriate prep work before jumping into mediation such as:
TJ Accountability
The most basic meaning of the word is to account. The first part of accountability is naming and accounting for the harms done without denying minimizing or making excuses.
*While admitting that “yes, I caused serious harm” without excuse, minimizing, or denying is a big step, it is only the first step in transforming the harmful behaviors. I often see a person say what they did and immediately gain trust because people equate non-denial as accountability. I caution against this and suggest further questions gauging their ability to respect boundaries in a variety of contexts and to look for examples of demonstrable behavior change.
There are many ways an accountability process can be run and I am not asserting this as the only or best way, but it is a way that makes sense to me and I have found it helpful. Here are the steps:
In Transformative Justice an accountability process is meant to be: Non punitive, Non shaming, Non isolating, Increasing agency, Addresses conditions that enabled harm. Here is why:
Non-punitive: because
Who can hold someone accountable?
Source: Philly Stands Up
1. Identifying Behaviors
and naming the harms: This is the process
Of identifying what behaviors lead to the harm.
2. Accepting Harm Done: often there is a lot of denial, shame and grief to work through to get to a place of acceptance and remorse for the full scope of the harm done and its impacts. This is usually the hardest part and it is vital to know the rest of the work is genuine.
3. Looking for Patterns: What lead to the harm? What enabled/caused it? How can we develop the skill of
noticing these things regularly.
4. Unlearning Old Behaviors: What can be done to interrupt or dismantle the patterns that lead to harm?
5. Learning New Behaviors: What are healthier more fulfilling and connecting behaviors that can take the place of past behaviors.
Who can engage in accountability work?
Anyone can do accountability work! A person who has harmed can do their own accountability work without having someone hold them accountable or they can have a person or group process their harm with them (aka being “held” accountable). I think this is important because sometimes people who harm claim that they can’t start working on changing their behavior without support from others. Sometimes people don’t have the ability to devote that much labor to someone else’s personal work and that is ok. It shouldn’t mean the person get a free pass to not work on changing their behaviors.
I do believe however that accountability work is always done best when it is informed by the person who experienced harm. Whenever possible have input from the person harmed. Ask about:
Most the labor of holding a person accountable should not fall on the person directly harmed. Someone else is best to do the work of holding the person accountable and processing harm. Generally this work is much deeper with the input of the person harmed and another person to reflect with and assist with the un-learning of harmful and abusive behaviors.The person harmed shouldn’t be expected to do this work.
Holding an Accountability Process
“Expect that people often resist taking accountability. Create systems flexible enough to allow for the expected process of dodging and delaying accountability and strong enough to withstand and diminish these tactics over time.” - Creative Interventionists Toolkit
Some tools used in accountability work
Qualities of a TJ Accountability Process
TJ has a softer approach for working with people who have caused harm that is different than many models of justice. It is not the only or right way. Listen to the person harmed to see if it is what they feel the situation calls for.
Non-punitive: TJ believes arbitrary punishments don’t transform a person’s capacity to harm. Punishments are not rehabilitative and instead push people away from accountability by creating defensiveness and motivation for denial. It is important to note though that there are often natural consequences to harm such as losing trust, relationships, and unsafety, ect. - These are natural consequences that can be motivating for a person to want to change their behavior. Consequences are proportional to the harm and directly related as an outcome or preventative effort. Ask yourself: What is appropriate consequences vs. arbitrary punishments?
Qualities of a TJ Accountability Process Cont.
Listen to the person harmed to see if it is what they feel the situation calls for.
Non isolating: Relational harm is healed relationally. Isolation exacerbates a person’s capacity to harm. This does not mean that a person who has harmed someone is entitled to share space with the person or group harmed or community spaces where people feel unsafe by their presence. But completely isolating someone removes removes them from people who can check their behavior and help them practice new behavior in friendships. Ask yourself: Who can support this person in accountability work safely?
