29. nov. 2011

Vabilo na predstavitev zbornika Škratove filmske šole 2011

Kolektiv Škratove filmske šole 2011 vabi na zaključni večer Škratove filmske šole 2011, na katerem bodo predstavili zbornik Film in digitalni način produkcije, ki je nastal na letošnjih škratovsko-filmskih druženjih. Besedila: Andrej Tomažin, Bojan Anđelković, Matic Majcen, Katja Čičigoj, Uroš Kranjc, Ander Pezelj, Tjaša Pureber, Jelena Mikloš, Zora Žbontar, Ana Jereb, Rok Bozovičar in Tanja Hladnik. V zborniku so objavljene tudi zgodbe, nastale v okviru delavnic Preoblečena filmska svetovja, ki so potekale po vzoru delavnic Svetovi drugih Tee Hvala. Na delavnicah so sodelovale in sodelovali Nina Cvar, Martin Horvat, Jelena Mikloš, Srečko Lubšina, Andrej Tomažin, Tea Hvala, Saška in Tit Podobnik. Po predstavitvi se obeta prijetna glasba hišnih glasbenih selektorjev in pisana kolekcija čipsov in smokijev.

V sredo, 30. novembra 2011 ob 18.00 v Klubu SOT-24, 5, AKC Metelkova mesto, Ljubljana. 

27. nov. 2011

Varnost v na moč zapletenem gibanju

"Ker se na skupščinah od tistega, ki predlaga nov
 dogodek, pričakuje tudi (so)izvedbo, bi lahko
 sklenila, da v ljubljanskem gibanju ni ne feministk ne
 lezbijk, ki bi bile o tem pripravljene govoriti. Možnosti,
 da je feminizem pri nas odveč, ker smo, kot pogosto
 slišim, ženske že davno dosegle enakopravnost,
 nisem dala priložnosti. Raje sem se spraševala, ali to
 pomeni, da gibanje 15o kljub vsemu ni dovolj
 vključujoče, ali da imajo druge aktivistke drugačne
 prioritete, ali da smo feministke in lezbijke nevidne
 zato, ker nas je premalo in nismo povezane med sabo?"

 
Dan po zasedbi ploščadi pred poslopjem Ljubljanske borze sem prispela v mesto. Aktivistke so pripovedovale o množični udeležbi, o različnosti ljudi in vzklikov, ki so zaznamovali protest 15. oktobra in o podpori, na katero je naletela uspešna zasedba prostora, ki je šele s tem postal javen. Začela sem brskati po spletu za fotografijami, da bi videla, kaj sem zamudila, in v enem bolj branih medijev naletela na fotografijo aktivistke, ki pred borzo pometa tla med šotori. Preneseni pomen fotografije (pometanje pred »tujim« pragom, ki je tuj samo zato, ker nam je dokončno odtujil presežno vrednost našega dela) sem povsem spregledala, saj me je bolj zaposlovala misel, da medij na vsak način želi zmanjšati pomen novega političnega prostora in javnosti v nastajanju.

Bralcem in bralkam, ki so podobo izenačili z dejansko delitvijo dela v nastajajočem gibanju, je fotografija potrdila sum, da ga ne gre jemati resno, saj nekritično povzema vzorce obnašanja, ki kar kličejo po znamenitem feminističnem grafitu iz socialističnih časov: »Proletarci vseh dežel, kdo vam pere nogavice?« Bralke in gotovo tudi kak bralec, ki nas je fotografija zgolj utrdila v prepričanju, da so reprezentacije žensk v slovenskih medijih obupne, seveda še naprej izkazujemo podporo gibanju, ki skuša delovati egalitarno in vključujoče. Patriarhalna spolna delitev dela, po kateri bi gospodinjsko in skrbniško delo pripadlo aktivistkam, medtem ko bi aktivisti prevzeli tehnična in intelektualna opravila, bi gibanje postavila na laž bolj kot to, kar mu ves čas neuspešno očitajo cinični komentatorji; da že zaradi razprtega imena boj za »ne ve, kaj hoče«. Še nekaj drugega bi gibanje postavilo na laž: nezmožnost, da ustvari javni prostor, v katerem se pripadniki spolnih, seksualnih, etničnih, razrednih in drugih manjšin počutijo varno; torej prostor, kjer se jim – nam – ni treba bati izključevanja ali/in nasilja.

