#comm4650

[aretoodesign-blog]

Transgender Inclusiveness

Micro Design Intervention -- 5 of 5

Having paired two projects together, targeting cisgender and transgender spaces, I was pleased to see more uptake to conversation from the second phase. Aforementioned in my prior blog post, this in part had to do with the nightly cleaning of the bathrooms -- the posters were taken down. However, the ones in the single-stall bathrooms were not.    Regardless, the failure of having separate hashtags for each domain contributed. Though, nobody used #dontstopMRU, more would be exposed to the conversation from looking up #inclusiveMRU.

Images 1-3. Sample of one of the Gender Neutral bathrooms at MRU, outfitted with Isolation is not Inclusion posters.

The initial thought about having this conversation was to point out how, though we are progressively moving forward as a society, we our spaces are reminiscent past way of thinking, upholding the values of the past. By upholding visible separation, inclusion will not follow.

Image 1 and 2. First Insgatram post addressing Isolation is not Inclusion poster.

With regards to gender neutral bathrooms, there are two Instagram posts which address dialogue of both sides: the first post speaks the space is inclusive for more than one demographic, but simultaneously claiming that the general public is not the trajectory demographic for gender neutral bathrooms.    The positive upside of having isolating bathrooms is that a variety of users can make use of the space -- however great this is, if isolation is the only option compared to binary perspective, the message behind the poster is being overlooked or ignored.

Images 3-7. First floor, Riddell Library, the long journey to the Gender Neutral bathroom.

Part of the dialogue that was overlooked by this post is the isolation of having to go out of your way to find a gender neutral bathroom. For example, the bottom floor of the library has male and female bathrooms in the center of the building, with ease of access -- the gender neutral bathroom is at accessed by a hallway at the end of the building, then to another hallway, and then down another hallway.   However, this experience was not overlooked. Another Instagram post directly speaks to this reality. Further, this Instagram user directly addresses the first blog post to open continuing the dialogue on the matter. 

Image 8. Instagram post of the negative experience of the long journey to find a Gender Neutral bathroom. The second post speaks to the problem pointed out by the poster: inclusiveness does not come from isolation. Especially when it is inconvenient, and hidden away. 

Being a shared experience, comments to this post respond with advice. But, this display of assistance is a sort of microagression, burying someone’s lived experience with a suggestion. Rather than addressing the problem at large, pushing back on someone’s lived experience creates further exclusion from being invalidated.

Images 9. Responses to issue with Gender Neutral bathroom journey. The response to this reality “you need to know where your bathroom are” perpetuates the problem of exclusiveness, rather then helping to facilitate the inclusive culture of being embedded in the community without having a disruptive experience from the rest of the group. At the end of the day, inclusion looks like something you wouldn’t have to think about to participate in. At present, though steps are being made to help encourage that, it is not the reality at MRU.

[aretoodesign-blog]

Calgary Transit Bylaw 4M81

Micro Design Intervention -- 4 of 5

The City of Calgary has a discrepancy undermining its claim to affect car volume in the city centre. Its policy from Calgary Transit: Bylaw 4M81 eliminates bike riders from connecting with the central artery for pubic transportation, being the C-Train.

The intent of this micro intervention is to raise awareness about the policy by having conversations with other transit users, or at least bring this to their attention, so if problems arise, they know why.

Image 1. Social media of the advocacy at City Hall station.

Across the street, at the northern platform, is where Bow Valley College is located. The campus is lucky, as they are directly on the C-Train line. But, this is not the reality of many.   As bike accessible busses are rare, sparse, and far off route this policy makes the other form of Calgary’s public transportation an unreliable option with a fixed schedule.   People trying to get to and from work, school, appointments, meetings, and so forth, are barred from what should be accessible, timely transportation for all tax-paying Calgarians.

Image 2. Woman reading #change4m81 sign while en route.

