Sogi Campaigns Blog | Sogi Campaigns

How to mount an effective letter-writing campaign

January 6, 2017

From the release of political prisoners to political change both large and small, letter-writing campaigns have also been a solid staple for social activists across the world. Although modern technology may have replaced the written letter with emails and social media, the tactics within these campaigns still remain largely the same. Today we give you 7 tips to run the perfect letter-writing campaign for IDAHOT 2016.

1 – Set your goals

There are probably hundreds of things you’d like to achieve through activism. Although we all want to end global inequality and discrimination, we sometimes have to set our sights on more reasonable, achievable goals. Even the most successful campaigns will struggle to promote meaningful change if their aims are poorly-defined.

When creating your campaign make sure you have an achievable and easy-to-define goal that you’d like to reach. This might be repealing a law, increasing funding to a certain area, a simple political change, or any number of other goals.

Most importantly of all, make sure your goal is achievable by the group or individual you are targeting. It might be worth researching the power and influence they hold first of all, which leads us to…

2 – Find your target

You’ve found the issue in your community you’d like to change, but you need also to find out who can change it. If you’re calling for a government official to take action then you should first research the best way to get in touch. Most officials have websites and phone lines that can help you find this information.

For a department, or organization, it’s worth find a direct contact for the person with the power! In a similar way, if you’re contacting a private business then it’s important to make sure you address the person that actually makes the changes.

Overall, writing to a specific individual or group that directly works with your issue is always more important. It’s also important to remember that someone high up the chain might have the power, but will be much harder to contact and

3 – Spread the word

Invite your friends! Family! Loved ones! Community group! Church group! Whoever!

If you already have a campaign group or network established then spread the word to as many people as possible. Modern technology makes this even easier, with Facebook events, Twitter and email.

Set a date (or dates) and a time for everyone to meet, and let as many people know as you can. It might seem obvious, but even the best organized events will fail if not enough people manage to take part.

4 – Make it accessible

The more people willing to take part, the better – but it can sometimes be hard for everyone who might support your aims to take part. If you’re holding the campaign as part of an event at a public venue then make sure it’s easy to find, and accessible for everyone.

If possible try to avoid bars and nightclubs, or any other kind of space that might make people uncomfortable. Community centres or conference spaces are usually the best option.

If your campaign isn’t part of a single public event then make sure the information needed to take part is easily available, either online or in an accessible format. One important aspect of this would be creating the basic resources everyone needs, such as a draft letter or email, an address, and the goals of your campaign.

And adults aren’t the only ones that matter! The input of children and young people can be especially powerful and important. Whenever possible, make sure you try to involve young people in your campaign, especially if the issue is something youth-oriented. Getting the opinions and thoughts of a broad range of society is incredibly important when advocating for change!

5 – Make it fun!

Let’s be honest: Sometimes campaigning isn’t everyone’s cup of tea! Activism can be a lot of fun, but letter-writing isn’t exactly a thrill-a-minute activity!

If you’d like as many people as possible to get involved then it’s good to have some other form of incentive to attract them.

If you have the funds or the time, food is always a great option. Other activities could include a film screening, tea and coffee morning, or even something as simple of a meet-and-great with other members of the community.

6 – Invite the press

An important part of letter-writing campaigns is raising awareness of your issue. Inviting local media and journalists can be a great way to get your issue into the headlines.

Not only does it raise awareness, but the added attention can help add pressure to those you’re trying to target.

Contact your local newspaper, radio or television stations and speak to them about the issue you’re trying to address. If you’re holding an event then invite journalists along to discuss your aims.

If you know how, writing a press release with important information about your campaign might also be a good way of working with the press.

If you’re expecting a lot of media attention then it might be worth arranging a member of your team to act as the press liaison. This is the person that deals directly with any questions and enquiries and therefore should be someone who is well-informed and articulate when it comes to your issue.

7 – Keep up the pressure

Most importantly don’t forget to keep up the pressure until your goals are met!

A single letter-writing campaign is likely not to bring about all the change you want along. Instead, make sure that multiple campaigns, of different scales and styles, are taken out.