Vračala sem se pred borzo in videla, da se ženske in moški pri delu menjajo in družijo: aktivistke so pometale, odpirale konzerve, rezale zelenjavo, kuhale čaj in ga ponujale mimoidočim, ki so se ustavili, da bi poklepetali, ali pa tako kot gospa Ana prinesli dve kolebnici (»Da se boste ogreli, ko vas bo zazeblo.«), svečke (»Za boljši ambient.«) in pekač domačega štrudla z obljubo, da mu bodo – »če vam bo všeč in zato, da podpora ne bo samo moralna« – sledili novi. Nekatere aktivistke so moderirale avtonomne skupščine, predlagale in vodile delavnice, izdelovale in delile letake, urejale in pisale blog www.15o.si, prevažale stole iz Metelkove do »bojze«, menjale plinske bombe in skratka počele (več kot?) vse tisto, kar so počeli bojzi. Kljub vtisu, da je vse v redu, sem nekaj novih in starih znank vprašala, če se pred borzo počutijo varno; med njimi študentko sociologije, pisateljico, zdravnico in umetnico-mati samohranilko, ki je, ne mimogrede, po koncu prve delovne noči v novem ljubljanskem klubu jokala zaradi nadlegovanja in otipavanja hostes.* Nekatere so se čudile, zakaj naj se ne bi počutile varno. Druge niso razumele, kam merim, in rekla sem, da sem razmišljala, kako je, če si deliš šotor z ljudmi, ki jih ne poznaš, sploh z moškimi. In o tem, da te noč in dan »pazi« policija. Dodala sem, da razumem, da je zasedba nekaj posebnega, da si v zanosu, da revolucijo vohaš tako gotovo kot prihajajočo zimo in ti je že zato (kao) vse kul.

»Premrzlo je, da bi spala v šotoru,« je rekla prva, »ponoči sem tukaj samo, ko dežuram, in to počnem s svojimi«.

»Policija se ne vmešava – razen takrat, ko piše kazni tipom, ki so se šli olajšat za vogal,« se je zasmejala druga in dodala, da je bilo na skupščinah, kar zadeva pravila obnašanja, jasno rečeno, da je spoštljiv odnos do vseh udeležencev in udeleženk pričakovan, raba alkohola pa odsvetovana, saj se hočejo izogniti nasilju.

Zanimalo me je, če so se pred borzo že morali soočiti s homofobijo, seksizmom, rasizmom in napadi na druge manjšine, ki bi zahtevali bolj ostra pravila. Moje znanke so zmajale z glavo in bila sem vesela, da s svojimi vprašanji, kar zadeva Ljubljano, streljam mimo.

V torek, 15. novembra, je minil neverjeten mesec boja za. Med »obmesečnim sprehodom« mimo sodišča, Nove ljubljanske banke in parlamenta, ki se ga je, tako pravijo, udeležilo okrog sto ljudi, sem sedela v službi, kjer sem se spomnila na solidarnostno izjavo Angele Davis, namenjeno aktivistom v New Yorku. Temnopolta aktivistka, lezbijka, feministka, nekoč članica Črnih panterjev in ameriške KP, ki danes raziskuje »zaporniško-industrijski kompleks«, ki ga je izkusila na lastni koži, jim je rekla: »Spreminjate politični prostor. Obudili ste našo skupno strast. Spomnili ste nas na to, da je še vedno mogoče graditi skupnosti upora. Predani ste kolektivnemu delu in zavračate razredne, etnične, spolne in seksualne hierarhije«. Dodala je, da odločitev za skupen nastop, enoten protest, prinaša veliko odgovornost, ker je treba najti odgovor na vprašanje, kako združiti sile, ne da bi zatirali ali poenostavljali zapletena razmerja med posamezniki, vključenimi v gibanje. Kako torej ustvariti kompleksno in emancipatorno skupnost? Angela Davis je odgovorila s citatom temnopolte, lezbične in feministične pesnice Audre Lorde: »Toleranca ne zadošča, razlike moramo razumeti kot vir neizbežne polarnosti, v kateri se dialektično poraja naša ustvarjalnost.« Zaključila je, da šele v zapleteni skupnosti lahko rečemo »ja življenju, ja sreči, ja skupnosti, ja izobraževanju – brezplačnemu izobraževanju, ja enakopravnosti, ja domišljiji, ja ustvarjalnosti, ja upanju in ja prihodnosti«.

