Communicatons

Who is listening? - Kelly R Piercy semperfidelas@gmail.com

Revolutions are funny things. Somehow those we remember are the ones that have met with success. I wonder how many remember the name of Boudica or Vercingetorix? They both lead great revolutions against Roman occupation. And they both ended up like the Houston Oilers. Just a sidebar in history, they came to the game with all the support of their people, and like the Oilers, lost the 'Big Game' and slipped from memory.

There is another thing about revolutions that needs to be recognized. After the American Revolution, everyone did not live 'happily ever after'. The Federalist Papers did not spring from some bonhomie among political scientist wanting to dialog about the philosophy of the new nation. The Federalist Papers were a heated debate between two powerful factions with very opposite views of the shape of this new society that was born from a bloody war.

In fact, many Americans either willingly fled the new nation or were forced off their land by the victors. Why was this? Because even among those who fought against the supposed tyranny of their overlords, there was disagreement. The disagreement and factionalization did not exist only among the populace, it ran all the way to the top, even Washington's position was in doubt. The Declaration of Independence almost failed at the last minute because of disagreement with the why and what of the revolution.

Revolutions are not pretty and they are generally a series of devastating losses by the revolutionaries. Case in point, the American Revolution, The Viet Nam War, The risings of the English and the alliance in Europe against Rome. Yet, in every case, revolutions succeed.

What does any of this have to do with communication? This column is generally about how we communicate between ourselves and with those outside our movement. Mostly we discuss words and language, and tact and diplomacy here. That sort of writing is probably what is more fitting in this space. However, some comments from conference attendees inspires me to ask a different question and take this column in a different direction.

Who is listening and what are they hearing?

For the most part, our most effective listeners are our most entrenched opponents; Absolute Zero, Perverted Justice, and the rest. What are they hearing? Mostly that we cannot seem to form a united front and we do well enough at arguing with ourselves, thank you very much.

Another answer is, a very small fraction of those we represent. Certainly, we receive many emails asking for help. Sadly we receive too few emails asking how the sender can help us. Our websites blanket the net as we form more and more factions with the desire to take the lead and become the victor in the battle. Some sites claim large volumes of 'hits' and 'visits'. Yet nothing changes, registries exist even to the Territories of the United States and are insidiously spreading around the World. Some efforts by our State Organizers, notably Virginia and Texas, have slowed or stopped the progress of further restriction. There is still debate among the states about the AWA, but it is mostly the states asking the fed to relax the rules so they can be in compliance without enduring further costs for more legislation.

So, who is listening? It would seem very few, and what is being heard is not what is being said. I spent some years working in International Field Service. During that time I learned a very important lesson about communication. I am not responsible for what I say, I am responsible for what you hear. We are responsible for what those who allow the registry hear. What are they hearing? Are they hearing that we want 'sex offenses' to be stricken from the law? Are they hearing that we want our particular 'offense' ignored because the effects of the registry make our life difficult? Are they hearing that it is the 'victims' fault because 'she lied about her age', or the parents fault because 'they were not taking proper care of their child'.

Probably.

How many times have we talked to one of our comrades and heard this: "Before this happened to (me, my son, etc.) I believed everyone on the registry was a _______."

It recalls what I heard about myself when I returned from the Southeast Asia War Games. How many times was I called a 'Baby Killer' by the multitude that opposed what my parents, society, and government told me was the right thing to do. Now, the registry labels me worse, a 'Baby Raper'.

I never killed a baby, I never raped a baby. In fact, in my two years as a Participant, Southeast Asia War Games, I never held or touched a Viet Namese adult, let alone child, in a way that could be construed as sexual. I have never been charged with touching a child or adult in any way that can be construed as sexual, I have never even been accused of 'chatting' with someone who portrayed themselves as a minor.

Yet there are those who still label me 'Baby Killer' and more that now label me a 'Baby Raper". Why? Because the supporters of the registry control the language.

So, who is listening? It would seem many are listening, but they are not hearing our message.

This column is about teaching communication skills. At least that is what it is supposed to be about. Not this month. I do not have any advice. I offer no solutions. I only listen to commenters who urge us to a louder voice through a dual approach in increased informed lobbying and street activism.

Our RSOL conference showed the emergence of our strength. Are there more than 130 of us? Will we step up and be recognized, let our names and faces go beyond the anonymity of the registry and into the streets and to the offices of legislators and executives. I am concerned that we must, and we must do it with reason, truth, passion, and courage if we expect those who listen to hear.