mattheo

I see a lot of people with opinions on how to handle accessibility at direct actions and I feel that a lot of these opinions are completely out of touch with the reality of direct actions. While many of these ideas can apply at an ordinary protest (particularly one with money) many of these ideas range from difficult to impossible to implement at a direct action.

Hi, my name is Corvid and I'm a multiply disabled person who is knowledgeable about direct action. I wanted to share my takes on accessibility at direct actions. The scope of this post will be limited as the categories of "direct action" and "accessibility" are extremely broad and it's impossible to cover all of it in one post. I am going to write from my own personal experience as someone with a mobility disability and hearing loss (with residual hearing).

To dispel some myths

Direct action is not synonymous with protest. Direct actions may take the form of a protest but not all direct actions are your typical march or rally and not all marches and rallies are direct actions. Direct action specifically describes direct attacks on the source of the problem (hence direct action). Direct action tends to be higher risk than a typical protest as the nature of directly attacking the source of the problem attracts the attention of the state (especially when the target is the state).

Direct action is a wide category covering everything from firebombing to building occupations and beyond. It is impossible to discuss accessibility at all direct actions. Direct actions can range in size from one or a small handful of people to a large crowd. Direct actions are not always organized and when they are organized the organizers typically stay anonymous for protection. The invites to direct actions are not usually posted online and when they are they are typically masqueraded as other events on the flyer.

There are other, lower risk direct actions. This post isn't about them. People argue all the time about what "counts" as direct action- don't bring these arguments onto my post.

Now let's get into it

The risky nature of direct action means that openly citing where the direct action will take place can risk drawing the police to the location before anyone even arrives and/or having riot cops on standby waiting to kettle the action. Publicizing things like march routes can lead to preemptive "safety" measures like stationing cops along the route and setting up concrete barricades to block people in. I often see people suggesting that direct actions should publicize their march routes so people can prepare for accessibility challenges- this will not ever happen and should not ever happen. This might work for an above-the-ground protest (especially if it's a state-sanctioned parade like no kings) but it is just simply too risky to publicize locations for direct actions. Many direct actions do not even publicize their meeting locations until an hour before the actual action.

Many direct actions do take the route of holding a march to the location of the action or putting the location of the action along the march route. So what can be done? Mileage can easily be published without compromising the safety of the march. Barriers can be scouted ahead of time and communicated in the messages sent out about the action (whether that be messages in signal chats, inconspicuous flyers, or word of mouth). People who are trusted by the (behind the scenes) organizers can communicate their access needs for the action. (I would not recommend messaging someone you think is an organizer about details of a direct action if you are not trusted by that person).

A lot of increasing accessibility for your access needs at direct actions will come with building trust with the organizers. Unfortunately, this can only be done by meeting up with those people in person, and you may not know who they are. You can often find these people at lower risk protests and mutual aid...if you know where to look. When you are in organizing circles you get more control over the accessibility of the action.

It is exceptionally difficult to have a crowd that moves slowly. Moving slowly is a risk. People often have to move quickly. This does not apply to all direct actions- building occupations, for example, do not move quickly (though people should be prepared to get out quickly if the plan is not to get arrested there).

I see people suggest seating pretty frequently. This might work for an ordinary rally or march but it does not work well for a direct action. Bringing seating options gets your shit stolen and direct actionists generally do not have the money to replace camping chairs all the time. Many direct actions have to stay mobile for safety.

Remember that it is impossible to accommodate everybody, especially at a direct action where risks are high.

Some direct actions happen organically when the conditions are just right and people start to move together. It is impossible to control the accessibility of these as no planning goes into them.

I see a lot of people suggest interpreters for direct action. It is very, very hard to get this to work. When you are paying someone that inherently creates a paper trail tying them back to the direct action. Additionally, many direct actions do not center around speeches and chants. To have an interpreter present at a direct action you need to find someone who feels comfortable taking that role and will do it for either cash or free. Most direct actionists do not have a large amount of money to pay for an interpreter. A large percentage of direct actions do not have a planned end time. Interpreters are hired by the hour and are usually not interested in spending days in a building for an occupation.

Instead, it is best to travel with a group of people who can interpret the necessary information about what is happening around you. It is always a good idea to attend a direct action in a group. There is safety in numbers and it helps prevent you from getting grabbed on the way out. A majority of protest and direct action arrests happen as people are leaving, not while the protest or action is going on. Be prepared for quick movement, many direct actions do not stick around for long as staying after you have smashed windows is dangerous.

