Curating Movements by Silencing Individuals

Nancy Naples explores factors that determine who gets to speak and who is heard as well as the coercive discourse that places a responsibility on survivors to speak, particularly in institutional sites.  I want to think about ways in which movements are intentionally or unintentionally curated through norms that demands some to speak while others are silenced.

The power of consciousness raising in creating social change is repeatedly emphasized through historical retellings. Feminist history attributes the creations of the movement to stop violence against women to a shift from sharing personal experiences through private discussions to political action, which brought experiences to a public platform. The suffragette movement used hunger strikes and increasingly militant tactics to bring attention to their issues. Both of these movements were characterized by focused goals that only allowed certain experiences to be shared and particular groups to speak.

Dean Spade touches upon this model for social change in his lecture. He describes an approach in which the most privileged within a group promise to “come back” for the more vulnerable because their voice is perceived as more marketable to those in power. In the gay rights movement, trans people were asked to be silent while a more “attainable” goal was achieved first. Another example is the Occupy Wall Street Movement, a key criticism of which was that the movement lacked focused demands and a united vision.

Naples analyses demonstrates that these beliefs continue to hold a strong grip and create coercive discourses that push some survivors to speak, particularly in institutional spaces while simultaneously silencing others. However, it must be asked if the resulting social improvements are worth the silence of vulnerable groups.