En route to City Hall station in the city center many heads turned to read the sign, both while on the platform waiting for the train and while riding. But, many nobody came over to ask about it. It was not the same while standing on the platform at City Hall, however. Many more heads were turned while passing by, while boarding, and even while across the platform -- people, entire families would stop to read the signs before continuing on with their day.

There were about 10 people who asked what the bylaw was about, engaging in a 3-4 minute chat about what the problems are and why. Many said they could see how this poses a problem, but were also unsure of what would solve the problem because it begins with attitude. Most who oppose have had poor experiences with riders. Even though it is a management issue, it is the same dispute about holding space on the road -- bicyclists and drivers are opposed to giving up space they consider fundamentally theirs.    Part of starting to shift this mentality is to be aware of the issues feeding to the problem. Being able to explain the details and the ripple effects helped locals realize a city policy they didn’t even know of was causing problems in and of itself, but also prevented other city goals tax payers continue to pay into. If it doesn’t affect them, and if it is not visible, it persists. During this time advocating to change bylaw 4m81, all but one person who spoke with us were open to dialogue on the subject.    One man simply passed by pontificating the reason this bylaw is in effect: he postulated it was because bike users annually break ankles of other transit users while riding the train. He did not seem to care about any of the content on our signs, or what we were speaking of. In fact, when I mentioned I have spoken with bylaw officers, the Calgary Transit call centre, and a supervisor within Calgary Transit, nobody had mentioned this, his response was -- that they did tell me this, and he continued on his way.

Image 3. Man reading #change4m81 sign.

Image 4. Men reading #change4M81 sign.

Image 5. Men reading #change4m81 sign

Image 6. Man and woman reading #change4m81 sign.

Image 7. Group reading #change4m81 sign. 

Image 8. Man on train reading #change4m81 sign while standing in designated bike zone.

What made conversations easier to have, was being located directly at the train. We were able to point out that Calgary Transit already designates bike zones as a part of each train compartment, to facilitate desired pedestrian-bike user interaction. We were also able to point out the mismanagement of these zones making them moot:    The only indication of these areas, to all users, is through a 2″ sticker on the outside window. This area is therefore used as standing room where bike users are trying to load then occupy this area. Other passengers are obstacles to maneuver a bike around and remain upright during travel.      What amplifies this problem further is the vertical bar obstructing boarding and exiting with a bike. Many passengers use this to hold onto while standing, as other entrances and exits do not have a vertical bar at the door to hold onto. This makes these areas more troublesome for bike users.    With such little emphasis and endorsement of what areas are for which transit users people are either oblivious or try to make the ride the best it can be. With proper facilitation through proper endorsement and enforcement, bikes would not be a problem for any c-train user.

Image 9. General posting of anti-bicycle policy at city center C-Train station.

Given that there were only two of us, the numbers were rather small to make a draw much attention. At least social media was able to transcend that barrier, though it was only through a SnapChat story for the day.     It is also the getting into colder winter weather. When people are on their way to warm up inside winter doesn’t allow for much consideration about bicycle use, especially when that is not routinely seen at this time of year.    Beyond the presence on the C-Train platform, I was able to facilitate a number of conversations while attempting to recruit friends, colleagues, and peers. I was able to flow through similar conversations in preparation for the day, while bringing to light points never considered or connected.

In order to actually make some headway with the project, beyond a few chats, it would be better to arrange a group to perform the same stand-in on the platform at a time in the year where bicycle traffic is on peoples minds.    With the use of social media, I anticipate there would be more buy in as well as participation. The hashtag was only used by myself to display the workings of preparing for the day.

[aretoodesign-blog]

Transgender Rights to use Public Bathrooms

Micro Design Intervention -- 3 of 5

Having had discussions at work with colleagues about the importance of having safe spaces for transgender individuals, it dawned on me how there is a sense of unfamiliarity. At Recreation we have hosted safe swim nights because of the entanglement of people wanting to be themselves in public, but needing to separate space from themselves from the public at large in vulnerable moments. 