V arhiv spletne strani 15o.si se je v mesecu dni preselil dolg seznam izvedenih delavnic in debat ter besedila izjav in javnih pozivov. Med njimi še vedno pogrešam to, o čemer je govorila Angela Davis (debato o pasteh poenostavljenih predstav o gibanju kot nečem homogenem), in še bolj debato o tem, kako prekarizacija dela zadeva ženske, še posebej starejše ženske, revne ženske, lezbijke in pripadnice etničnih manjšin v Sloveniji. Ker se na skupščinah od tistega, ki predlaga nov dogodek, pričakuje tudi (so)izvedbo, bi lahko sklenila, da v ljubljanskem gibanju ni ne feministk ne lezbijk, ki bi bile o tem pripravljene govoriti. Možnosti, da je feminizem pri nas odveč, ker smo, kot pogosto slišim, ženske že davno dosegle enakopravnost, nisem dala priložnosti. Raje sem se spraševala, ali to pomeni, da gibanje 15o kljub vsemu ni dovolj vključujoče, ali da imajo druge aktivistke drugačne prioritete, ali da smo feministke in lezbijke nevidne zato, ker nas je premalo in nismo povezane med sabo?

Tudi v mestih, kjer feministične in sorodne skupine soustvarjajo gibanje (spremljala sem predvsem delovanje ameriških skupin), so se varnosti vseh udeležencev in udeleženk resneje posvetili šele takrat, ko se je izkazalo, da jo je na množičnih zasedbah težko zagotoviti, o čemer pričajo številna poročila o zastraševanju, nadlegovanju in tudi posilstvih. Nekatera gibanja so dogovor o principih in praksi varnega zasedništva izglasovala preden je prišlo do spolnih napadov, vendar je bilo jasno, da še tako dobronamerne izjave ne morejo preprečiti nasilja, zato so aktivistke organizirale ločene šotore za spanje, v katere moški nimajo vstopa. Ponekod so k sodelovanju povabile strokovnjakinje, ki so vodile delavnice o konsenzu, o podpori žrtvam spolnega nasilja in zlorabe, o soočanju z rasizmom in o načinih, kako se upreti tehnikam dominacije ter moškemu šovinizmu. Kaj si ameriške aktivistke torej predstavljajo pod izrazom »varna zasedba«? Skupina Women Occupy iz New Yorka jo je opredelila kot možnost, da ženske »sprožajo debate o učinkih socialne neenakosti, v njih sodelujejo, jih usmerjajo in tudi zaključijo« in »možnost, da vse to počnejo v okolju brez policijskega nasilja, brez spolnega nadlegovanja in objektiviranja. V boju potrebujemo ženske,« so sklenile članice skupine, »vendar jim vse našteto jemlje moč.«