Making your campaign one part of an ongoing campaign for change is the best way to make sure that public opinion remains high, and that those who are capable of making change, do so.

Express yourself(ie) !

January 5, 2017

Expressing ourselves is at the heart of every campaign.

Our expressions is what makes us visible, what makes us liked or disliked, what brings us enemies and allies.

Expressions come in many forms, and each campaigner will be faced with an early crucial choice : whose expression are we considering?

and under what form?

The answer to the first question is very often “Everyone’s”: while many campaigns chose to have celebrities, moral authorities or selected individuals carry a standard message, many others increasingly chose to call for public expression.

Public expression campaigns have the combined benefit of generating original content, which can serve as basis for advocacy (for example when the campaign aims at collecting powerful stories, which will then be brought to decision makers), and of reinforcing the community by drawing more people into the action.

But inviting the public to express themselves is not necessarily easy.

The answer to the second question is often “Selfies”. Many campaigns indeed are based on people sending selfies, which arguably is the easiest form of participation, both for those who contribute and for those who are in charge of validating the content (a split second tells you if a photo is OK to be posted, or to remain on a FB page or a Tumblr account, whereas written contributions take often very long to read and it might in addition be difficult to determine at times if some writings are OK).

Most selfie campaigns will be based on people sending a picture of themselves holding a sign with their message.

But as time goes by, selfie-campaigns have become quite worn-out, and campaigners need fresh ideas for public expression campaigns;

In a previous article, we documented the ‘Kiss the Pride’ initiative which invited the public to send ‘Rainbow lips’ selfies.

We also documented how nudity and sexuality are being used in selfie campaigns

There are many ways in which a selfie campaign can be tailored to the campaign’s message.

A feminist campaign once asked the public to deconstruct images of masculinity/patriarchy.

A campaign from an LGBT organisation, which wanted to make the point that legal and social obstacles to expressing your full sexuality left people incomplete, asked the public to send half portraits of themselves and created a giant display of these submissions.

In some contexts, coming out as LGBT is just too risky to allow for a selfie campaign. BUT there are creative ways around it. This incapacity to show your face publicly can become the very message of your campaign. French photographer Philippe Castetbon created a campaign by which people sent creative shoots of themselves where they remained unidentifiable. The campaign message was clearly that repressive legislations and social climates deprive people of the very basis of their identity: their image. In places where criminal laws are in place, selfies can feature people’s faces masked by bars, featuring prison bars.

Holding a mirror in front of your face when you take the selfie is also a powerful way to demonstrate how the person looking at you (and maybe condemning you) could easily be in your place.

Need more ideas to inspire your next selfie campaign ? Check out

Buzzfeed

Improvephotography

If you feel your public needs advice to take good selfies, check out these and also see below a nice infographic from the postplanner site

Tips for safety

January 5, 2017

Whether it’s at a protest, public event, or at an established community space, it’s always important to ensure that every one, regardless of background, is free to engage with your community. When it comes to the LGBTQ community safe spaces are incredibly important, especially for young people and minorities that may face widespread discrimination within mainstream society.

Safer spaces policies are the rules by which a community agrees to operate. They help make sure that marginalised individuals are free to be themselves, and help prevent some of the problems common in mainstream society (such as racism, sexism or transphobia) from becoming a part of the community. In preparation for IDAHOT 2016 we’re sharing a few short tips that you should know before creating an official safer spaces policy for your event or community space.

Understand your community

Before starting to create a safer spaces policy it’s good to know which members of your community would benefit most from it. Within LGBTQ circles women, trans and non-binary people, and people with disabilities are often marginalised and excluded from the conversation more than other groups. (In Western countries also people of colour face similar issues).

A safer spaces policy should exist to ensure that those voices within your community can still thrive and contribute. Looking at your community and understanding who would benefit is the best way to start making a policy that tackles these important issues.

Preempt problems

Before even starting a policy it’s also important to understand the problems that are common. Do men dominate conversations and action? Do people with disabilities struggle to engage? Is the language you use accessible and easy for everyone?