The fact this was a conversation at work, in a university setting, that someone “just doesn’t get why there need’s to be a specific area for transgender people to go to the bathroom” sparked an idea:    Perhaps, like in the perception of wayfinding, someone can only understand empathy when they are in the same moment of vulnerability, and inspired to consider that moment as the reality of someone else of a different circumstance. Maybe then, the experience would have transference for those unable to achieve the understanding on their own.

This idea created parallel between wanting people to go through this exercise, while not antagonising people who understand this experience. I came up with a design I believe endorses people who currently understand, while visibly proposing the idea of the thought exercise.    With use of hierarchy, the sign reads “Transgender rights don’t stop behind closed doors”, emphasizing that behind closed stalls, and behind closed bathroom doors people have the right to be treated with respect. As we know, policies and confrontations exist where that is not the reality.    The parallel is introduced by splitting up the posted into two zones. The left, an endorsement to keep on keepin on, “Don’t hesitate to be yourself”; the right, the thought exercise, “Stop. What if your right to use this bathroom were questioned?”

Image 1. Transgender Rights poster.

It would have been more impactful to use the same hashtag as another design, attempting to bring inclusiveness to the minds of the MRU community (#inclusiveMRU). 

The hashtag on the poster reads “#dontstopMRU”, which is stand alone. Though nobody has responded, at least on instagram, with this hashtag. I am unable to see the impact of this project beyond having conversations with classmates.

Image 2. Poster in women’s bathroom in W wing.

Image 3. Poster in men’s bathroom in Upper floor, Main St.

Image 4. Poster in men’s bathroom in W wing.

There were a total of 8 bathrooms where these posters have been displayed. First, by a female classmate last week, and then by myself. I waited until midnight the same night the posters were put up. 

When I checked the women’s washrooms where I knew the posters were placed they had been taken down. This was at the same time custodial staff had finished their rounds in the area, so it is likely the exercise was too short lived to spark a response, beyond the bathroom goer’s while the posters were present. 

This micro design intervention was paired with a sister intervention, specifically targeting the installation of Gender Neutral signs at MRU. This was part of the discussion at my work place, at MRU, to create a safe space, leading to an inclusive environment on campus. This sister intervention will explore the response to that component of the project.

[aretoodesign-blog]

Community Pop-Up Food Box

Micro Design Intervention -- 2 of 5

This initiative was born from conversations hosted by Calgary Neighbourhoods, with Manchester residents. Many commented feeling disconnected from the community, as they felt there was a lack of community presence -- there is no community space, no community events, and a lack of neighbourly interaction. 

As the area is comprised of mainly by accessible housing through Calgary Housing Company, many of the occupants are low income or require social assistance. This means that many households are food insecure. Of course, there are a variety of circumstances of occupants in the community, and in the building.

Much like a pop-up library, a pop-up food box acts as a way for the public to participate in the community. The reciprocal acts of taking or giving items is a way for an individual to engage anonymously, on their own terms. As a symbol of community in the building, occupants are able to see a visible community presence, regardless of participating or not.

By creating a space for community participation, I assembled this food box to see if the building would embrace the opportunity for community interaction or reject it. This is the progression over the past week:  

Image 1. Items to construct a pop-up food box.

Image 2. Cutting up the sign for pop-up food box.

While creating this food box, I realized it could be made more minimalistic due to the nature of the materials, the way the interact, and my inability to find where I put my roll of tape. Mainly the lack of tape. So, the only materials used was a milk crate and a piece of paper.    To create this food box, I cut out a sort of bottleneck shape into a piece of paper, with a square message printed at the bottom. This then folds over and hangs through the milk crate’s gripping holds, staying in place due to the bottleneck form.

Originally, I imagined the construction to look as a shelter or a shelf typical for pop-up libraries. Then I realized the inability to use this method, because of the Canadian reality of long winters. An adjustment needed to be made.

Image 3. Pop-up food box set-up in foyer of building.

