[ Applause ] >> Oh thank you. I hadn't even said anything yet. Welcome everybody to today's session
on the problem with wokeness. For those of you who don't
know me my name is Jan Fran. I'm a journalist and TV presenter. I host a show called The Feed on
SBS Viceland but a very drunk woman in the line to the toilet at a music
festival once more accurately described me as that lady that makes content
about politics for the internet. [laughter] That's now
on my business card. I don't have a business
card, I'm a millennial. I think though that description
is quite pertinent to what it is that we are talking about here today. Anyone who engages with
any kind of social or political issues online will
be aware of the term wokeness. According to Wiktionary
wokeness is the quality or state of being aware of social justice issues. But according to Urban
Dictionary wokeness is a state of being constantly offended. [laughter] It can be used
in the following sentence, as a result of Amy's wokeness nobody
wants to be around her anymore. [laughter] So is wokeness an
important recognition of oppression or is it becoming intolerant,
unkind and restrictive? To try and answer that
question we have with us stylist and cultural critic Ayishat Akanbi. And before I introduce
Ayishat just a quick note on how today's session will run. Ayishat will speak. She and I will do a Q&A and then we
will open up to audience questions. Just a heads up, this
session will be recorded. There will be two microphones
on either side of the stage. About five minutes out from the Q&A
I'll let you know that it's happening and anybody who wants to ask a question,
head on over to the mics and make sure that you speak into them so that we
can actually hear what you're saying. Please also do try to
keep your questions as questions rather than
say as monologues. [laughter] That would be very helpful. Without further ado I am so pleased
to introduce our speaker today. I feel Iesha actually needs
no introduction in this room because her video, the Problem
with Wokeness, went viral and I think for very good reason. Ayishat very generally tapped into
a growing discomfort over the way in which we have conversations
with others, particularly in that online
space and on social media. She's got an incredibly unique voice
and an incredibly unique perspective and also a keen interest
in sociopolitical issues. She also is a fashion stylist. She's been in that line
of work for a decade. She is a writer. She's an artist. She's based in London and we are
very lucky to have her here today. So please welcome Ayishat Akanbi. [ Applause ] >> Thank you. I can hardly believe I'm in Sydney, wow. So thank you for having
me and for coming. And for those of you who may not have
seen the video I would like to play that just so you can have some
context about why I feel the way that I feel and why I'm here today. I think wokeness has robbed
many a people of compassion and replaced it with more superiority. Compassion and empathy is paramount
to any social movement and so any form of progress once you have
compassion, empathy, you can often see that you have a lot more in common
with people then you do apart and it's persistent under which
we live in that forcefully tries to group us on our differences. What is radical is kindness. What is radical is understanding. That's the one thing we don't want
us to do is to understand each other. Arguing with each other
isn't actually radical at all it's very conformist actually. I do think that wokeness
does run the risk sometimes in reducing very complex issues. Wokeness tends to be quite
reactionary instead of responsive. And so when you react you go off emotion
and you go off of anger, resentment, humiliation and that doesn't
necessarily leave much space for nuance. And nuance is important in your order to understand the interconnectedness
of the issues. [music] So wokeness is a term that a
lot of people don't really understand. But in my understanding of it I
would say wokeness is a slang term for social awareness. You can be woke about anything,
race, gender, sexuality, veganism, climate change, every issue gaining
mainstream prominence can consider you woke. Strangely people tend to
associate woke ideas with the left. The word may have gained mainstream
popularity with progressive politics but wokeness does exist
on the right too. Try mentioning the words diversity
or social justice or immigration and the right can easily
get just as triggered. Woke is simply the belief of anything that you think is correct
and progressive. The rise of Twitter, Facebook statusing and Instagram activists has
given us all a public voice. In theory this is fantastic. But in practice it leads
to complications. A place to express our frustrations
disillusioned with the system and anger is not only necessary
but it can be cathartic. Unfortunately we haven't
recognised the power in having a portable
encyclopaedia inside our pockets. Having a world of information at our fingertips is nothing
short of a revolution. But it does create some anger. Anger, especially for women and nonwhite
people, is stigmatised as violence, unfeminine and a threat instead
of a normal response to abuse. Our collective anger has
spot international discourse, unnecessary movements such as the Me
Too Campaign and Black Lives Matter. However discussing anything
topical online can be hard at best and draining at worst. Being woke is fundamentally useful. What we do with our newfound awareness
can often be misguided in the long term. We turn on each other
for not being up to date. We take ideas we deemed
negative to be indicators of someone's entire character. Civil rights activist and novelist James
Baldwin once said, I love America more than any other country in this world and
it's exactly for this reason I insisted on crystalizing her perpetually. I share Baldwin's sentiment. Therefore the ways in which we approach
these topics also deserve critique. Taking a good look around it's
tempting to become pessimistic. But I believe in the idea that
working towards a balanced society is achievable. But we can only do this by practising
compassion instead of pointing fingers. There is a place for outrage,
anger and resentment but if we aim to tackle issues from
the branches instead of the root we find ourselves entangled. This makes it imperative to
divorce our pain from our reasoning for the sake of clarity and unity. The unnecessary oppression in the
world causes a visceral reaction to anybody with their eyes open. And I'm sure we're all in agreement that the current climate
online is a verbal landmine. It can be explained only as
irony that considering we're in the gender revolution we
still think in very binary terms. We've reduced complex issues to black and white both literally
and figuratively. You're either right or
wrong, problematical or progressive, good or bad. Have productive ideas isn't enough to
stop an online mob from cancelling you if you misuse a word or have
a difference of opinion. You can spend a lifetime
fighting injustice but the moment the internet considers
you not woke enough it's a wrap. What happens here is we shut down
conversation more then we encourage it. This doesn't leave space for perspective
and instead it scares everyone into having the same ideas. This is dangerous as any thinking that