Look at some of the common problems your community faces, both in mainstream society and in your own spaces, and attempt to identity some ways in which they could be avoided. Every community in every country is different, so there is never a one-size-fits-all solution to these issues.

Promote cooperation

Rather than making a set of rules that bans some people from acting in certain ways it’s always much more useful to promote cooperation instead. If one group, for example, tends to talk while another listens then you should try to promote behaviour in which these roles are reversed. You should always try to encourage others to voluntarily give up their typical role rather than try to take it away from them.

By making everyone aware of their own behaviour, and how it effects others, you can also foster cooperation that can be hugely powerful in mainstream society too.

Avoid alienating and generalisations

In a similar way, it’s also important to remember that your policy does not help to further alienate certain people from the community, even if they do typically hold a position of power within it. Bad safer spaces policies from the past typically relied on rules that excluded those individuals from participating instead.

Although it may seem like this is an easy way of addressing power imbalances, it often only helps to exclude individuals from your community entirely. Remember that the primary aim should be to prevent issues common in the mainstream and to build a community that is entirely inclusive in ways that mainstream society is not.

An important part of this effort is not making assumptions about anyone’s background or identity. Although it can be easier to generalize this can lead to many problems, which within the LGBTQ community should always be avoided.

Get feedback

If you’re writing the policy on your own, or as part of a small team, make sure you get feedback from the rest of the community. If a rule or suggestion isn’t working you might want to remove it. If something is missing you might want to add it.

It’s difficult sometimes to address the needs of everyone on your own, which is why it’s important to take feedback and criticisms from those individuals themselves. Encourage your community to share input on their own needs and wishes, and try whenever possible to include these within your policy.

Know your legal rights

Sometimes a community will be forced to exclude individuals or groups that make it difficult or impossible to operate. If someone breaks your rules, either on purpose or through continued ignorance, then you may wish to exclude them from your space. In these cases it’s important to know where you stand legally. Every country will have different laws around removing someone from a property or event, so make sure you check in advance to know where you stand in case a worst-case scenario occurs.

In some cases legal standards will make it easier to enforce the rules you’ve set. In some countries these laws may make it difficult to operate freely. It’s always important to make sure your policy operates within legal parameters, so that everyone within the community is safe from further issues.

Make your policy known

Publish your policy online and in-person whenever possible. If you are in a shared or public space make sure you have physical copies, or a display, at entrances and in key areas. This will ensure that everyone understands the policy and can operate by its standards.

At the same time make sure people know how, and to whom, to give feedback. The policy should also make it clear where to report other concerns, and what to do in certain situations.

A policy is only useful if it’s known and agreed upon!

Learn from others

Although every safe spaces policy is different a lot of them follow similar lines. If you’re still unsure on what to include then try researching groups in your area that might have their own policies. It’s also important to learn from the mistakes of others that you might have encountered, so you ensure you don’t repeat them!

Safer spaces policies fro several groups can easily be found online in many cases. Using these as a template or jumping off point is a good way to start. However, make sure not to simply copy-and-paste the policy of another community, as your own issues may not be fully addressed within!

Make sure to check out our website in the next few days for more information and ideas for action. For updates, news and more also make sure to follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Choosing …no choice

November 20, 2016

One of the arguments against sexual and gender diversities that we hear most frequently the world over is that they are “choices”. This argument implies that people who don’t conform to social norms are personally responsible for it. Not only does it imply that there is a responsibility, hence a fault, but it also takes this responsibility totally away from society, the family, etc. It loads the burden on the shoulder of the person, while erasing all other potential forms of “responsibility”.

More subtle versions of the same argument focus on the choice to “act out” the difference: while recognizing that sexual and gender diversities are not choices per se, but that expressing them is. This argument invites sexual and gender minorities to shut down their feelings and conform to mainstream social norms.

Understandably, a lot of campaigns for sexual and gender diversities have tackled this specific angle, as a cornerstone of dismantling public stigma against sexual and gender minorities.

The core strategy by claiming that sexual and gender diversities are “not a choice” is to shut off the notion of fault/guilt. It therefore implies that there is no possibility/need to “fix” it.