Non shaming: There is a difference between guilt and shame. Shame is a belief that “I am bad”. When a person believes they are intrinsically bad, there is no room for growth because they have no faith in themselves and their ability to change. Guilt is a healthy and needed response in accountability work that involves regret about actions. “I did something bad” is work-able because people have agency over their actions. Ask yourself: What can I do to humanize the person?
Increasing agency: Agency is when a person has control over their own choices, actions, and behaviors. It is really common for people to want to restrict the freedom and choices of a person who has caused harm in an effort to prevent harm from happening again. And that is appropriate when a person is actively harming via access to a venue, group of people, position of power, etcetera. Without enabling abuse, a good accountability process helps a person who has harmed find their own agency and control over their own choices as part of their accountability work. Ask yourself: How can I help this person take charge of their actions?
Hope: A TJ practitioner should not take on an accountability process if they can’t see a vision forward for how the person will stop harming or a way they could transform their behaviors. Refer the person to an organization specifically for people who have caused harm or a different TJ practitioner if you can’t see a way forward. Ask yourself: Can I visualize the steps needed to change this person’s behavior?
How to Apologize
If someone is hurt by your actions. Keep this phrase in mind when motivating yourself to give an apology:
“You can either be right or in relationship” - Mia Mingus
A good apology entails:
Right Sized Apology & Accountability Work
When apologizing. The goal is to take accountability for what is yours, nothing more, nothing less. We don’t want to under account and minimize and deny what happened or over account and say that we are responsible for more than what we did. Neither serve the person harmed.
Under Accountability: Often people are afraid to admit what they did. Maybe this is because of shame, a fear of being demonized, or a worry that if you come to terms with what you did, it will affect your self worth. If this is you, try to humanize yourself, have self compassion and remember that you are still worthy of existence. The strength and vulnerability it takes to own and acknowledge what you did is painful but deep important work. In the end, it will help with self-worth. Moving through harm you did and making it right, instead of suppressing and minimizing it, helps you feel like you have transformed into a person who you can be proud of.
Over Accountability: Some people over take responsibility, likely also because of shame. Examples are: “I did everything wrong”, “It was completely my fault”, “I’m a bad person”. This deflects from what specific behaviors they are actually accountable for, which isn't helpful and makes the accountability work less honest about what when wrong and more about the person who caused harm feeling guilty. It also often results in people reassuring the person that they are not all bad or responsible for literally everything which can unintentionally encourage under accountability.
Something to think about: You can still apologize for your portion of the harm even if you did not cause the majority of the harm. Ideally, everyone could apologize for whatever role they caused in hurt or harm.
Working Through Shame
The antidote to shame is letting other people see the thing/part of yourself that you are ashamed of and them holding it with compassion and understanding.
Guilt: “I did bad.”
Shame: “I am bad.”
Guilt is an appropriate response to causing harm. It is regret for having done something that is not inline with your values. Guilt motivates us to take accountability for and change our behaviors. Guilt is different from shame.
Shame is a belief that you are inherently a bad person. Believe that you are inherently bad because you were capable of causing harm is counter productive to working on changing behavior because if you are inherently bad, you are doomed to always make bad decisions. Shame shifts the accountability work away from the behavior and instead internalizes it towards self. Taking yourself down and going into a shame spiral makes it harder and often blocks capacity to do accountability work.
If you are supporting someone in doing accountability work. Try to help them develop a sense of self that is positive and aligned with their values. Work to have them see that their actions that are not aligned with their values are instances of them not living up to their ideals, but not reflections of themself. Try to lead with a strength based perspective and encourage them that they are capable of making different choices in the future.
Pod Mapping
DON’T DO THIS WORK ALONE! Pod mapping is a tool to map community support and social networks that can be of assistance in both support for the person harmed and in accountability work.
This worksheet can be used by filling in each circle with individual people or by making each circle a “pod” of people with a certain function.The bolded circles close to the person in the center receiving support are those who have close relationships and are invested in supporting. The dotted lines are potential supportive people. The larger circles on the outside are group support and organizational supports. Below is an example of how to use the sheet.