we hand over to others for the sake of appearing woke will leave our
movements hollow and full of holes. I know how easy it is to be accused
of erasing someone's experience. This made me hesitant about taking a
part in a video you guys just watched. I guess in the middle of social
unrest it's easy to watch someone talk about empathy, kindness and
compassion and consider this to be idealistic and passive. I get it because at one stage
I may have watched a video like mine and said the same thing. But with time I eventually found a new
way of being, a new way which allowed me to value understanding more then blame. Becoming socially aware is like experiences the
stages of grief after death. The first stage, denial, and learning
that the world isn't what you thought. Next comes guilt, due to
everything we once failed to know or didn't even care about. Often time this evolves into anger, given away to defensiveness
and furious heartaches. But we ought to remember that the
most important conversations are not to meant to be comfortable. Any movement or group that views
questions and analysis as an attack is to silence in spiteful understanding. It's been said many times that growth
does not live in the comfort zone. Developing the skills, patience
and momentary detachment from identity helps us tackle
ideas we disagree with. This is part of the analytical process. In a world where suffering
is written into the contract of existence we cannot
infantilize ourselves by framing our identities
as beyond perform. But yet to recognise
the danger in deciding who has a voice due to their oppression. Suffering is not a gateway
to more superiority. If we could only speak
on alethic experiences, fiction would cease to exist. Shooting ideas down because they are not from the right people doesn't
make the ideas disappear. Instead they operate with
insidious undertones. In doing so we push people
into the arms of extremism. But here's a radical
thought, if we can learn to understand how aggressive ideas
are formed we have more chance in destroying them. To be radical is to be curious
about what makes us uncomfortable. But like many I wish to raise
the voices of the marginalised. I do believe in the power
of woman identified unity. I do believe that racism is
not only breathtaking stupidity but a deadly stain on society. I also believe that popular ideas of gender suppress the
true nature of us all. And in moving forward we must
remember our humble beginnings. The last five to six years
has seen a major change in how we describe the
complexities of our identity. Before the internet became a social
political hub you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would
not be described as problematic by today's standards. And this is how progress
becomes a battle for superiority. Are we able to stop cancelling people
who remind us of our former selves? If I'm being honest I didn't predict
the viral response of my video. It's brought me to the
other side of the world. At first I wanted to pay
the video minimal attention. I really didn't expect the influx
of positive messages and a lot of people told me that I spoke
the words that they couldn't find and felt fearful to express what I said. It was then I discovered the
similarities between us and them. When people on both sides of the political spectrum
resonate with the video. But as expected the video also
ruffled some feathers, which is fine, because one of the points
of the video is that disagreement doesn't mean
we have to dismiss each other. I used to be angry. Ok it would be fair to
say that I'm still angry. But I just have to log out
sometimes so I can hear myself think. Anger is productive if it's
an occasional visit instead of a permanent residency. I've been enraged by the
following at different points. A, the destruction of
the environment, B, prioritising certain animal life
firms over others, C, education, D, the capitalists idea of
success, E, racism, F, men. [laughter] There was very little
that didn't make my blood boil. But internalising all these
issues made me defensive and quick to attack everyone. I find a way to bring everything
back to my own personal suffering. I struggle to really see
beyond my own identity. After all, intersectionality
is seeing the importance of other people suffering. Being active on social media
can simplify and minimise issues for the sake of being retweetable. Seeing everyone abandoned reason
for retweets became too much. I decided enough was enough. Before any external change can
happen we need an inner change. Society isn't a faceless monster. It's everyone outside and
it's everyone in this room. To be socially aware is important
but it's crucial to be self-aware. Some call this rhetoric a spiritual
revolution but for the sake of not being too mystical I'll
call it a common recognition. This does mean that people
should fail to see colour or deny our different experiences and
treatment as we move through the world. When we talk about our feelings
and not just our opinions we see that we have a lot more
similarities then we know. The desire for acceptance, dignity,
power, fairness, financial stability, the yearning to be happy and the
insecurities that reveal themselves in the different ways plague us all. At this point it becomes clear
that progress has become less of a movement and more of a religion. Sins are problematic opinions for
which there's often no redemption. Confession is the public apology and the high priest is
whoever has the most followers. Being empathetic is not
the same as being passive. When we show empathy to
ourselves we allow ourselves to see other people more clearly. This means that we should work with
those committed to our struggles even if they have different ideas. Arriving at the same destination doesn't
require the same mode of transport. It means that we should be
more compelled to ask questions when we disagree instead of diminish. It means learning to sit with what
is uncomfortable before responding. It's learning that discomfort
does not need to be discredited but inspected instead. It's knowing that other people's
personal stories don't threaten the validity of yours. Each time we label someone
an enemy for a difference of opinion we weaken
our collective unity. We don't need to have the exact same
ideas to share the same end goal. Miles Davis once said if you understood
everything I said you'd be me. [laughter] From this I learnt
that we can't always expect people who have never walked in our
shoes to feel our bruises. We have to accept that we
won't always be understood. And how do we expect to be
understood by everyone else when we don't understand ourselves? We need to accept that we
are all at different stages in the lane we call growth. We can rebel against the lies
and caricatures we've been sold about each other by becoming
more interested then irritated. But we can't fight intolerance
with intolerance. By doing so we run the risk of
becoming what we fight against. Online discussion has the tendency to encourage the idea
that one truth exists. F. Scott Fitzgerald believed
that intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas
in mind at the same time and still retain the
ability to function. The idea of only one truth plays into
