The short version of this post: RantWoman probably is going to change the title of an old blog post, add some headings to improve blind person navigability, and cite thie post to add context acknowledging that the older post could be problematic in a number of ways for different readers. RantWoman is disinclined to edit history, even though the older post like much on this blog could stand some editing. RantWoman INTENDS both this post and the older post as part of many conversations about child safety and individual life journeys.
In fine Quakerly way, RantWoman has seasoned this with two trusted members of the community. Neither of them interacted in depth with RantWoman's willingness to consider whether anything in the post might run afoul of Blogger guidelines. More below.
The slightly longer version:
1. Recently RantWoman received email from Blogger informing her that a years old blog post has been "unpublished," rendered unfit for human consumption. The email comes with links to terms of service and content policy with an invitation to appeal and suggestions about options to address the concerns identified.
Blogger Content Guidelines
Why was your blog post unpublished?
Your content has violated our Malware and Viruses policy. Please visit
our Community Guidelines page linked in this email to learn more.
Malware?
The technological elements of the post are no different than many other posts, plain text and a couple links either to blogger or to other sites. If the malware issue is another site, RantWoman is happy to hear suggestions about who and how to troubleshoot that.
So that leaves the community guidelines, which RantWoman step by step tackles here.
2. This post contains a lot of Quaker jargon. Non-Quaker readers are invited either to use your own search engines or to leave comments asking RantWoman to explain further. RantWoman only posts comments with the author's permission.
3. The original post was written before RantWoman began her practice of posting really blunt advisories about sensitive content at the beginning of many posts. RantWoman, honestly, also had not thought about content guidelines. RantWoman recognizes that the content of the old post is challenging but believes it needs to remain available in the interest of paths to continued discussion of things that affect many families.
4. RantWoman will leave the original frank title in the text of the post. The title is meant to acknowledge that people may for many reasons have sex offender issues on their minds a lot of the time and there are things that come of that. Despite the title, the old post is NOT an endorsement of sex offenders, an accusation that came RantWoman's way in a recent Twitter conversation about a messy family situation in the news. It is, however, part of one Quaker meeting's walk with questions about community safety, supporting a low-level sex offender, and intending also to walk alongside the complex experiences of individuals impacted personally by related issues. It is a long story. A lot about RantWoman's perspective can be found under the label Safest though that label also contains some other content related to general principles RantWoman considers relevant.
Events all started with a long ago conversation during coffee hour.
The post also contains a link about a Meeting for Business at another Quaker meeting where similar subjects are talked about.
5. The post was written at a time when people with titles implying they were prepared to help members of the community season different aspect of the situation were, for RantWoman, less than astute and less than helpful and also obtuse about another change occuring in RantWoman's life. (speaking VERY plainly, in connection with midlife vision loss, RantWoman was dealing both with a lot of generalized ableism and with physical and emotional abuse from one specific member of the community. This walk continues to evolve. Except for the point that any kind of disability can make people particularly vulnerable, RantWoman wants here to stick to questions of how to talk about experiences related to sex offenders) RantWoman very much appreciates currently having a sense of people she can ask to look at such things.
One of RantWoman's advisors mentioned above just said "there are no content warnings for life."
The other said basically the same thing and suggested that people can just absent themselves from triggering material. Um, in RantWoman's experience, that is not necessarily possible. Sometimes job responsibilities require one to walk over the rocky territory of something from the past in order to do better going forward about keeping people and communities safe. In one case, RantWoman was able to add one appropriate line to an insurance policy. Doing more, like topical staff training was beyond RantWoman's light. RantWoman later gratefully ceded many topics to a non-profit much better equipped than RantWoman was, notwithstanding all the experiences connected with questions of worshipping with sex offenders and evolution of awareness about realities in RantWoman's family.
6. In the US national cultural war Zeitgeist both terminology and discussion of hot button issues are all over the place and definitely not in centered, well-seasoned form. RantWoman tries to offer thoughtful prayerful interventions but not to get sucked too far down rabbit holes or electronic time sinks. Some of the time RantWoman succeeds.
With all that in mind, readers who are not prepared to think about the day to day realities experienced by many survivors of sexual abuse and their loved ones, please either know what you are getting into by reading on or feel free to click away to something else.
In Light and Faithfulness
RantWoman
Posts
