![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lydamorehouse So, I don't even want to tell you how much of the Loft malarky I have continued to have to deal with. It feels ongoing in a way that is starting make me lose sleep.
Since I started here I should probably give you all a little wrap-up of the newest twist in this DRAMA. After actual pressure from media outlets, the Loft finally decided to talk to me in order to "set the record straight." The executive director called me and because MN is what is called a "single-party" state, you don't need permission to record calls, I planed to record it, and I did. (Side note, I have a terrible phone that could not handle any of the apps? So, I ended up putting her on speaker phone and just holding it near my computer so that Audacity could pick up both sides of the conversation. It worked okay, but, man, the quality of sound when she is talking is BAD.)
I actually did this for a couple of reasons. My memory is bad--in a way that I think is typical of a lot of people? I don't remember things perfectly when the conversation is difficult, heated, or I'm otherwise worried, etc.. Like, this is why I often want Shawn (and usually visa versa) to be with at the important doctor's appointments, so there are basically two people with the information. So, I wanted a recording for my own sake, in case, at 4 am I wake up wondering: "Oh no! I did I say something rude?" or "Wait, did she imply what I think she did??"
Also, I'm still not sure I don't want to pursue this via some legal channel and having a recording of the conversion would be useful, if I do.
Okay, so the Executive Director planned to call me at noon, and OF COURSE, in a super corporate business "power move" called at 12:05 pm. I literally found this hilarious? Like, wow, already showing your insincerity.
She starts by saying that the Loft likes to keep these sorts of conversations private and confidential. Then she stops speaking. She clearly waiting for me to agree that that's what we're having. The silence stretches. I finally say, "uh, so...?" And, she has to give up and asks if there's something I'd like to start with. I lead with my main question which is, "Why did the Loft tell me one thing about the reason I was fired and then turn around and tell my students something that cast me in the frame?" (This is paraphrasing.)
There is another awkwardly log pause and the director clearly starts reading a statement. Even at the time, I knew she was reading because she stumbled over some words in a way you just DON'T when you're speaking spontaneously and off the cuff. This statement is full of corporate double-speak in a way that I'm actually sort of having trouble parsing it. There are words like "open dialoguing" and god knows what all else. (I did not, in fact, listen to the whole thing again. I did replay certain parts for Shawn, however.) She finally drops the "bomb."
She tells me that, in fact, there have been complaints about me. She says that I (and in re-listening, I notice this is actually not concrete but a list of OPTIONS, like maybe she is trying to cold read me?) either gave feed back, written comments, or said to the critique client something that the client found offensive to the GLBTQIA+ community. I was not expecting this? I didn't exactly scoff, but I broke in and said, "Wow! Really? That's surprising given that I'm a lesbian."
Shawn and I counted.
There is a good TEN SECONDS of utter, astonished SILENCE.
They didn't know. The Loft had no idea that I'm a lesbian. It is so clear that the director has no idea what to do with this twist because after pulling herself together, she starts rereading her script. She never really address this, or the fact that a conversation in community between two queer folks should not be treated the same way as one between a queer person and an outsider to that community. (I can call my friends dykes, but the straights better not call me that. We all understand this. It's code-switching. Something she is likely to be familiar with as a Black woman.)
But, okay, I get a chance to speak and I say, something to the effect of, excuse me, but when did you receive this complaint? She checks her notes, she says 8/9/2023. I say, "Well, that's impossible, I haven't had a critique client in over a year." She then makes mumblely noises about how, "Oh, that's when it came to light.. uh... at that time," seeming to admit on tape (unknowingly) that they clearly spent time in early August digging up information with which to fuel some kind of retaliatory action like this. Because the last critique I did for the Loft was in October of 2022, I believe. It did have GLBTQIA+ content and I do remember having a complex discussion with the client. So, it is possible that the client, who is also queer, did take something I said as offensive. I will never suggest that just because I'm queer that I'm absolved of the possibility of homophobia or what have you.
None of this really matters, because its very, very clear that in many ways, this is bull. If the Loft is so concerned about creating GLBTQIA+ safer spaces AND there was a complaint against me that suggested to them that I was problematic in this regard (and let's even give them the benefit of the doubt and believe, which I don't, that their stated reason that it took over a year for someone to approach me about this is because somehow the previous Education Director was blocking "justice" being served) they should have been GOOD ALLIES to the queer community and come at me hard. Say it! Write the email that says, "Dear Lyda, it has come to light that you are a Bad Actor and known to be anti-GLBTQIA+ and we don't stand for it!"
If someone in my community is a bigot, I shout bigot! That's what allyship looks like!!
Why, instead, write an email that says, "there are some programming changes happening, including phasing out the program you're using wet.ink and la, la, la about strategic and budgetary concerns, good luck with your future endeavors, Love, the Loft" ?? (Obviously paraphrasing here. I believe I quoted them directly in my previous post if you want to re-read the actual communication)
When I asked them that, they said, well, it says in the email "participant feedback" among this long laundry list of other, very innocuous reasons. WHICH it does say, but as an organization of writers, it should also be clear to them that sliding in to a list of words that otherwise are entirely about strategic planning and programmic shifts, does not, in fact, give connotation of "we heard something bad about you from a student" but instead, "we surveyed our general student body and they're looking for other kinds of programming."