identity essentialism and theism. We acknowledge varying
truths by understanding that nobody has the monopoly
on suffering. Accepting that we are
all at different stages of awareness will make us
more willing to ask questions because there may be some complexities that even the holy grail
of Google may not know. But at present asking
questions is frowned upon. It's considered emotional
labour and a microaggression. But I say it's the willingness
to ask questions and to seek which helps us cure ignorance. We need an intersection of perspectives
because not all trans people, for instance, have the same
ideas on gender and sex. Not all black people have the same
ideas on modes of liberation and so on. It's useful to remember that
asking questions is a basic human survival instinct. Not every question is an attack and
we can use discernments to judge this. It is by being allowed to
ask questions that many of us even know what
half of what we do today. To gain understanding
we should be prepared to answer questions whilst
remaining inquisitive. But understanding is a two way street. We should also be compassionate
towards outrage for it's a normal response upon
learning the deception of society. The reaction is palpable. Language is created to
articulate emotions that are oppressed yet inescapable. People aren't simply
making up words to be edgy. They are seeking new ways of
expressing their authenticity. But in identifying the
groups and institutes that have kept people
subjugated we have often forgot that we have been conditioned to
the tools to do this ourselves. We don't get to live in a sick society
without learning some of its illness. Oppression is more a virtue,
it's a preventable reality. In our attempt to soothe our eternal
[inaudible] we've created a zero tolerance policy for error. We've begun to look for more
purity instead of honesty. The fear of being called
problematic only leaves room for trendy perspectives whilst
negating all others as toxic. We draw the [inaudible] thought of as progressive people
rather than thinking people. But we don't have to argue to
add to the pot of perspective. We can offer up new ideas without
having to negate anybody else's. We can offer opposing views
without using someone else as a springboard for ridicule. And we can manage all of this
when we remember having the right or wrong opinion is no
indication of character. That can only be decided by
what you do, not what you say. Having progressive politics
doesn't stop you from being the most abusive
in your private life. And having traditional politics
doesn't stop you from being kind. And in its purity wokeness is helpful. Media representation
has become more diverse. Women's issues are prioritised. The topics which gain traction
online bleed into the real world by films, music and advertising. This is one of the biggest indicators
of the power of online discussion and what we can achieve
when we work together. This should remind us that we actually
have more power then we give ourselves credit for. If only once we build
solidarity with those who share our values then we
can work towards real change. As much as exploring our
own uniqueness is helpful, getting to know others helps
us understand our selves and work towards the collective goals. Let's remember, that anger is a
starter and not the entire dish. Let's use anger as a
catalyst for empathy. Let us become so angry we're
forced to ask questions. Let us be angry enough
to think critically and not just ounce of popularity. If not we shall run the risks of uniting
on what we are instead of who we are and repeating the cycles that
cause us the very same pain. Identity is part of us,
not the entirety of us. When we realise this we will see that different experiences
don't actually produce radically different people. The human condition is the desire
to belong and to be shown dignity. If we won't progress we could stop
reacting and start responding. It's often what we dislike in others
we turn a blind eye to in ourselves. Once we stop believing our
opinions define us we may recognise that we have more in common
with people then we do apart and this is how we begin again. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Thank you so much for that. I can't tell you how many points
I severely agree with you on. [laughter] I guess I just want
to start by I imagine a lot of you will have seen Ayishat's video. It went, it travelled pretty widely. Why do you think that it got
the reaction that it got? >> You know again I really didn't
expect it but when I think about it and from everything that
people have spoken to me about, I have so many emails,
DM's, and new followers, people who have been
cancelled, all types of things. And I think really what's happened
is I think a lot of people felt like they weren't allowed
to say anything like this. I think people feel like if they were
to say actually nuance is important and maybe we should look
for the grey areas. Because online everything
is black and white. But I would say the most of life
really lives in the grey area. And because we're not allowed to do
that online I think someone saying it, and I guess my identity perhaps makes
it easier for me to say it, you know. I can imagine that same video coming from someone else potentially could
have a very different impact on people. >> A white man perhaps. >> Perhaps. >> You sort of touched on something
that I think is pretty important there and that's sort of the role
of the media in all of this. You know we're talking about
trying to have these nuanced and complicated conversations but
we're having them through these mediums that don't allow for
nuance and complexity. And they are to a large degree
the only mediums that we have. >> Yeah. >> How is it that we
can use these mediums to have nuance conversations
when they allow for none? >> I can only maybe speak about you know
the way that I approach these topics. >> Yes. >> I'm quite active on Twitter but
whenever I see someone say something that I think is absolutely stupid
I don't, I'm not one who rushes to quote tweet because I kind of see like you know quoting someone else's
tweet with like abuse or an insult. I mean if I was walking in the street and I heard people saying
things I didn't agree with I wouldn't just intercept. So I don't see why I
should do that online. >> You don't stop people
at the bus stop. >> No, I think that's
quite entitled actually. And I think you know being behind a
computer can give people an extra type of confidence. But so what I do is I might see
the stupid opinion and I'll use that to make a thought of my own,
completely independent of that person. I'll just use it to inspire my
own thoughts and things like that. So I think if we're not in a hurry
to kind of like show everybody like how stupid we think someone is, because that then makes
people want to do that to us. So that's the way I do it. And I also have my DM's open
and I always say to people on Twitter I'm pretty open
to responding to anything if you're respectful, if you're kind. And I think the people who DM me and
want to have conversations are people who don't feel like they have something
to prove but something to share. >> Yeah and I think we were talking
about this earlier backstage as well. I, about a year and a half