Feministična aktivistka Lucinda Marshall je na spletni strani Occupy Patriarchy! analizirala odločitve in jezik izjav, s katerimi so se aktivistični kolektivi odzvali na primere spolnega nasilja v njihovi sredi. Obravnavala je tudi primer iz Glasgowa na Škotskem, kjer je 25. oktobra več moških posililo mladoletno dekle. Prva reakcija skupine Occupy Glasgow? Mladoletnim so prepovedali prenočevanje v zasedenem parku, kar pomeni, da so raje kaznovali šibkejšega (mladoletne in s tem posredno tudi žrtev posilstva) kot da bi poskrbeli za varnost vseh udeležencev. Poleg tega so se aktivisti v svoji prvi izjavi povsem distancirali od zločina in žrtve. Njen spol sploh ni bil omenjen (»obžalujemo krivico, ki se je zgodila enemu od ljudi v parku«), namesto o skupinskem posilstvu pa so pisali o »domnevnem spolnem napadu«. Ob komentarjih aktivistov, ki so trdili, da gre za osamljen primer, ki ga ne gre posploševati na celotno gibanje, ni bilo težko skleniti, da je marsikoga bolj kot zloraba dekleta skrbela okrnjena podobo gibanja. To izjavo je čez noč zamenjala druga. V njej so zapisali, da so na skupščini 26. oktobra dolgo debatirali »o tem zaničevanja vrednem, nedopustnem zločinu in njegovih posledicah«, in da se zavezujejo k doslednemu upoštevanju varnostih meril, ki so jih določili ob začetku gibanja. Organizirali so solidarnostno vigilijo za žrtev, lokalne feministične in LGBTI skupine pa pozvali, da se pridružijo gibanju. To pomeni, da se omenjene skupine pred tem niso vidno vključevale v gibanje Occupy Glasgow. Ni mi uspelo izvedeti, zakaj ne, niti, če so se odzvale na vabilo, ki je moralo zveneti precej grenko, če pomislimo, da so se aktivisti na manjšino v lastnih krogih spomnili šele takrat, ko so se morali soočati z brutalnimi posledicami seksizma. »Gibanje, ki dopušča seksizem,« je sklenila Lucinda Marshall, »ženske odvrača od sodelovanja, in ko ženske zapustijo gibanje, v njegovem imenu govorijo samo moški – vključno s seksisti.«

Vemo, kaj sledi: v skupinah, kjer prevladujejo moški, je spolno nadlegovanje hitro reducirano na »osebni problem« žrtve, upoštevanje spolne delitve dela v ekonomskih debatah pa je dojeto kot »zastranitev« ali »partikularizacija« problema, ki je »v osnovi« razreden. V ta rog je na Wall Streetu trobil tudi Slavoj Žižek, ki je dejal, da je zahodna levica najprej opustila »tako imenovani esencializem razrednega boja« in ga zamenjala z množico antirasističnih, feminističnih in drugih bojev, zdaj pa se je pokazalo, da je »pravo ime« osnovnega problema vendarle kapitalizem. No, kot vse kaže, bo patriarhat, ki je starejši od kapitalizma, slednjega preživel brez večjih težav. Če kdo, mu jih bodo povzročale feministke in druge manjšine, ki ne morejo pristati na homogenizacijo levice in diktat aktivistične večine.

Za konec velja ponoviti, da se dejanska egalitarnost in odprtost vsake družbene ureditve, tudi novih političnih gibanj, meri s stopnjo varnosti, podpore in vključenosti, ki jo občutijo in doživljajo manjšine, ne večina. Če nočemo, da iz aktivističnega repertoarja izpadejo vsebine, taktike in prizorišča upora, ki jih institucionalizirano razumevanje politike tako ali tako izključuje kot osebne, zasebne, apolitične ali trivialne, potem bo očitno treba spremeniti tudi razumevanje izraza upor, da ta ne bo zajemal samo množičnih protestov proti nepravičnosti, temveč tudi voljo do iskanja alternativnih strategij preživetja in sanjarjenje o na moč zapletenem, a boljšem svetu za vse.

Prva objava: 24. november 2011, portal Življenje na dotikPerspektive in refleksije (Maribor 2012 - Evropska prestolnica kulture).

Safety in a Very Complex Movement

"Patriarchal sexual division of labor, according to
 which household and caring work should be done by
 female activists, while male activists should take over
 technical and intellectual tasks, would catch the
 movement lying faster than what it is being
 unsuccessfully accused of by cynical commentators
 for this whole time; it 'doesn’t know what it wants'
 because of its name fight for. Something else would
 also catch the movement lying: its inability to create
 a public space, where members of sexual, ethnic,
 class and other minorities would feel safe; so a place 
 where they—we—are not afraid of
 alienation or/and violence."

