Preparing for
challenging discussions
By
There was a time when polite people
assumed one would never discuss politics or religion in public. These were considered off limits because they
might bring up dissension or emotion: one could not assume the conversation would be
easily conducted in civility. Our norms
for civility, perhaps, have gotten more relaxed - assumptions today about what one can discuss
in public have changed. And, too, with
Friends, few areas are off limits. It is
a given that a group looking at Quaker faith and witness will discover areas of
divergent experiences and beliefs.
Presumably, you are reading this because
the group has decided to engage in a discussion in which differences expressed
can cause anger or pain – such as
addressing diverse experiences or concerns like gay/lesbian marriage, racism
within the Religious Society of Friends or spiritual/religious language. Success is helped by recognizing the
importance of the key ingredients to any conversation – which become even more
important when the issue may touch strong emotions :
ü
openness to hearing comments that may
challenge your beliefs and experiences
ü
commitment to listening deeply
ü
holding the group in the Light, in a
spirit of worship
ü
agreeing that the subject offers a
spiritually enriching opportunity
When the group has decided to take on such
a topic, can you assume that participants are willing to risk personal exposure
and perhaps pain in their discussion? When
the group has this understanding and moves forward, such experiences can offer
richness, transformation and
growth. Preparing for this can include reviewing
the article Ways to Structure Discussion
and thinking about the four ‘ingredients’ mentioned, and consider the following.
By paying attention to the progress of the
discussion, a facilitator can decide to interrupt a discussion, refocus it, or
in other ways redirect people – but do not act hastily. As the discussion unfolds, pay attention to
the group and how it is functioning.
o
How are participants engaging with each
other?
o
Are a variety of points being made or is
any one person, or point, dominating?
o
Is new ground being broken, or are points
being repeated?
o
Are participants responding to ideas or doing
personal battle with each other?
o
How are challenging statements being
addressed?
o
Is someone’s experience being discredited?
o
Is there an aspect of ‘insiders/outsiders’ in the
discussion?
o
Is one person being heavily
relied upon to be an ‘expert’ on ‘their
people’ or their position?
If
you begin to feel that there is an unevenness in who is contributing to the
conversation or what is being said, checking with the group can be helpful. A simple question ‘How is it going?’ is
better than asking if people feel safe.
Or asking about the area that others have not mentioned (‘What do you
think about …?’). If you think the subject is wandering but
participants are engaged, checking in with the group – reminding them of the
time and asking if this discussion is continuing to be helpful – may be all you
need to do.
However,
if you have a sense of unspoken discomfort, of someone feeling unable to speak,
if there is repetition or there are polarized views that seem stuck, if the progress
of the discussion seems unrelated to the original intent of the
discussion, you may wish to call for a
break, check in with individuals and reconvene with a different format or focus
of the discussion.
You
may want to note the following circumstances which can lend emotional energy to
the conversation. Any one of these
examples might feel like a time to intervene with a question, observation, or
suggestion, or
to call a break, depending on your sense of the group. Anytime you feel that one person is being put
in the center of attention by the group, or has not contributed to much of the
conversation, you may want to ‘check in’
to see how it’s going during a
break.
ü
Someone
may speak as if particular qualities are authentically Quaker,
and therefore imply that other qualities are nonQuaker.
When someone refers to the religious society as
being 'white', or as being ‘Christian’,
those who are not can feel discounted.
It’s helpful to remember that while as a faith tradition we carry
‘imprints’ of our Anglo-Saxon, Christian beginnings, we are diverse today in
race and in theology.
ü Someone with no experience of having limited mobility, or of being gay,
or of a race other than white may voice
disbelief, or may contradict the information shared; or may give advice to
those who do have that experience. Even
if the intent is not meant to harm, it can feel disrespectful.
ü
A related problem concerns a tendency
to rely on someone with a different
experience to be the resource person for that group about that experience. An
African American participant may be asked to
share experiences beyond the sharing everyone is asked to do. This may be a time for the facilitator to intervene,
asking if this is a question the person wants to answer, then perhaps
redirecting the conversation. It would be good to check in at a break with
the one asked, in order to check
assumptions.
ü
On the other hand if there is a voice
that has not been heard, you also want to allow space. It may be that a person
with a minority view or experience has not felt an openness to sharing. Invite space: “Let’s have some silence; I’d like those who
have been speaking to wait. Let’s see if
anyone who has been silent has anything to add.” This does not single out anyone who has not
spoken, and allows the conversation to continue.
It
can help a group’s confidence to safely explore a sensitive topic if they first discuss guidelines for such
conversations. Such a discussion – even
setting up a specific list – can help the participants remember that they have
responsibility for the progress of the conversations. It is useful to ask the group what will be
helpful, and then fill in with some of the following if they do not appear from
the group:
ü
Speak
from personal experience: specifically, don’t speak on behalf of another person
ü
Avoid
generalities or abstractions – which can seem to speak for a Higher Authority
ü
Speak
in turn; allow all to contribute
ü
Refrain
from interrupting when someone is making a point
ü
Refrain
from giving advice
ü
Refrain
from analyzing other people’s experiences
A last word…
As human beings, we function on emotional,
intellectual and spiritual levels. Each
of these may act as a lens through which one functions – so that one person may
understand more from emotional understanding, or from intellectual
understanding. We are all different in
more than the ways we appear. Remember that personal injury to feelings may
come unexpectedly to anyone, even unrelated to the subjects being discussed.
It is good to expect no difficulty in a subject for discussion;
even so, you may find that the issue has
more of a charge than expected. Sensitivity
to feelings on the part of the facilitator can help; forgiving spirits on all
sides can also help. Modeling a sense
of ‘nonanxiousness’,
being tender in any conversation-particularly when there are strong
emotions- will help the group.
Remember the blessing of worship. Too often in the awkwardness of frank
discussion words are said which do not help.
When the group reflects a tension, it may be best to follow up with space: letting worship settle can allow
for balance to emerge – sometimes a
deeper exploration of the difficulty, sometimes the comfort all may seek.