ago, very actively decided not to use twitter that much anymore. Like Twitter is catnip
for a person like me. I am a snarky journo with opinions
like that's who it's made for. And so I have to kind of hold myself
back several thousand times a day from replying to people. But what I have started doing, which
is a bit weird and maybe a bit awkward. Is I just DM people if I think
they're right and or wrong. >> Yeah. >> And I sort of say I'm
sorry, I'm just sliding into your DM, it's just a big weird. But I do that because for me it
takes away the performer element. >> Exactly, exactly, people
are very different in the DM's. >> Because it is only
just you and that person. >> Exactly yeah. >> And the relationship, the context of
what you're talking about happens then between you and the person in the DM. >> Exactly. >> Rather then you and
actually the audience over here. >> Exactly. >> So do you think it's
more about the way that we use these mediums that count? >> Yeah I think so. I think if people, because
not everybody uses Twitter for like political discussion or social
discussion but if that is something that you see as a priority I encourage
maybe open up your DM's you know and have conversations with people
because that's really how you're going to be able to have a certain type of
vulnerability and to not have to perform or to say something funny
but just ask questions. Because I think even when you reply
to people online everyone is so aware that they're being watched and
so they may not even be offended but they might pretend to be
offended on other people's behalf. >> Right, right. >> So I think you know the DM's kind of
puts us all on an equal playing field. >> Yeah. I wanted to ask you
about intent versus impact. Because I find when we're talking about wokeness that's
sort of at the crux of it. You know you can have somebody
who it tells an off colour joke or you know says something
and then says something like I didn't have the
intention to hurt anyone. And that person may be very genuine. I tend to believe people when they
say I didn't intend to hurt anyone. But somebody was offended. Somebody was impacted. Who has done something right and who has
done something wrong in that scenario? And actually who is allowed
to determine who's wrong? >> Yeah I mean I think that's a
really tricky way to look at things. I mean for me, and again I can only
ever speak and write from my experience but I just try to not internalise
other people's ignorance, you know, I really try my hardest to like,
and if someone does say something that offends me potentially,
and I try not to be offended by anyone I don't consider
really intelligent, otherwise I'd be constantly offended. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> I would always be offended. So like you have to be
a certain level of >> I love that. >> We have to create our own rules. Otherwise, I mean, life
is pretty offensive to be fair, you know what I mean. I don't really want to pay bills. I'm offended by that notion. [laughter] But we have to do it. So for me, yeah, I just I
pick and choose my battles. I pick and choose my battles. And I know that we've all kind of been
raised in different circumstances, different levels of education, different
exposure to culture and arts and music, and I think all of those things really
play a part in who a person becomes. And so I don't know I just, if someone
says they didn't mean it that way and I can discern that from
the way that they came at me, the language that they
used and I'll believe them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah I don't know. It's a bit too much work to
go back and forth, you know. And I just think what do we
really achieve, you know? I think we just exert a lot of
energy that is spent elsewhere. >> Yeah. You talked a little bit
in the speech and also in the video about the difference between
being reactionary and responsive. >> Yeah, yeah. >> What's the main different
there between the two? >> I guess it would be maybe some
think when we're discerning impact and attention it's like we
can, sometimes we want to react because we are in the social climate where if we don't seem offended
then people think we're complicit. >> Right. >> You know, people think if you're not
actively saying this and that online, if you're not performing
your anger, your outrage or your activism then you're complicit. And so for me I think
to not be reactionary is like when you know there's been
loads of campaigns recently where like I don't know a big
designer company will bring out a like a campaign that's maybe racist
or may be offensive to some degree about whatever it may be, and
it's just like considering first. Like before I think we can all get
swept away by everyone else's opinion. We see everyone else talking about
it and then we get this pressure like oh my God, they're talking
about it, is everyone looking at me? I'm not saying anything. >> Right. >> And then I think,
then that's reactionary. I think that is reaction. But I just wait, I wait,
and I really try to like let the online noise die down. And then really see how
I feel about things. And just I maybe find something
to be ridiculous or stupid but I don't know why I have to
take the internet to suggest that. I think it's much easier, or any
even easier, a bit more powerful to just withdrawal my complete
attention from that company, you know, and my money too. >> Yeah, do you think that
we are too easily offended? >> In the sense that life is very
complex and there is residuality, there is negative and positivity and we
only know how to appreciate positivity because there is negativity. And so I think it's something that
we, yeah, we should get a bit more, yes I do think that we are. [laughter] I do think we are. I do think we are becoming
a bit too offended. And I think there's a privilege in that. I think there's a real privilege in
being able to be offended by everything because not everybody
has the opportunity. You know there are some places you
know where you know speaking out even on feminism, on anything, you
know, can have you put in prison and so many things can happen. And so I think for, yeah, to be
offended by everything is to almost hand over your thinking and your
feelings to someone else. >> Right, it's like you give
them a certain power over you. >> And that's why I think we should
choose at least what we're offended by. You know like if it's a family member,
makes sense, you know they've known you for a long time or stuff like that. >> Yeah. >> Or a partner or people you respect, but the average person,
I don't know about that. [laughter] I love this idea. It's like no, you're not intelligent
enough for me to be offended by you. >> And I think it's whatever
you value, to be fair. I mean if it's like,
if you play football and like it's a really good
football player who's critiqued you, you know what I mean, then
you might take that onboard. >> Sure. >> But if it's someone that
you don't really respect, like in that capacity,
then why take it on? >> Yeah exactly and I think we're living
in this time now that we've never lived in a time like this before. >> Yeah. >> Where everyone has an opinion
and everyone has a platform by which to voice that opinion. So I think you have to be a
little bit more discerning about whose opinion it is