I arrived in Ljubljana the day after protesters occupied the platform in front of the Ljubljana Stock Exchange. Activists talked about mass participation, about variety of people and different calls that marked the protest on 15 October, and about the support granted after a successful occupation of this place that became public only because of it. I started searching for photos in the Internet to find out what I missed and I found a photo showing a female activist sweeping the floor between tents in front of the stock exchange building in one of the most popular media. I completely overlooked the figurative meaning of the photo (Sln. “sweeping in front of “foreign” doorstep” meaning ‘mind one’s own business’, which is ‘foreign’ only because it finally alienated the excess value of our work from us) because I had my mind on the thought that the media wanted to reduce the meaning of the new political space and public being created in any way or another.

There were readers who equated the photo with the actual division of work in the movement being created and the photo confirmed their suspicion that it should not be taken seriously because it uncritically copies behavior patterns calling for a popular feminist graffiti from the time of Socialism: “Proletarians from all lands, who washes your socks?” Female readers and certainly some male readers, whose beliefs were only made stronger by the photo that the presentations of women in Slovenian media are terrible, continue to support the movement anyway that tries to function in an egalitarian and inclusive way. Patriarchal sexual division of labor, according to which household and caring work should be done by female activists, while male activists should take over technical and intellectual tasks, would catch the movement lying faster than what it is being unsuccessfully accused of by cynical commentators for this whole time; it “doesn’t know what it wants” because of its name fight for. Something else would also catch the movement lying: its inability to create a public space, where members of sexual, ethnic, class and other minorities would feel safe; so a place where they—we—are not afraid of alienation or/and violence.

I kept returning in front of the stock exchange and saw women and men switching their tasks and hanging out: female activists were sweeping, opening cans, chopping vegetable, making tea and offering it to passers-by who stopped to chat, or to what Mrs. Ana did who brought two jump ropes (“This will warm you up when you’re cold.”), candles (“For more pleasant atmosphere.”), and a home-made strudel with a promise it will be followed by new ones “if you will like it and so that my support won’t be only moral”. Some female activists moderated autonomous gatherings, initiated and led workshops, made and distributed leaflets, edited and wrote the www.15o.si blog, transported chairs from Metelkova City to the stock exchange, changed gas bottles and did (more than) what guys did. Despite the impression that everything is ok, I asked some of my new and old female acquaintances if they felt safe in front of the stock exchange; among them a sociology student, a writer, a doctor and an artist-single mother who cried after the first night of work in a new club in Ljubljana* because hostesses were harassed and inappropriately touched. Some of them were surprised why they shouldn’t feel safe. The others didn’t understand what I wanted to find out and I said that I wondered how it looked like to share a tent with people you didn’t know, especially with men. And about the fact that police watched you day and night. I added I understand that the occupation is something special, that you are enthusiastic, that you smell a revolution like you smell winter coming, and that everything seems cool to you because of all that.

“It’s too cold to sleep in a tent,” said the first one. “I’m here only when I’m on duty and I do it with my friends.”

“The police don’t interfere, except when writing punishments to guys who peed around the corner,” said the second one laughing and added that at gatherings, when discussing general behavior rules, it was clearly stated that a respectful attitude toward all participants is expected and alcohol is discouraged because they want to avoid violence.

I was wondering if they had to deal with homophobia, sexism, racism, and attacks on other minorities who would require more rigid rules in front of the stock exchange. My acquaintances shook their heads and I was happy that my questions about Ljubljana went in the wrong direction.

On Tuesday, 15 November, an incredible month of ‘the fight for’ passed by. During the “month walk” past the court, the bank Nova ljubljanska banka and the parliament which was attended by, as reported, about hundred people, I sat at work and remembered Angela Davis’s solidarity statement to activists in New York. Black activist, lesbian, once a member of the Black Panthers and American KP, which investigates “the prison-industrial complex”, which she experienced on her own skin, said to them: “You’re changing political space. You’ve revived our common desire. You reminded us that protest groups could still be created. You are devoted to collective work and you reject class, ethnical, and sexual hierarchies.” She added that the decision for a collective act, a unified protest, brought great responsibility, because we had to find an answer to the question how to combine forces without oppressing or simplifying complex relationships between individuals involved in the movement. How to create a complex and emancipating community? Angela Davis answered it with a quote by a black lesbian and feminist poet Audra Lorde: “Tolerance is not enough; we have to understand differences as being a source of inevitable polarity, where our creativity dialectically appears. She concluded that only in a complex community we could say “yes to life, yes to happiness, yes to community, yes to education—free education—yes to equality, yes to imagination, yes to creativity, yes to hope, and yes to future.”