There have been critiques of this approach though. One of them being that the slogan “it’s not a choice” repeats the words of our opponents and results in unconsciously reinforcing the parallel between sexual and gender diversity and the notion of choice. Basically hearing”homosexuality” and “choice” in the same sentence is bound to reinforce the mostly available idea (that it IS a choice), whatever the sentence actually says.

Another more conceptual argument is that this approach disenfranchises sexual and gender minorities and makes them “passive” objects of their desires.

But the most often cited opposition is that the “no choice” argument mechanically reinforces the biological argument: if sexual and gender diversities are not choices, then they are inborn. This paves the way for very questionnable strategies to find the biological determinants (including with the objective to “rectify” them). Making sexual and gender diversities a biological pattern further reinforces the notion that they are pathologies.

This argument nevertheless supposes a “mechanical” correspondance between the “choice” and the “biology” sides, which has the big weakness of excluding other forms of beliefs as regards sexual and gender diversities

Campaigns focusing on the “no choice” argument have sometimes used the parallel with heterosexuality, to drive the point.

An interesting video experiment conducted in 2008 asked people first if they thought being gay is a choice. They then asked them when they themselves chose to be straight. The contradiction that people realise is an interesting illustration of a campaign tactic.

At the end of the day, it is clear that our sexualities and our gender identities are shaped by a constant interaction of social, cultural, historical and, sometimes, biological forces. And it is equally clear that no one “chooses” their sexuality and feeling of gender, in the sense that no one makes a rationale conscious decision as to whom they are attracted by or they related to the social gender they are assigned to. The only thing that IS a choice, is how we express what goes on inside us.

Being homosexual or transgender is not a choice

Being proud is

And for our conservative opponents, that’s the trouble.

At the end of the day it is nevertheless doubtful whether the “not a choice” argument alone can win people over. In most people’s minds, there has to be some form of explanation of sexual and gender diversities in order to justify the existing social order. If people get convinced it is not a choice, they will default on other “explanation”. Biology in indeed the most easily available “offer”. Campaigners who are rightfully wary of this might need to consider developing alternative messages that respond to the “vacuum” that a successful “not a choice” campaign generates.

——°——-

ps: an interesting, albeit questionnable, argument that we found in favour of the “choice” argument is that a wilful choice to open up on our desires, explore the reasons for their limitations, proactively try out new sexual relationships or gender expressions might liberate new desires and might in the end affect our sexualities and gender expressions. In that sense, our sexualities and gender expressions could be the result of choices. But again, it is in that case not so much our desires that are choices, but our decision to liberate, explore, innovate.

Changing hearts and minds? Sure, but what exactly do we want to change?

November 16, 2016

Campaigns often aim to change “hearts and minds”. But these vague notions offer little help in identifying and designing what the change objectives exactly are.

So what exactly are we trying to change? How people think? what they do? what they consider right or wrong? what they believe others think?

Every campaigner needs to have a clear vision of the various levels and areas that we can aim for, knowing of course all of these are intimately intertwined.

In this post we’ll have a look at some notions:

Attitudes are evaluations of objects as good or bad, desirable or undesirable. Attitudes can evaluate people, behaviors, events, or any object, whether specific (ice cream) or abstract (progress). They vary on a positive/negative scale.

Beliefs are ideas about how true it is that things are related in particular ways. Beliefs vary in how certain we are that they are true. Unlike values, beliefs refer to the subjective probability that a relationship it true, not to the importance of goals as a guiding principles in life.

Norms are standards or rules that tell members of a group or society how they should behave. More generally, because norms are social expectations, we are more or less inclined to accept them depending on how important conformity vs. self-direction values are to us.

Traits are tendencies to show consistent patterns of thought, feelings, and actions across time and situations. Traits vary in the frequency and intensity with which people exhibit them. They describe what people are like rather than what people consider important.

Behaviors are sheer facts about what people do.

Confusions about these different categories, specifically between behaviors and attitudes, lead many campaigns in wrong directions as they focus on what people say rather than observe how people act.

With inputs from The Online Readings in Psychology and Culture

Break the law!