that you actually let in. >> You have to, yeah. And it's like Twitter is very much
like being able to walk down the street and hear everybody's thoughts. You know like that is
essentially what it is. Every time we scroll the timeline. >> Yeah. >> And so like if we could in
reality walk down the street and hear everybody's thoughts. Like I don't know would we be like
hey, hey, hey, it just doesn't, yeah. >> Well it sounds like
a dystrophic nightmare. >> Right. [laughter] >> You wrote a piece last
year about countercultural. You know this idea that when
somebody slips up or misbehaves, sometimes it can be you
know quite serious things that they're engaged with. They're cancelled. You know they're no more, they're done. And you wrote to insult someone who
doesn't live your reality for failing to consider you is to over
simplify the human experience. Humiliating people for
insensitive comments that they made years ago denies
the possibility of change. So I wanted to ask you, is
there a good or a right way to perhaps address something or
someone that you see to be wrong or misguided or offensive or >> I think if we know that
person then we can call them out. I think we can DM them. I think we can have conversations
with them. But I think when we, I don't know, we
do it with celebrities a lot and maybe because I don't necessarily
expect celebrities to do anything but entertain me. You know I don't necessarily expect
them to have like, I don't know, a really a great critique
on Palestine and you know. I don't really expect that. I don't really expect them to
be up to date on I don't know, the hot and social issues of the time. >> Sure. >> And I think what we do there
is that we project our own ideals onto celebrities and on to
the people that we admire. But these people often
have never claimed to be anything other than they are. You know and what happens now, again
because I think if you're not seen to have an opinion people
call you complicit. And so we encourage people in the
public eye who have never claimed to be political or social, we
encourage them to have opinions on things they don't
know anything about. >> Yeah. >> You know and then >> And then they inevitably slip up. >> They slip up. >> Because they're not >> And then we attack them. And it just, again it's just a cycle and
I think that rather than maybe trying to expect, I don't know, a great
social critique from like Kanye West, maybe we should maybe look for
thinkers and you know people who have spent their lives
dedicated to certain issues. [laughter] >> Do you see any role
for shame on the internet? What do you think about
publicly shaming someone who has done something
wrong on the internet? >> I don't personally do that. Although I do actually sometimes think
that shaming can have, I mean at least when I think about myself, when I think
about certain things that I'm ashamed, they teach me about how to navigate. You know when I, shame is useful
is kind of reminding us how to live, at least for my own self. But I've been taking it publicly to the
internet to shame someone, I'm not sure. I think it might just be best,
a better way to kind of show that you are not invested in this
person, that you don't agree, is to stop talking about them probably. >> Right. >> Yeah I think that takes away, because for some people all
publicity is good publicity. And not everybody that we talk
about really gets cancelled from like whatever profession
that they are in. But I think if we, yeah I think we
should just remove our attention from a lot of these people that
we don't agree with or companies, I think we should remove our money. I think that's >> That speaks louder
then shaming someone. >> Yeah way louder, yeah, yeah. >> I think with the element
of shame as well for me it's a question of to what end? >> Yeah exactly. >> To what end are you
shaming this person? If you want them to change shame may
not be the most effective way to change. >> It doesn't. >> And so I often find that when
people are shamed on the internet or the people doing the shaming, again
they're often doing it for an audience. >> Yeah, they are. >> It's not really about the
actual person, the ends there. >> Right because we have people in
our family's surely who pissed us off or said things that we do not agree
with or maybe they're Trump supporters or may they, or whatever, you know,
we don't go to the internet and be like my dad did blah, blah,
blah, you don't do that. You don't shame your
dad on the internet. You don't shame your
sister on the internet. >> Although my dad is here and I
have shamed him on the internet. [laughter] >> Ok well. >> Sorry dad. >> I love you, babe. >> Let's talk a little
bit about identity because identity I think plays
a very big role in who is woke and who can be woke at what time. What do you think it is and why do
you see it as having some limitations? >> Because I think identity can make us
run the risk of essentializing identity. And when I say that I mean like there
is no one way to be a gay person or a lesbian person or a
trans person, or back person, a white man, a white woman. And I think when we cling to
identity it can be quite limiting in how we see ourselves. And also clinging to identity, and not to say that identity doesn't
affect the way that we're treated. This isn't to negate the facts that
certain parts of our identity create for a different experience
as we move through the world. But if we could only see things through
our identity it's just not very, it doesn't leave space
for clarity I don't think. I don't think you know because, yeah, I
just don't think it's a very useful way of thinking about the
world I think if you want to have a broader perspective on things. >> Yeah. >> I think we need to momentarily
divorce ourselves from that and think not necessarily as a
man, as a woman, as a black person, as a white person, but
just as a human, you know. I think that's what we need to do. >> Do you think it is possible to
detach yourself from your identity? I speak to quite a lot of people
in my line of work obviously and there'll be people who say I can't
detach the political from the personal. Do you think that you can do
that in every circumstance or will there be people who
just, who simply can't detach? >> It depends on if it's
a priority for you. I can't live, personally, I can't
live my life constantly offended. I think it's draining. I think it's exhausting. I think it's bad for your mental health. I think that's another
conversation that's quite prominent at the moment, mental health. And so if we're considering our mental
health I think that we have to put in our own sort of guidelines and
rules for how we think about the world. And so yes I do believe it's possible. I think when I'm thinking about a
lot of issues I'm not thinking even as a woman necessarily sometimes. >> Right. >> In order for me to kind of understand
maybe how patriarchy can be also limiting to men, you know, I
can't necessarily think about me as the sole oppressed women. You know I just have to think about
me as a human being in that context and then I can clearly see,
oh actually this stuff isn't so good for you guys either. You know and then that seems
to be a lot more helpful. You know I don't necessarily deal
with good and bad but what's helpful and unhelpful and that
