Critiques of The Alternative Justices Project: Victim/Survivors
While the Alternative Justices Project has received a lot of positive feedback, we want to be transparent about the critiques, whether constructive or not, that we have received over the years. We primarily hear positive things, people talking about how there is nowhere else to get this type of care, people telling us how these processes have transformed their lives, but positive feedback isn’t the goal of this post. Part of Alternative Justices isn’t about hiding the harm we may have done, but about addressing it in the open so we can all learn. This series will offer critiques from various sources.
Critiques from Those Who Have Been Harmed
We don’t do what the victims/survivors/those who come to us having experienced harm want us to do.
This has typically been a critique from folks who wanted us to involve the police or lawyers or other parties who do this work for pay. These types of actions go against our values. You can read more about our shared critiques here.
We are unclear.
This critique is often specifically in reference to being unclear about what ways we are willing to offer support and/or what ways we engage with harms committed. As a decentralized collective, we can be less unified in our approaches and techniques as well as less leader-driven which gives us less clear direction.
We are unsupportive.
This critique has been leveled as specific stewards during the accountability processes. As a result of this and similar critiques, we have changed one of our processes. Previously, we had one AltJ steward for each situation, thus this human would try to support both those who experienced harm and those they accused. Now we assign those who have experienced harm and those they have accused separate stewards to enable better support for all.