This food box was placed in the entrance foyer of my building, beyond the security doors. As the community has safety concerns, this kept the food box protected from vandalism. Likewise, because of animals finding their way around the city, the Canada was placed in a safe location indoors to keep animals from looting the goods.    In particular to the Canadian reality, to keep the food from freezing or being damaged from weather, an indoor solution was necessary. The milk crate was then chosen for being a free and durable receptacle for donations.

Image 4. Pop-up food box after 1 hour.

The night I set-up this up I went out to pick-up my boyfriend from the city centre. In it I had placed three potatoes, and three cans of non-perishable food: corn, pear halves, and salmon. When I returned an hour later the items were gone. Two new cans of other food took it’s place.

Over the next week, more interactions took place. The box was renewed with different items every day or so. Being that this is the first week, I was surprised by the immediate uptake, having thought it would need to be present for some time before people would adopt it.    Though I am optimistic, I believe this exercise needs to be stoked by the community to keep it going. It would not be reasonable to imagine the box be stocked at all times, but the more it is empty, it feels there will be less considerations to the effect. Without a community representative ensuring it be replenished with a couple items now and then, the idea is a fragile in the time before it becomes common place.

Image 5. Pop-up food box after 1 day.

Image 6. Pop-up food box after 2 days. 

Image 7. Pop-up food box after a week.

Image 8. Pop-up food box after 1 week.

Image 9. Pop-up food box after 1 week.

Having had conversations with people in other spaces I have decided to make this document available for the public to share, so people can make their own version of a pop-up food box, or pass it along to others who know of a space to host this idea.

[aretoodesign-blog]

Little did I know

Blog Reflection 4 -- A conversation with someone of a different point of view.

Everything being said was fundamentally wrong, yet I sat there listening. In fact, I was jumping out of my seat. A debate was taking place in my global citizenship class, Citizenship without Boarders. Each group had to pick a topic -- the topics already debated: automated labour, and euthanasia. 

The other topics were interesting, making fair -- or moderately fair -- points on their own behalf. But, this debate was getting at people, it wasn’t just me fidgeting. I kept reflecting over the same meagre, stale, outdated points being made by the opposition. It got me so mindful of this, as a bystander, I could not help but write out my own responses.

When the time came for questions my hand shot up like many others. I was not going to go unheard, as was my meek attempt to ask a question during other debates. That wasn’t going to happen.     It had been a long night, and class was concluding, so I was able to reign in the full attention of the class for one seismic question. Luckily, an astute classmate followed after the conversation from my question subsided -- it was my second question, but taken further. I rejoiced, literally thanking my classmate while he was asking the question. But, still, my last question went unanswered.

Or so I thought.

While packing up, one of the three men opposed to legalizing prostitution came up to me and asked me to ask my question because it was obvious I was burning a hole in my seat during the debate. I was appreciative of this. Not only did we have a platform in class, but this was on his own time asking to open a dialogue about our differences.

I asked. He answered. And but so did others. Four of us stayed behind talking about the intricacies of what came up in the debate -- how it affected our lives, and how this plays into society as a larger picture. It was surprising to hear the humanity which was seemingly to be absent before, just as the shared opinions and shared experiences. 

What I realized was that I remove the humanity from others who disagree with me about core values. Even though I can hear someone out, I have disregarded them, written-off people as a classification according to one topic in a reality of millions of global issues.    The feeling of my eyebrows raising was abrupt when I realized I was distancing myself off, rather than engaging; further, rather than accepting that this opposition is part of other human experiences and perceptions. It is not my own, it is far from it, but people share all the same needs. To define a person off of one interaction, one behaviour, one opinion is absurd, but it does happen every day. What I realized though, is like my final year has groomed me to actively acknowledge and challenge my assumptions, I need to challenge my own resistance to that which is not my reality.

[gabrielledickson]

COMM 4650: Learnings from a disagreement filled conversation

My family is very politically divided. By that I actually mean all of us are relatively in agreement except for one of my grandparents. There is an unwritten rule in my family that none of us bring up anything even mildly political when this person is present. This is necessary for us to keep the peace and keep Christmas a conflict free time. When someone decides to be brave, or irresponsible, and not follow this rule, a fire is most certainly started.