seems to be helpful for me. >> Yeah. I just want to let all of
you know that we will be doing a Q&A in about three minutes so if there
is anybody that has a question for Ayishat please do make
your way over to those, I don't know if you can see them in the
down lights but there's two microphones. One is there and one is there. If you'd like to ask a question I'd
encourage you to make your way over now. You said something really interesting
in the speech that you just gave, this idea that suffering doesn't
make you morally superior. >> Yeah. >> Can you talk a little bit about that? >> Yeah I think you know and
that suffering can be anything. That suffering can be
maybe about our weight. That suffering can be
about our sexuality. That suffering can be about the
fact that we have a different diet. I mean on the internet now
anything is cause for suffering. And it just, and I think
once we attach ourselves to these sufferings we think
we have a more of a licenced to say certain things, to be
offended, to call someone out, and it's just like no, I don't think so. The entire globe is suffering. And I think that it's >> What gives you the
right to call someone out? >> I don't know. For me again it's like
I don't do this thing. I don't even know why I
need to call someone out. I just stop saying it. >> Right. >> In every capacity in every way. And I think as activists or
as people who are interested in social progression, of change,
like our money is our biggest weapon. And I really just think about the
usefulness of things and even maybe in that sense I divorce my
emotions from my reasoning. Because again if I live in my emotions, and not to say that emotions aren't
important, of course they are, but if I can only see things through
my emotions then I just don't, from what I see and observe when
I see people doing these things on the internet I don't
see much progress. >> Yeah. We'll take a
couple of questions. We'll start with number one over here. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> I just wanted to ask you, I feel like >> Sorry, we might just get you
to start that question again. Hopefully the mic, there we
go, the mics are working. >> Hi, as a result of
cultural I feel like a lot of the time people get praised
or labelled as being woke for just simply recognising
someone's humanity or just having an opinion
that's positive. And then that then becomes a mechanism
for them to kind of separate themselves from people who might not be as
progressive or from learning further. They often say I'm work so I'm not
that person that, you know I'm a person with these beliefs that are
potentially problematic. I guess I'm just wondering, you
know, in an age where we're quick to cancel people or quick to praise
them, how would you suggest kind of navigating those relationships where
people have used being woke as an excuse to stop actually further learning. >> Yeah I think this is
when we start believing that good opinions make good
people and that's just not true. What you do and how you act and
especially how you act with people who you disagree with, I
think that says everything. I think when you're interrupting
and you're going to come across that in every spirit. It's in our families. It's in different places that we go. It's everywhere. And if we can't manage it on the internet I don't
know, to me it's not woke. I think if you're constantly,
if your activism is rooted in condemning everyone, yeah I don't
see that as a form of progress. Sorry, I don't know if I'm
answering your question. Tell me again, sorry, the last part. >> I guess I was saying a lot of people
think because I've been cold woke or because I consider
myself woke I no longer need to understand people do work. >> No, no, that's ridiculous. I think, yeah no, I think
the work is ongoing. I think it's a life long lesson. I think there's never, I mean
you can never know everything. And you can never know too much. And I think we have to start
to understand the people that we disagree with as well. I think if we stop learning because
we think we know it all, I don't know, I think that's a really limiting and
arrogant way to approach progress. >> Yeah anyone who thinks they
know everything is a fuckin idiot. [laughter] >> Right, that's true. Number two? >> Hi, I first of all really
value your opinions on this. And I wanted to ask how you think we
can focus on understanding and empathy without relying on the emotional labour
of minorities to educate too much, how to balance between that. >> Cool. Well I think in that sense then
you know then fair enough we do have a lot of resources that
are available to us. And again I think divorcing ourselves
from our identify in the sense of, ok, just because I may be a white
woman or a Chinese woman, doesn't mean that I only have to read
literature in that space, you know? I think we should encourage
ourselves to, you know because we have the
wealth information in our pocket, like literally we have the
words information in our pocket. And so you know explore like film
and TV and books like and really get to read other people's
experiences through the world. I think that is how we
start to understand and empathise with other people. And I think we could also do
a lot more self-interrogation. Like whenever, if there's ever been a
time that we've had a really negative or maybe even a prejudice
opinion about something, I think it's maybe really inquiring
where that came from you know without necessarily judging
yourself for it because I think we all can you know
have those things at different points. But I think it's to really question and
understand where those things came from and then it will make you
less hesitant, you know, to judge other people
and things like that. But yeah I think using the
resources that are available to us I think will help us develop
empathy and compassion for other people. >> Thank you. [applause] >> I agree with everything you said
about you can't combat stupidity online and the best way to deal with it
is to either privately educate or you know you deal with
it and take it offline because online arguments can't be won. But on a larger scale, how do you
combat that kind of stupidity? Because you can't educate
everyone individually. What's the way of doing it? Because there's just so
much online stupidity. [laughter] >> Yeah there is but then I don't
necessarily know if it's my job or anyone's job to educate everybody. But I think we can put this
in whatever our practices are, whatever our craft is. So I write, I'm a [inaudible] as
well, and the things that I see to be problematic or an issue I
try to write about those things. Of if I think you know maybe the
modelling industry only focuses on one type of person. Then I try to, in my shoes, put the
different type of people in them, different races, different body
types and things like that. I think that we can start to educate
people, not necessarily directly but by what we put out into the world. You know like adding to
the pot of content that's out there and art that's out there. I think that's how we do it. But I don't think we should
ever think it's our job to try and educate anyone, everyone. You know and for me like I try not
to, I don't spend my time like arguing with anyone who's committed