October 18, 2016

The article below, reproduce from Wagingnonviolence.org opens interesting discussions on how to use legal breach for campaigning purposes.

Applied to LGBTI, this tactics of explicitly and visibly transgressing the law you want to see abolished has been used quite extensively in times and places where anti-LGBTI laws were still on the books but not enforced. This is somewhat different to strategic litigation cases,where you challenge a law in a legal battle, but can be combined.

This issue is certainly worth opening a chapter on.

—————

About 100 Danes, young and old, stood outside Copenhagen City Court in the chilly seaside winds last Tuesday to show their solidarity with four activists alleged to have illegally assisted refugees in their trek across the waters from Denmark to Sweden.

While only two of the accused are Danish citizens, all are members of MedMenneskeSmuglerne, or “Those who smuggle thy neighbor” — an outgrowth of the more broad-based initiative Welcome to Denmark, which welcomes migrants and refugees into the country.

Last year, over one million migrants and refugees from Syria, Afghanistan, Eritrea and other unstable nations endured the risks of exodus to Denmark and other parts of Europe. Many died during the journey or ended up in refugee camps for prolonged periods. This migration wave correlates directly to the growing xenophobia and shift to the right in many European countries, including Denmark.

“Pretty much all leftist organizations in Europe neglected to consider the refugee influx on their agendas,” said Mimoza Murati, one of the non-Danish activists facing criminal charges that day. “We should have been prepared because we know the political landscape.”

While Danish prosecutors may not have agreed, their case was ultimately dismissed for lack of substantial evidence. The four members of MedMenneskeSmuglerne were met with victorious applause by their Welcome to Denmark cohorts outside the court building.

Providing hospitality for asylum seekers

When Trine Simmel, a young Danish activist from Aarhus, saw the masses of migrants on television pouring across the German border into Denmark’s Jylland peninsula around September 2015, she connected with her friends to figure out what they could do to provide basic needs to the newcomers.

The migrants were being escorted by policemen into Jylland, so the youth initially planned to wait at an overpass, where they could drop care packages full of warm clothes, hygiene products and other essentials. The migrants, however, had become suspicious of being escorted by state authorities and dispersed themselves into the forests, which made tracking them much more difficult.

“The young people residing in Jylland called their parents to convene four or five cars, so shoes and related items could be distributed,” Simmel explained. “When drivers would come across migrants, they would offer the care package and ask them where they wanted to go within Denmark.”

A good number of the refugees decided to go to Copenhagen, just across the sea from Sweden, where some already had family members.

“Many apolitical people stepped up to help drive those walking on the railways,” Simmel said. “Many of these people had family backgrounds as immigrants and felt empathetic, but were not usually active in political issues.” An informal hospitality network known as Venligboerne, which includes over 150,000 members across Denmark, helped facilitate the volunteer effort.

Activists like Simmel felt this crisis presented an opportunity to get away from the typical activist duties of meetings and demonstration, and provide a direct service. The influx of refugees tugged at their consciences.

“Just like my grandfather, I had to decide which side of history I wanted to be on,” Simmel said. “Politicians demonized us for posting pictures on Facebook of immigrants being helped, but even [Danes] during World War II were demonized and in violation of the law [for helping Jews].”

Reviving a tradition of refugee smuggling

Denmark was the only country in Europe to reduce the size of its armed forces at the beginning of WWII, yet it was undoubtedly among the most effective in resisting German occupation.

Shortly after an overnight invasion of Denmark on April 9, 1940, 17-year-old Slagelse schoolboy Arne Sejr became frustrated at Danish passivity toward foreign rule. He returned home from school and used his typewriter to print 25 copies of his“Ten Commandments for Danes.” The last of these commandments read, “You shall protect anyone chased by the Germans.”

Danish youth discretely produced fliers of this kind over the course of the German occupation. Groups like the Danish Youth Association under the guidance of theology professor Hal Koch and the Churchill Club in Alborg sabotaged German authorities on a regular basis, sometimes destroying vehicles carrying weapons and munitions.