If you can't hear what is happening in the crowd then bring someone who can. Do not bring bluetooth enabled hearing aids or cochlear implants, especially if they have a "find my device" feature. Every single bluetooth device has a unique signature that can be traced back to you. By bringing your bluetooth-enabled hearing aids or cochlear implants you risk leaving a digital trail directly tying you to the action. Find another way to communicate.

Sometimes direct action is just not something you can do... that's ok

a lot of this is going to slightly skew to organizer advice, because most DAs I've known of were collectively organized. but here's some stuff that has helped me. In general most of the DAs I'm aware of happen in either announced last minute ways and/or communicated only with those involved, so a lot of this is communication and trust based, and your mileage will vary.

if you're a newbie to stuff, my best advice is to take inventory of your own skillset and look into opportunities to enhance it and plug it into local social movements. there are lots of online workshops and in person workshops in major cities where people talk about organizing. educating yourself on this stuff is going to help you grow your own inspiration and creativity for how you specifically can help with actions or whatever else you want to do. you don't need to be the person doing parkour over barriers to be useful. maybe you can translate something or graphic design or write communiqués or help with conflict resolution or wheatpaste at 3am or do something else. anyway. my tips

developing non-sign language signs and signals to communicate essential info with. squeezing a specific person's shoulder or hand a certain number of times, finding some hand gesture or stretch that is very distinct but not obvious, having specific contacts communicate in some other way. you need to figure out, in a safe and secure setting in advance, what your signals will be and what they will mean. you need to also arrange a plan for a lack of certain signals. with communication-based issues, I think it's important to keep in mind that there are some actions where *no one* can communicate verbally for whatever reason. there's usually some creative way to make things work or adapt an action, but not all action needs to fit everyone. that doesn't make someone less valuable if they can't participate in one action or another.

planning for things in reaction to specific cues and criteria. "if x happens, we meet at y instead. you will know this is the case by this signal."

scouts can usually eyeball accessibility stuff in advance if they know to look for it, and relay that info to people, but sometimes you don't have scouts for whatever reason.

you can't do black bloc with a mobility aid generally. however: if you really want to and enough people are down, you can be intentionally deceptive by trading mobility aids with people or having people using them who don't need them, etc., to make this safer for all. it will make things clunky and probably some people might have weird idealogical arguments about it but frankly? I know situations where people did this and it genuinely helped people be safer. people also do this frequently with N95 masks.

agitators react differently to people with mobility aids (this varies greatly based on mobility aid too), bikes, etc. especially if you look like a random bystander just trying to see what the commotion is about. if people are comfortable with it, sometimes having this kind of soft barrier can slow down or hinder accessibility of a site for people you don't want there. there's lots of ways to do this, I shan't go too much into it

something I do wish more people would realize about DA is that it's not meant to be for everyone. there is a specific goal and specific tactics for a given action. we don't all have to do the exact same things. *somebody* needs to be the emergency contact to let somebody's spouse know to pick up the kids if they get detained. *somebody* needs to provide support for the people involved. *somebody* is a legal observer, somebody is holding the medic supplies, somebody is teaching the medics.

An antiviral pill has, for the first time, been shown to prevent COVID-19 in people exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus at home, according to trial results published today in the New England Journal of Medicine1. The drug could be a lifeline for those who still face real danger from the virus, such as care-home residents or transplant recipients on immune-suppressing medication.

Blackwater Dive

2024, hand bleached and dyed denim, cotton batting and thread

I need every single person to understand how horrible tumblr’s tagging system is

I go into the tag for epilepsy and its all flashing lights. We can’t use our own tag because people without epilepsy fill it up with improper warnings.

Use ‘flashing’ in place of ‘epilepsy’ in your tags. You aren’t warning people of epileptics, you’re warning us of flashing lights. Please please tag properly. Epileptics say this endlessly and constantly and it’s ignored. You are risking lives by doing this.

Here’s proof of what I mean:

You ask genuinely and you’ll receive genuinely.

First, in pretty much every damn society the closer the proximity to darker skin, to Blackness, the worse the racism will be via colorism. Second, everyone else really, specifically, globally, hates Black people and see us individually/collectively as a resource to be exploited and Africa as a place to be used to their benefit and pillaged and destroyed.

Antiblackness because it ain’t the same as generalized umbrella racism, because it’s describing the specific ways the rest of the world wants Black folks dead, out of sight, or enslaved, no self determination, no autonomy–bodily, mentally, materially, collectively. TikTok and YouTube algorithms specifically suppress Black creators more than anyone but the darker your skin get, the more you get gone. Shit, don’t think it’s a new thing—over a decade ago Facebook algorithms changed a generation of online Black folks language/speech patterns because if they knew you was Black you could get banned for saying the word “white” in any sense but positively. So we started calling whites yt, and when they caught on to that, we got more creative and used 6f/#ffffff, Mayosapian, yakubian devil, and so so many more.