to misunderstanding me. Because some people are committed
to ignorance, you know, that's it. And in that sense yeah,
no I think we work with the people who do want to learn. We work with the people
who are open minded, who can consider different perspectives. [ Applause ] >> Number two. >> Thank you. This is sort of similar
but a little bit different. I haven't listened to your
online video yet but I will. I'm sure you've experienced, well you
talked about experiencing outrage. For me the outrage has driven, you know,
me to be strong, to try to be a voice for the issues that I've experienced. And I get, I totally get the
respect that you're moving from the outrage to compassion. Do you still feel that
there's an important role for accessing that outrage? >> Oh my God, completely. I'm enraged every day. But it's just about how
I channel that rage now. You know like and I tried to channel
that rage as opposed to arguing with someone, as opposed
to demeaning someone. I try to channel it into writing. I try to channel it into
Tweets sometimes. I try to channel it into being dedicated to understand why someone could
have this level of ignorance. And I'm very curious by nature. And you know I'm more interested
in the why then the what. And I think when we become interested
in why things are happening as opposed to what is happening we
lessen a lot of outrage and we can just approach topics wiser. But no, I think outrage is a very
necessary tool to get up, you know, to start thinking about things. To start becoming curious. If it wasn't for outrage I wouldn't
have been able to come to any of this. >> Yeah, do you sort of see anger
as not so much being the end but rather being a means to a end? >> Yeah, yeah, no, It's a
means to an end, definitely. Yeah completely it's a means to an end. I don't think it's, you know, I think
I said it in the talk, you know, it's a starter but it's
not the whole dish. >> Yep, yeah. >> Hi, I'm listening to what you're
saying about the world being a choice and access to information
being a choice. And also sort of mediating that outrage. And I agree mostly, kind of with the
general vibe of what you're saying. But I guess where I get lost is
hang on, where is the outrage that means I can still get taken
off the streets and strapped down if I express my anger in a
way that's deemed inappropriate. It's like somewhere in
all of this discussion, which on a good day I'm
happen to join in with. >> Are you having a good day? [laughter] >> But even on a good day, you know, a
security guard didn't want to let me in. You know like, so I'm
talking about, you know, trying to get on a train,
not being let in. Triggered, on the ground crying, and 50 or so people walk
by, some yelling abuse. Like it's like yeah that's
their experience and I'm sure they're great
people on a good day. But that really terrible traumatic
thing happening to me seems to get lost in this kind of ableist discussion. And I'm just wondering how do we
keep the individual and the outrage for the individual who is
actually at this moment unable to access safe hospitalisation
when unwell? You know not able to access information
and dealing with discrimination, abuse and neglect on a daily basis. And I mean kind of that's me but I'm
here so I am so privileged compared to my peers who you know wouldn't
know how to get to Sydney. >> Yeah. >> And certainly don't have
their beautiful companion with them to do that. >> Yeah. >> So is your question sort of how
do we maintain that righteous anger that has a very legitimate
place in society? >> Righteous is the wrong word. It's like I feel, I agree
that you know discomfort is where you know change occurs. My life is discomfort and I feel like
so often people like me are asked to sacrifice our discomfort. So this kind of wonderful
discussion can occur. But it's like dude, I was still,
you know, illegally restrained and 17 people walked by and did nothing? Like how is that possible? Because I can take part in discussion, I just live in a different world
then people who have the money to walk away from a business like yeah. >> I think you know that's
a big question. I think and in terms of
ok people are walking by and they're not necessarily
acknowledging you, is what you're saying. They're not necessarily acknowledging
the complexity of your existence and the pain that you're going through. But there are some people that will. There are some people that feel
exactly the same way that you do. And we can't necessarily change other
people is something that I've learnt but I can change the way that
I feel about other people. All I have is myself. And all we do have as people,
all we have is ourselves. And there is always going to be someone,
I think, that feels the exact same way that you do and that
you can organise with and you can maybe address
these things in the same way that like someone found it important
enough to stop Black Lives Matter. But you know before that police
brutality was going on unrecorded and no one thought about it. But so it may be you know we can't
necessarily change other people but you can bring awareness to that. You know that's something
that I'm thinking about now. So you know maybe, I don't know if
it's something, if it's writing, I don't know what it is but I
think that, I don't know, we can, I mean the outrage is important. I think that you should
be outraged at the fact that like disability issues
are not taken seriously enough for that you can feel invisible. I think that's important. But we can't make everybody recognise
that importance if people, you know, if you're not sharing that story. You know if you're not
putting it out there. But I think your outrage
is perfectly valid but it's about where it's going to go. >> Yeah and I think, I think, I
guess I just think that people like me are telling the story. >> Yeah ok. >> They're not being accepted because
they don't fit that world view. >> Oh I see, that trendy thing. >> Yeah. I get that. And I see what I think those
things are annoying myself. And it's something I tried to,
and I don't know if we caught it, right so addressed in the talk that's
like you know we only leave space for very buzz worthy or
not even buzz worthy. Let's say that any new space for very
popular discussion but everything else because there is so much
injustice in the world. There are so many things happening
that nobody is talking about, absolutely no one is talking about. And so I do definitely see that as a
problem and I think that's why we need to push back against this
thing that's happening online of you can't say this
and you can't say that. Because if this is important
to you, like regardless of what anybody else says,
because that's what I do, regardless of what anybody says
I'm going to say what I'm saying. So I think you just, I don't
think anything happens overnight but I think you keep at it and you find
as many people who feel the same way that you do that you can organise with
together and you make cause listen. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Number two. >> Hi, I guess a lot of the things
that happen on the internet kind of get reduced to individual arguing
over who's right and who's wrong. In your experience how, like what
would you advise to move beyond like individual opinions towards, as