Compared to the rest of my family, this person is quite conservative. I wouldn’t say that they are extremely conservative in the grand scheme of things but lets just say they are probably Stephen Harper’s biggest fan. As you can imagine, a lot of tension was created in my family when Trump was elected. I think that we all had a moment where we felt extremely disconnected from this person. When they were not present, we would talk about how we did not understand how this person could possible agree with what Trump was saying. However, I don’t think that any of us were actually making that much of an effort to understand where they were coming from. I decided to take this opportunity to try to understand where this person is coming from with their values.

Recently, this person brought up politics with me. Instead of immediately changing the topic, as I would usually do, I decided to simply listen to what they had to say about why I should be a conservative. This lead to an extremely interesting conversation that provided me with insights into why this person’s politics are the way that they are. They told me about how their parents raised them to be a liberal and in their young adult life they did subscribe to this value system. However, over time, they realized that their values actually fell more in line with those of the conservative party. This seems to be largely because of certain kept, pivotal events in their life.

This conversation really helped me to understand why a person might hold such conservative values. It allowed me to learn about this person’s background and the reasons that they believe in conservatism. After the conversation, I reflected on the differences in this person’s life and my life and the reasons for our differing politics were clearly illuminated for me. I think that considering what has happened to a person in their life time is essential to understanding why their values may be so different from yours. I also realized that this person did not have evil intentions, but they just had differing ideas from me about how to create a safe and prosperous Canada. Ultimately, we have the same goal, we just have very different ideas about what a safe and prosperous Canada looks like and how we achieve that.

Overall, I did not find it difficult to have this conversation. I am practiced at not engaging in debate with this person and I have already accepted our differences. I am also extremely averse to conflict so I do usually just let people that I disagree with speak with out responding to their ideas. The difference in this instance was that I intentionally tried to understand where this person was coming from instead of just letting what this person was saying go. I do think that there are certain things that this person could have said that I would not have been able to help myself from responding to. If they started attacking women, which I know they have done in the past, I think I would have felt compelled to defend myself and my gender. I think the reason for this is that in the conversation we had, all of the things that this person was talking about were general or did not apply specifically to me. While I disagreed strongly with what they were saying, they were not attacking me at all.  I also think that this is because I feel very strongly about gendered issues but not so strongly about economic issues.

I think that one of the key things that allowed for this conversation to result in learning instead of argument was that I really intentionally approached it with a focus on learning and making this person feel heard. I also made very careful, strategic comments that made this person feel that I was open to hearing what they had to say. I was careful to never make them think that I agreed with them though.

In conclusion, I am glad that I had this conversation. Ultimately, I think that it brought this person and I closer and I am happy that it happened. I think that this Christmas may just go smoother because of it!

[aretoodesign-blog]

Deciphering the Code

Blog reflection 3 -- Reflection on podcast episode ‘Eggshells’

It can be awkward realizing your behaviour is not understood by others. Then to call someone out on it, only to have them use the ‘I’m not a racist’ card. That’s right this blog post is about the things white people do which causes dysfunction while interacting outside their own skin colour. 

WRONG ASSUMPTION

Last week while listening to the ‘Eggshells’ episode of Colour Code’s podcast I was initially confused. From the language I was hearing, I was prepared to hear an angry offensive white person, with an emotional wreck of a person of colour as the introduction to the episode spoke about a heated discussion about white fragility.    Instead, I heard an oblivious man making generalisations, who when caught off guard, was not able to articulate himself well. His opposite, an intelligent woman who remained calm while still focused on making a point... to the point she didn’t seem to make much else happen. The conversation stagnated. 

The content of this problem was because the conversation focused on knit picking apart what was being said, rather than focusing on the concepts being exchanged. The conversation originated out of the topic of a poll suggesting POC do not integrate themselves into the community. The point being made is that presence in a space is interacting versus how others, particularly white people, prescribe this interaction to be becoming unsettled when others do not mirror their own behaviour.