A long list of workshops, discussion, statements, and public appeals moved to the 15o.si web site in just a month. But among them I still miss what Angela Davis talked about (the discussion on traps of simplified impressions about the movement as something homogenous) and even more the discussion on how division of labor affects women, especially older women, poor women, lesbians, and women from ethnic minorities in Slovenia. Because the person who proposes a new event at gatherings is expected to (co)organize it, I could conclude there are neither feminists nor lesbians in the Ljubljana movement, who are willing to talk about it. I didn’t give a chance to the possibility that feminism in Slovenia is unnecessary because we, women, as I often hear, have achieved equality a long time ago. I rather wondered if this means that the 15o movement is not inclusive enough despite all this or that other female activists have different priorities or that feminists and lesbians are invisible because there is to little of us and because we aren’t connected to each other?

Even in towns where feminist and related groups help to create a movement (I mainly observed how American groups function), more attention to safety of all participants was paid only when it turned out it was hard to ensure safety at large-scale gatherings, which is evidenced by numerous reports on intimidation, harassment, and also rapes. Some movements have agreed on principles and practice of safe gatherings before the sexual assault occurred but it was clear that even the most well-intentioned statements couldn’t stop violence, and female activists therefore organized separate tents for sleeping, in which men were not allowed. In some places, female experts were invited to participate and then they led workshops on consensus, on supporting victims of sexual violence and abuse, on handling racism, and on ways how to oppose domination techniques and male chauvinism. What do American activists imagine under the term “a safe gathering”? The Women Occupy group from New York defined it as a chance for women “to initiate discussions on the effects of social inequality, to participate in them, direct them and also conclude them” and as “a possibility for them to do all this in an environment without police violence, without sexual harassment, and without objectification. We need women in the fight,” group members concluded, “but all mentioned takes power away from them.”

On the Occupy Patriarchy! web site, feminist activist Lucinda Marshall analyzed decisions and the language of statements, with which activist groups responded to cases of sexual violence in their midst. She also discussed the case from Glasgow, Scotland, where a group of men raped a minor girl. The first reaction of the Occupy Glasgow group? Minors were banned from sleeping overnight in the occupied park, which means they rather punished the more vulnerable ones (minors and thus indirectly also the rape victim) than provided safety for all participants. Moreover, activists distanced themselves completely from the crime and the victim in their first statement. Her sex was not mentioned at all (“we regret injustice caused to a person in the park”), and they wrote about “an alleged sexual assault” instead of a group rape. Considering activists’ comments arguing that this was an isolated case and couldn’t be generalized to the entire movement, it wasn’t difficult to conclude that many people were more concerned about bad reputation of the movement than abuse of the girl. This statement was replaced by another one overnight. They wrote in it that they extensively discussed “this despicable and unacceptable crime and its consequences” at the gathering on 26 October and that they are obliged to strictly observe safety rules established at the beginning of the movement. They organized a vigil for the victim and asked local feminist and LGBTI groups to join the movement. This means that these groups weren’t visibly involved in the Occupy Glasgow movement until then. I couldn’t find out why not and if they accepted the invitation, which must have sounded quite bitter, if we take into account that activists remembered a minority in their circles only when they had to face brutal consequences of sexism. “A movement that allows sexism discourages women from participating and when women leave the movement, only men—including sexist men—speak on its behalf,” said Lucinda Marshall in the end.

We know what follows: in groups dominated by men, sexual harassment is fast reduced to the victim’s “personal problem” and, in economic discussions, the respect of sexual division of labor is considered as “moving away from the problem” or as “a particularization of the problem”, which is class-oriented “in its basis”. Slavoj Žižek played the same tune at Wall Street saying that the western left first gave up “the so-called essentialism of class struggle” and replaced it with numerous anti-racist, feminist and similar struggles, but now it appears that “the correct name” of the basic problem is, however, capitalism. Well, as it seems, patriarchate, which is older than capitalism, will survive the latter without major troubles. If anyone, feminists and other minorities will cause trouble because they can’t agree on the homogeneity of the left and the dictate of the activist majority.