you were sort of talking just then, organising collective activities
to actually work towards like structural change and policy
change and that sort of thing. >> Yeah by finding people, you know,
like I said, I have my DM's open and that means like at any
point anybody can message me and we can have discussion. And I've met so many
people who were so unlikely, people that I never would have
thought would be my friends or people that I would meet up with. And they have become and they've
become really great people to organise with and to think with. And so I think it's about, you know
because at some point one thing that we're not doing is all of
this stuff exists mainly online. A lot of us are not organising
outside of these spaces. And I think maybe we can start
to push back on this idea that like you know about
being woke online. You know what is it that
actually doing in physical spaces? And so I would encourage you
to reach out to the people. And I'm not sure if everyone is
open all the time and wanting to. But whether that is even starting
with a Facebook group first. But I think meet ups are
really, really, important. In London there's a group that I
organise with, a group of like creatives of colour and we organise and
talk about things that affect us and we passed jobs to each other. Things that are, you know, as
the system isn't necessarily set up to necessarily favour
always people of colour. We kind of create that
network for ourselves. So whatever it is that's important
to you, like I know that anything that one person thinks is
important is always going to be thousands of other people that do. And I think you know whether
it's thoughts on Facebook group or what's that, I think that's how
all groups slide, it was that group that now turned into, I don't
know, maybe 200 to 300 people. >> Holy hell. >> Right. >> That's a lot of notifications. [laughter] >> You just mute them unless
you have something to say. [laughter] But we do meet up, we
meet up once a month and it's great. And I think you know it
starts small, you know. It does start small. And we can't necessarily expect that these things are
going to happen overnight. But there are people who are dedicated
and who really are looking for this because I think the video only did
well because clearly people want to organise out of the internet. >> Yeah and I think as well, that sort
of kind of connexion that you build with somebody online, I think
it's really important to maybe see that as a bit of a means
to an end as well. And the end being that kind of tangible
thing that ok what do I do with this. >> Right, right. >> Where do I go? >> Yeah, yeah. >> And bringing it back, you know, into
real life I think can be quite powerful. >> Yeah, no, 100 percent. >> I think we have time for just
one more question so I'll go over here to microphone number one. >> Hi, I'm finding, I work in the music
industry so there's a lot of discussions about you know sexual
harassment and cancelled culture. And I'm finding that out of
those, there's a few people that are really woke and
are fighting the good fight. >> Yeah. >>But it's getting to a stage
where it's so aggressive that they're fighting not only the
people that they're trying to bring down but anyone that isn't speaking out like,
as you said, because they're complicit if they're not performing for everyone. And I just want to know what
your opinion is on how do reach out to these people and let
them know that we are allies. But just because I am not as
outraged as they are it doesn't mean that I'm still not upset
about these issues. I'm kind of get to the stage
where I'm so terrified of them because I know I'm just going to fight
an unwinnable fight against them, wondering how you might
reach out to them? >> Well I always, I think the whole
complicit argument is a weak one for me in the sense that you know
the same people that say who you are really fighting for
let's say against sexual abuse in which I completely understand
it and I'm part of that as well. But I would not say that
someone who is not vocal about these issues is complicit. And if that's the case what about
everything that I'm not vocal on? Does that mean I'm complicit
in you know starving children? You know does that mean I'm complicit in
you know the things that are happening in the middle east because I'm
not exactly looking into them? You know like we can't just,
yeah I think it's a very, it just doesn't hold water. You know and I think we need
to be able to remind people that like everybody has a
different way of communicating. And not everybody wants public
attention for their opinions. Not everybody wants to have to debate
with people that they don't know. Some people would rather talk to
people in their own safe spaces, in their own communities
and things like that. And I think that has
a lot more to be said because on the internet most people find
themselves just arguing back and forth. But I think if you were to go to
those people and say well I do care and this is what works for me. In the same way that I'm not condemning
you, because there's a lot of people who would condemn those
people the outrage and say that actually you're creating more
division, you're creating more tension. And if you're not saying that to
them I don't think anyone has a right to judge you. >> Yeah. And I also think that there are
probably, and this is totally anecdotal, but I think that there's a growing
number of people who are like you who you know are outraged about
something but also have a discomfort with I think the perform these elements
that comes with existing and speaking about these sorts of things online. And so I think connecting with those
people I think is going to help because you kind of, you
grow that particular space and you start attracting more
people to that particular space. It doesn't necessarily
have to be a face off between the super wokes
and the mildly wokes. [laughter] You know it
doesn't have to be like that. But I think people are complex and
you can be outraged about something and not want to necessarily take part
in you know a performative element of expressing that outrage. I think that's very valid. And being open about that is going to I think attract more
people to that possession. >> What she said. [laughter] >> Thank you very much. [ Applause ] Well thank you so much to all of you
for being here with us this afternoon and extremely big thank
you to Ayishat Akanbi for, [applause]
Please remember we are here as a representation of Andrew Yang. Do your part by being kind, respectful, and considerate of the humanity of your fellow users.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them or tag the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Someone posted her viral video on /r/videos and it really gave me some Yang vibes, especially on introspective thinking and empathy for others. This longer form video really captures I think some of the best descriptions in how we can combat some of the problems we face today. I think a lot of the YangGang already practices a lot of these principles which is what makes our community known for changing the tides of conversation.
I really hope Andrew Yang notices this video and talks to her on Yang Speaks -- it would be a great conversation.
Yes please. He needs more women guests.