Resurrection After Rape Community Group
Discussion, question-and-answer, general social support, and journal processing for progress-oriented rape survivors. No crisis, no damaging or triggering conflicts--this is for individuals who want to contribute to collective, cooperative action toward the goal of making actual PROGRESS through rape trauma. Much of this work is based on the book "Resurrection After...
One impact of the retreat on the RAR discussion group is the tendency for the euphoria of the retreat to become so prominent in the discussions here. The inadvertent effect is that those who couldn't attend are overwhelmed in discussions about the retreat, which can overshadow our other conversations about non-retreat topics. Further, the necessity of posting frequent pre-retreat news items, updates, and instructions "clutters" RAR with the topic, which again diminishes other conversations that belong here every bit as much.
Would you consider it a good idea to develop a DS group solely about the retreat, so that news, instructions, travel planning, menu planning, Q/A, etc. can all be "quarantined" in a way that doesn't redirect the RAR group focus? The paradox here is that by developing a specific group, we might actually REDUCE the sense of ingroup/outgroup schism by keeping RAR itself oriented around its original collective purposes, thus "sparing" others from the (sometimes-endless) chatter of retreat talk. This is NOT a suggestion to develop a clique group, but rather to openly acknowledge the need for retreat discussion in a way that doesn't foist it on ALL forumites here. That allows RAR to continue its routine of on-topic discussion of the book, journals, advice, and other rapport.
Is this a good idea, or doomed to fail?
Would you consider it a good idea to develop a DS group solely about the retreat, so that news, instructions, travel planning, menu planning, Q/A, etc. can all be "quarantined" in a way that doesn't redirect the RAR group focus? The paradox here is that by developing a specific group, we might actually REDUCE the sense of ingroup/outgroup schism by keeping RAR itself oriented around its original collective purposes, thus "sparing" others from the (sometimes-endless) chatter of retreat talk. This is NOT a suggestion to develop a clique group, but rather to openly acknowledge the need for retreat discussion in a way that doesn't foist it on ALL forumites here. That allows RAR to continue its routine of on-topic discussion of the book, journals, advice, and other rapport.
Is this a good idea, or doomed to fail?
I was going to suggest the exact thing Matt did about the news thread. I agree - it is here, it is separate...it negates the need to even see any references to the retreat is one is so inclined. I just remember how...upset(?) some seemed to get when we got home and posted...and posted...and posted. Several people kindly asked for us to please write as much as possible as they liked feeling like they had been there in spirit. But, I do recall a post or two by someone who was upset...and I am all about low-drama if it is possible. In fact, if this hadn't been brought up, I was simply planning to post only journals in my journal...but there are so many new people...and after the issue I had with a person having too much access to my private things...well, I blocked all ease of access...now, the new people would have no access to me at all if I don't post openly - unless they request friendship. (sorry....if you need me to explain further about my blocked access, I will. I just had a bad experience and chose to go into a more private setting here).