In the end it should be repeated that the actual egalitarianism and openness of each social system, including new political movements, is measured by the level of safety, support and integration felt and experienced by minorities and not by the majority. If we don’t want that contents, tactics and protest scene disappear from an activist repertoire, which are anyway excluded as personal, private, apolitical or trivial stuff by institutionalized understanding of politics, then the understanding of the term protest should also be changed so that it won’t only include mass demonstrations against injustice but also one’s will to search for alternative strategies of survival and of daydreaming about a very complex but better world for everyone.


The column was originally published in Slovene on November 24th 2011 in the Perspectives & Reflections section of LifeTouch, a project organised by Maribor -European Capital of Culture 2012.  

On December 2nd, it was re-published on the website of Radical Education Collective where 'occupy care' commented: "I think you’ve mixed up two different stories here. There was tragically a rape at Occupy Glasgow. But the woman was in her late 20s. The quote you mention has never come from us (the occupation was at that time in a Square not a park). You’re right that some people used the word ‘alleged’ when first talking about it, until better informed, as did (and does) much of the media. The statement agreed in a GA and published on the website is here: http://occupyglasgow.org/news/21-statement-from-occupy-glasgow-in-light-of-recent-events.html"

My reply: "Thank you for noticing my mistakes and simplifications. The Occupy Glasgow safer spaces policy says people staying overnight have to be over 18 years old. It is true, I did not manage to find information about the age of the rape victim and assumed too much by making a connection between the safe spaces policy and the rape. Occupy Patriarchy reports about a case of a minor (girl) raped in Dallas, so you are right to correct me – these were two different cases I shouldn’t have mixed. I apologize. I have quoted from the link you mention. Since I wrote the column in Slovene and the translator did not check the original quotes (or consulted me before putting the article online), the terminology (‘despicable and unacceptable crime and its consequences’) is inexact (Occupy Glasgow statement says ‘abhorrent and intolerable crime and its repercussions’). From what I understood, the occupation in Glasgow started (and the rape happened) in George Square and only later moved to Kelvingrove Park and the financial district. I do think that the latter two simplifications (‘park’ instead of ’square’ and the over-translation) do not disqualify my concern over safety in Ljubljana where the occupation continues, especially since it (safety) has not been seriously discussed yet, supposedly in good faith that informal exclusion, sexual harassment (or even rape) cannot and will not happen ‘here’."

*The name of the club deleted on December 13th 2011.

14. nov. 2011

Vabilo na predavanje o Rdečih zorah


Vabljene, vabljeni

na predavanje Tee Hvala o feminističnem in queerovskem festivalu Rdeče zore, ki od leta 2000 poteka v AKC Metelkova mesto v Ljubljani.

Tea Hvala, ena od organizatork festivala, je v svojem magistrskem delu iz antropologije spolov Rdeče zore obravnavala kot eno redkih neakademskih feminističnih javnosti v Sloveniji. Lani je uredila zbornik intervjujev Rdečke razsajajo!, v katerem nekdanje in sedanje organizatorke festivala razpravljajo o samoorganiziranem kolektivnem delu, o značilnostih feminističnih javnosti, o prednostih in slabostih uvoženega pojma „queer“ ter o seksizmu in homofobiji, ki zaznamujeta tako alternativne javnosti kot večinski politični in medijski diskurz v Sloveniji. Predavanje bo popestrila projekcija fotografij s preteklih edicij Rdečih zor.

Predavanje bo potekalo v okviru predmeta Študije spolov (smer Kulturologija) ga. Alenke Švab v petek, 18. novembra 2011 ob 10.00 v predavalnici št. 14 na Fakulteti za družbene vede.