Close Friend
Family Member
Potential Supportive Person
Community Group
Organization
Accountability Support
Processing Emotions
Harmer
Survivor Support
Low cost therapy
Drug & alcohol harm reduction
Roommate
Don’t attempt this alone
Attempt a team of 2-3 people MINIMUM. It is not ok to act as the sole person able to manage all of the dynamics of abuse, help with the person harmed healing and the accountability work of the person harmed and help de escalate violent situations and do violent interventions. You will burn out. And it is not helpful to anyone to be a savior and over perform in all areas.
Lean heavy on pod mapping. Get support for yourself in whatever role you take, get a team or group together to accomplish specific tasks. Relying solely on your own judgement in risky situations is much riskier than having a variety of perspectives. It serves everyone.
“But we tried to find support and could not find enough people.” - I fell for this trap too and regretted it. Instead of settling for all the labor falling on one person, pick out potential support people and start giving them the political education and relational proximity to the harm they need to eventually become tooled up and able to be of assistance. It may take more time to get started but it worth it.
One of the biggest obstacles of building community resilience to do TJ is that there is a lack of relational connections in our fractured capitalistic world. Talk about TJ as much as you can with friends and community to start building your community's resilience to build alternative structures in advance. Proactively help us build a strong enough alternative to policing that we can make it obsolete. We need more and more people to functionally understand and be able to do Transformative Justice or similarly aligned work.
Community Accountability
Working on shifting group social norms about:
*Community accountability is most often done reactively but can also be done proactively.
Sometimes people categorize community accountability within TJ and sometimes it can be any way to address harm across a network of people that may be at odds with some of the TJ values like canceling which is isolating.
Ask yourself: what would community accountability look like among your networks at large, affinity groups, and friend groups? Proactively and reactively what could be accomplished?
This is an extremely broad term that can mean a wide variety of things.In the context of TJ it can look like the following:
What is needed for a successful TJ Process?
Mia Mingus suggests that in order to successfully do a TJ process, one must have at least 2 of the three components. Be strategic and work collaboratively with folks who have shared relationships to the person who needs support, pod map, help determine a thoughtful sustainable structure to hold the TJ practice, and develop your skills by taking webinars and reading resources on the topic.
Relationship
Skill
Structure
TJ As an Approach or Method
Kazu Haga
Healing resistance
Resources
People Who Experience Harm (free)
Domestic Violence Hotline: 1-866-723-3014
Sexual Violence Hotline: 215-985-3333
Lutheran Settlement House: 215-426-8610 ext: 1236
Congresso (spanish speaking services): 215-763-8870 ext:1334
WIT - Women in Transition (open to all genders): 215-751-1111
WAA - Women Against Abuse (open to all genders): 1-866-723-3014
WOAR - Philadelphia Center Against Sexual Violence: 215-985-3333
For People Who Cause Harm (decent sliding scale)
Cordea Center: (215)242-2235 or email office@courdea.org
JJ Peters Institute (JJPI): (215) 701-1560
Masculinity Action Project: 215-426-8610 ext. 1233 or email: tfraser@lshphilly.org
WOAR: Healthy Masculinity Initiative: 215-985-3333 or email: Joey@woar.org
*It is important a person go to these specifically and not any therapist. The specialization in working through harm is needed. A normal therapist will just validate and not challenge a person.
Transformative Justice (mix of free & paid)
Look up Content From: Mia Mingus, Mariame Kaba, Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, Shira Hassan, Mimi Kim, Adrienne Marie Brown, Bay Area Transformative Justice Collective, Audre lorde safe outside the system project, Spring Up,
Books/PDFs: Creative Interventionists Toolkit, Transformative Justice Mixtape, Beyond Survival, The Revolution Starts at Home, We Do This ‘Til We Free Us, We Will Not Cancel Us, Holding Change, Support NY accountability curriculum,
Share this Transformative Justice Zine with others!!