Christian communities circulated messages against the German occupation through their homilies. This led to the murder of Kaj Munk, who was among the most outspoken clerics advocating for Danish self-rule.

Among all of the tactics employed, the WWII-era Danes are perhaps most remembered for their effective smuggling of refugee Jews across the border into Sweden. During the course of a few months in 1943, 7,220 Jews — almost the entire Jewish population in Denmark — managed to escape to Sweden with the help of their Danish comrades. Only 472 were captured in early October during raids by the Nazis.

“Early on, we used this history of direct service to refugees as our inspiration,” said Welcome to Denmark organizer Søren Warburg.

Providing a warm bed, an underground route to Sweden, warm clothes and a key to one’s house: These are tactics literally cut from WWII memory and pasted upon today’s context of migration in Europe. Even while Denmark’s present government has intentionally made itself unattractive to asylum seekers, Danes themselves — strengthened by a history of unions and community organizing — are providing the services their elected representatives in the welfare state are refusing to provide.

Reflecting on the history of Danish aid to Jewish refugees, Welcome to Denmark spokesperson Line Søgaard said, “We had a sense that something historical was happening again.” According to her, 500 Danes initially responded to the call to action and formed working groups, focusing both on a political campaign and direct services.

Sailing in solidarity

Since Copenhagen is situated about 20 miles across the Öresund Strait from Malmö, Sweden, members of the sailing community who wanted to help refugees find family members or friends in Sweden decided to take action. In October of 2015, they gathered a list of nearly 20 names of allied boat owners and organized the transport of migrants as a public act of defiance.

“At the beginning, we did not think anyone was going to get prosecuted,” Søgaard said. “There are real human traffickers they could go after, but instead leaders are saying that we are the ones betraying the nation.”

Getting in a boat again is no easy task for refugees who have survived the crossing of the Mediterranean Sea. “Many of the migrants we helped to reach Sweden would send us audio messages once they were relieved to have reached their family members,” Søgaard said. “There was this sense that we were continuing the [WWII] legacy of assisting refugees, which some of our family members had started. We had stuck to our sense of morals and ethics even when the [anti-smuggling] law is wrong.”

Crossing by sea, however, wasn’t the only way to reach Sweden. Calle Vangstrup, one of the other four activists who faced criminal charges, worked with his movement members to provide around-the-clock assistance at Rødby, Padborg and Central stations — three major meeting points where migrants who are usually not conversant in Danish or able to understand the transportation system could depart for Sweden by train.

“There were groups of people who were willing to help within the law and those willing to break the law [prohibiting transportation assistance across the border],” Vangstrup said. “Thankfully, the Swedes are more receptive these days, unlike during WWII when they would often send the smuggled Jews back and put them at risk again.”

Vangstrup believes members of Danish Nazi groups and the populist Danish Peoples’ Party were the ones who saw MedMenneskeSmuglerne on the news and reported them to the police.

“As a socialist and as a human being, I feel I should not enjoy so many rights when the refugees have none,” Vangstrup said.

Although the police carried out investigations leading to the charges against Vangstrup and his fellow activists last spring, police have not always perpetuated the xenophobia that characterizes the growing right-wing political ideology of Denmark.

During WWII, thousands of police officers were arrested by German authorities. Danish cops had developed a reputation for being unreliable, often deliberately overlooking the acts of sabotage committed by Danish youth against the occupiers.

This kind of humanity among the police resurfaced during the recent migrant influx in Denmark. “Many people were asking police what they could do to help the refugees,” Søgaard said. “The police did not even know how to advise people, so some looked the other way as the transporters continued their work.”

After the four activists accused of human trafficking were relieved of their charges, they spoke at a press conference, encouraging those directly aiding migrants and refugees to continue their work.

“We are not even a radical group,” Søgaard said. “We are just saying the same things that groups like the United Nations are saying [about the migration crisis]. Yet, there is still resistance to our efforts.” At the end of the day, these so-called human traffickers were just helping others in need with a lift to wherever they were going.

“We all have a right to security and a safe place for us and our children,” she continued. “We can’t just close up our borders and live comfortable lives.”