13. nov. 2011

prisotni izvzeti

mlad, lep in odprt pesnik
se ni obotavljal:
povedal je, da je pričakoval
kot pričakujejo fantje,
ki ljubijo samo protislovja,
ki jih, izvzetim, ustrezajo:
staro, grdo, zakompleksano
babo, sovražno feministko.

nisem ustrezala. dala sem mu
svojo lepo feministično roko
in čakala, da se nagleda
protislovja, ki ga počasi zadeva.

ni in ni se mogel nagledat.
še potem, povsem zapleten
v dotike, se je moral zaustavit
in z ganjenim glasom za oder,
ki naju je oba izvzel, zaklicat:
ah, ti si ženska, resnično lepa!

najbolje, da napišeš pesem,
sem rekla in ga privila k sebi,
da bi tisto malo, kar je ostalo
od starih, grdih, zakompleksanih protislovij,
obvarovala pred publiko v njegovih očeh.

1. nov. 2011

Premiera nove predstave Maje Delak 'Sramota'

Sramota

Premiera nove predstave v produkciji Zavoda Emanat in v sodelovanju z Vio Negativo.

Razpored predstav:
03.11.2011, Stara mestna elektrarna, Ljubljana
ob 19.00 Via Negativa
ob 21.30 Emanat

Ponovitvi:
04.11.2011, Stara mestna elektrarna, Ljubljana
ob 19.00 Emanat
ob 21.00 Via Negativa

05.11.2011, Stara mestna elektrarna, Ljubljana
ob 19.00 ViaNegativa



Foto: Nada Žgank


O PROJEKTU

Dve samostojni avtorski skupini, Via Negativa, ki jo konceptualno vodi Bojan Jablanovec, in sodelavci v produkciji Zavoda Emanat, ki jih v tem projektu vodi koreografinja Maja Delak, predstavljata dva različna performansa, ki sta nastala na osnovi obdelave skupne teme – sramote.

Via Negativa: Sramota

Maja Delak: Sramota

Kako uprizoriti nekaj tako performativnega, kot je sram? Kako govoriti o nečem, kar se izmika besedam? Kako nagovoriti občinstvo brez sramotenja?

Sramota je večjezična. Telesa, zvoki, glasba, podobe in besede govorijo hkrati. Kar želijo povedati, je v prekrivanjih in vrzelih med posameznimi jeziki. Subjekte na odru in subjekte pred njim izgovarjajo na način, ki se tako kot subjekti izmika enosmiselni označitvi: s premolki, zamiki, prekinitvami, obrati, obotavljanji, podvajanji, odmevi. Nikoli nis(m)o povsem ali zgolj tukaj, vedno smo še nekje drugje, kjer lahko za hip verjamemo, da smo nekdo drug ali sanjarimo, da bi to lahko bili. Včasih igramo kar sami sebe. Priča smo lastnemu popredmetenju, ko mora telo, ki je obvladano od lastne podvrženosti pogledu, odgovoriti s tem, kar mu jemlje besedo. (Tea Hvala)


SODELAVCI

Ustvarjalci in izvajalci: Loup Abramovici, Ingrid Berger Myhre, Maja Delak, Katja Kosi, Luka Prinčič, Maja Smrekar, Irena Tomažin

Koncept in koreografija: Maja Delak
v sodelovanju z: Loup Abramovici, Ingrid Berger Myhre, Nina Fajdiga, Tea Hvala, Katja Kosi, Luka Prinčič, Maja Smrekar, Irena Tomažin, Nataša Živkovič
Video, zvok, programiranje: Luka Prinčič
Video in scenografija: Maja Smrekar
Kostumografija: Ajda Tomazin
Oblikovanje luči: Urška Vohar
Besedila: Loup Abramovici, Ingrid Berger Myhre, Katja Kosi, Irena Tomažin
Uporabljena besedila: Lev N. Tolstoj, Mady Schutzman, Leo Lionni, Michio Kushi
Prevodi: Katja Kosi

Izvršna producentka: Nina Janež
Produkcija: Zavod Emanat
Finančna podpora: Ministrstvo za kulturo RS, Mestna občina Ljubljana
V sodelovanju z: Bunker, SMEEL

Cena vstopnic: 10 eur/8 eur dijaki, študenti, upokojenci.
Rezervacije na elektronski naslov info@emanat.si ali na telefon: 040/295-585.