IGNORANCE IS NOT BLISS

But, the conversation was falling apart because the fill-in host was not seasoned about talking about race while hosting a conversation which is racially motivated. When this was beginning to be uncovered, he was unable to calibrate his understanding, but simply looked to affirmative conversation with like-minded people.    When faced with the opportunity to hear about how what he perceived to be normal was in fact only one reality, of many lived realities, the host decided to shut down. He defended himself rather than listening and creating an open dialogue. 

Another point I struggled with was reconciling the concept that when a person realizes their own ignorance, to not latch to others to solve their own blindspot; and, that it is not the responsibility of someone experiencing ignorance of someone else to take it upon themselves to educate that person. However, this was due to the content of the episode.    It had one person taking on that role: stepping into a conversation to correct assumptions. But the conversation was stuck on the same points rather than explaining the position and how that functioned. The conversation was stuck repeating certain points, rather than discussing the function of what was being said to the system overall. 

WHAT TO DO IF IT HAPPENS TO YOU

The conclusion of the episode unpacked the point of the analysis of the recordings which transpired: when speaking to someone who has done something racist, if you choose to engage, make sure to focus the distinction you aren’t calling them a racist: that what you are saying, is that they have done something racist. Focus on the action, not the person. Otherwise, ego will kick in. To have a productive conversation, to get through you have to walk on eggshells.    And, if you are that person who is being called out. Take a second; listen. Acknowledge your unawareness, and try to understand what it is in context that is not your own. It is up to you to figure things out, which might have to be in a different space, at a different time. 

[gabrielledickson]

COMM 4650: Entitlement and the Fear of Change, a response to Colour Code Ep. 8: Eggshells

I found this episode of Colour Code to be extremely interesting.

I am finding this reflection to be extremely difficult to write. I have sat down to compose it several times and each time I feel like I don’t quite know what I want to say or how I want to say it. I recognize race as an extremely complex issue in Canada and I find it difficult to speak to because I feel like as a white, English speaking person born in Canada, I don’t know enough about the experiences of people who are not in the same position as me.

My grandfather is very interested in genealogy and always talks with us about the history of our family. This has kept me very aware of the fact that my family immigrated to Canada. I know that my experience is different because my family has been here for many generations, but I don’t feel more entitled to live here than anyone else who wants to immigrate here. My ancestors came here in search of a better life because things weren’t so great in the UK and I think that we should provide that opportunity to as many people as possible. I do not understand how people of European descent living in Canada forget that.

On the topic of diversity, I think that diversity is our strongest asset as a nation. While I think it is essential for us to all agree on a few key values as a society to unite us and follow some standard systems to maintain order, I see no reason to ask people to abandon their culture and language when they move to Canada. I actually think that having a wide variety of cultures and traditions represented in Canada creates a unique opportunity as it allows us to consider many different ways of understanding and doing things. As long as people are not hurting others and are following our laws, I don’t see a reason for them to have to change. It is hard for me to understand people who do not see immigration this way.

When I was listening to the interview, I did my best to try to understand where he was coming from. While I do not agree with what he was saying, I can see how people living in Canada may be upset if they feel that their way of life and norms are being threatened. Usually, people do not like change and if they see immigration as causing change, they may reject it. If he feels that people moving to his neighbourhood are changing the language of his area from English to another language, I can see how this may make him uncomfortable because he might feel as if he is going to loose his ability to communicate with others.  While I do not think that this is an accurate representation of what is happening, I can see how this could be an unsettling thought. I think it is crucial for him to separate his fears from what is actually going on. Listening to the interview, I felt like he was speaking based on his fears not based on reality.

I also wonder how gender played into this conversation. The part of the conversation that made me feel like gender really influenced the conversation was when he was saying that he felt like people in line with him at the grocery store should talk to him. I can not imagine why he feels entitled to have people talk to him. I wonder if women would be likely to make a similar claim, I know that I would never.