The ways we are hated ain’t unique to the US, although the US does fuckin love to hate us. It ain’t limited to countries we were or are enslaved in neither. Someone from non-African “third world”, global south, global majority just as likely to hate anyone they see as Black the same because to them, we ain’t people, a people, worthy of acknowledgement, justice, care, humanity.

Spent a ridiculous amount of time last night obsessively editing my hand written zines in Photoshop to take away any tiny blemishes so they were definitely readable.

Okay, fuck it. Because I keep seeing this again and again, even from people who are technically arguing for generally the right things.

But, babes, I am gonna hold your hands now, and ask you to repeat after me: Children. Are. Not. Inherently. Innocent.

Children are not inherently asexual. They are not inherently sex repulsed. And they also not inherently truthful, or inherently non-violent.

Children are generally worse at lying than adults (as lying needs some complicated brain things to happen), and often will just spout out what they think (because their prefrontal cortex is not yet fully developed and it is generally the area of the brain that does impulse control). But they are not inherently more truthful because of it.

They are also not non-violent. And you know that. Because you and I we all have seen little kids punch, and shove, and kick each other, or adults, when they were getting annoyed and fed up. Heck, kids often are more violent than adults, because again, they have less impulse control than adults do, and also often do not yet fully understand that when they are violent in those ways that it necessarily hurts others. That is a connection they have to learn. Their violence is not evil. It is just is.

And if a kid is not taught this (be it because the kid is a boy and parents looked away with "boys will be boys", or be it because the adults were neglectful or even abusive themselves) it is not their fault, and them being violent does not make them less of a child, or an inherently evil child. Same goes with children who either due to genetics or trauma have neural differences that makes them more violent or less truthful. They are not "evil children". They are disabled children. Disability is not evil. It also does not make them more or less of a child.

But also: yes. Children are already sexual. This goes doubly so for the weird child category that people on tumblr assume these days (everyone under 18, very much including youths), but even for those humans who most people will agree are children - let's say 12 and under. Those are not inherently asexual or sex repulsed.

Yes, I know, a lot of you might have this idea in their head where a kid gets told about how sex works and goes "ick!" and some kids react to it this way. But... not all of them do, and this does not mean something is wrong with the child.

It is actually fairly normal that kids have curiosity about this, and about their bodies, and how this works. Kids "playing doctor" and looking at each others bodies and touching them is perfectly normal. And yes, some kids will engage in actual sexual activity among themselves. And not informing children about sexuality will not prevent that - it will just make it more unsafe.

I will forever remember: when I was going to my rich-people conservative Catholic school, there was a case where an 11yo girl got pregnant from a 12yo boy. And what had happened between those two kids had been 100% consensual. It was just kids who were not fully informed on what this was, but having some vague notion from romance media, fooling around and... well, finding out the hard way.

And how much drama there was about how this clearly meant those kids were abused and what not.

But... from all anyone ever found. No, those kids were not abused. They were uneducated. Because adults around them had assumed that because they were children they would be inherently sex-repulsed. Which they were not. And it ended up with a whole drama of getting this one kid an abortion, because she was too small to carry, but also because she had never had her period before, the pregnancy was not noticed at first.

And this is an example that was just 100% because they were not educated. Because people had assumed an inherent asexuality of children.

Even over here on tumblr I see queer leftist people argue that actually, if you expose children to any knowledge about sex, let alone about sex outside of maybe words for the body and the general idea of "this is a thing adults might do", you are abusing them and are clearly a predator.

But... like, people. Can you please understand that it is actually this behavior - keeping important information away from children - that is actually at the very least neglectful, if not abusive? Because it is.

This idea of childhood innocence (with innocence being defined as an inherent aversion to sex, lies, and violence) is propaganda that you have been taught and that is part of the context that is used to further abuse children - especially those children who do not get afforded the assumption of innocence (notably Black, and Arab children, but queer children, disabled children, and other marginalized children as well).

Adults should not be having sex with children - especially not actual children. Partially because of the fact that children are the most legally oppressed class of people there is.

But (some) children and especially youths will have sex with one another. And there is nothing you can do about it. If you do not allow children and youths access to information about sex, they just will do it uneducated. And also, if you just assume that they will not look at porn, or try to prevent it, all you will likely create is a scenario, where they will look at porn on the really iffy websites that just do not give a flying fuck about any age restriction guidelines.