And if you are so sure... WHY BURY THAT?
Also why all the insistence that this is private. If I'm a bad actor and you are sure of it, should you not be willing to say that out loud and on the public record!!
So, again. This is clearly all been manufactured to some extent AFTER they received pressure from the Star Tribune and (possibly) MPR. I told them that was clear. And this is when they tried to insist that I never speak of this again out loud because this is a private and confidential conversation and I said, "You can't actually ask me not to talk to anyone about this because you made it abundantly clear that I no longer work for YOU. There is no non-disclosure part of your contract, anyway, and, even if there were, I am no longer bound by that. I am a free agent who can speak to whom I like, about what I like." (That is nearly a direct quote. I believe I actually also said something about how I would use social media to talk about this as my conscious deemed fit, but I get poetic like that under pressure; I blame my theater background.)
But, it is, in effect over because they have an accusation that I can never truly counter because they refused to give me details. They wouldn't say what I said or whom I said it to, nor even when exactly I might have said it *(other than the date it "came to light.")
So, that's the end of this ugly business. If there is one thing I wish I had said it's this: "If the Loft is truly committed to making itself a safer place for GLBTQIA+ folx, then I hope they are extending that to their teaching artists as well. If they will not stand up for their queer teaching artists then it's not a safe space and without queer teachers, the queer students will NOT feel safer."
Yet, it so painfully clear, this is not their real agenda. Not as an institution, nor in firing me.
One quick addendum. The whole teen summer issue: The same person who used to give me manuscript critiques is the same person I had feelings at. She recently was promoted to the position of Education Programming director--thus, finally in a position to make a decision to pull my class.
So... mmmm.
[BIG BREATH] Letting it go now.
Since I started here I should probably give you all a little wrap-up of the newest twist in this DRAMA. After actual pressure from media outlets, the Loft finally decided to talk to me in order to "set the record straight." The executive director called me and because MN is what is called a "single-party" state, you don't need permission to record calls, I planed to record it, and I did. (Side note, I have a terrible phone that could not handle any of the apps? So, I ended up putting her on speaker phone and just holding it near my computer so that Audacity could pick up both sides of the conversation. It worked okay, but, man, the quality of sound when she is talking is BAD.)
I actually did this for a couple of reasons. My memory is bad--in a way that I think is typical of a lot of people? I don't remember things perfectly when the conversation is difficult, heated, or I'm otherwise worried, etc.. Like, this is why I often want Shawn (and usually visa versa) to be with at the important doctor's appointments, so there are basically two people with the information. So, I wanted a recording for my own sake, in case, at 4 am I wake up wondering: "Oh no! I did I say something rude?" or "Wait, did she imply what I think she did??"
Also, I'm still not sure I don't want to pursue this via some legal channel and having a recording of the conversion would be useful, if I do.
Okay, so the Executive Director planned to call me at noon, and OF COURSE, in a super corporate business "power move" called at 12:05 pm. I literally found this hilarious? Like, wow, already showing your insincerity.
She starts by saying that the Loft likes to keep these sorts of conversations private and confidential. Then she stops speaking. She clearly waiting for me to agree that that's what we're having. The silence stretches. I finally say, "uh, so...?" And, she has to give up and asks if there's something I'd like to start with. I lead with my main question which is, "Why did the Loft tell me one thing about the reason I was fired and then turn around and tell my students something that cast me in the frame?" (This is paraphrasing.)
There is another awkwardly log pause and the director clearly starts reading a statement. Even at the time, I knew she was reading because she stumbled over some words in a way you just DON'T when you're speaking spontaneously and off the cuff. This statement is full of corporate double-speak in a way that I'm actually sort of having trouble parsing it. There are words like "open dialoguing" and god knows what all else. (I did not, in fact, listen to the whole thing again. I did replay certain parts for Shawn, however.) She finally drops the "bomb."
She tells me that, in fact, there have been complaints about me. She says that I (and in re-listening, I notice this is actually not concrete but a list of OPTIONS, like maybe she is trying to cold read me?) either gave feed back, written comments, or said to the critique client something that the client found offensive to the GLBTQIA+ community. I was not expecting this? I didn't exactly scoff, but I broke in and said, "Wow! Really? That's surprising given that I'm a lesbian."
Shawn and I counted.
There is a good TEN SECONDS of utter, astonished SILENCE.
They didn't know. The Loft had no idea that I'm a lesbian. It is so clear that the director has no idea what to do with this twist because after pulling herself together, she starts rereading her script. She never really address this, or the fact that a conversation in community between two queer folks should not be treated the same way as one between a queer person and an outsider to that community. (I can call my friends dykes, but the straights better not call me that. We all understand this. It's code-switching. Something she is likely to be familiar with as a Black woman.)
But, okay, I get a chance to speak and I say, something to the effect of, excuse me, but when did you receive this complaint? She checks her notes, she says 8/9/2023. I say, "Well, that's impossible, I haven't had a critique client in over a year." She then makes mumblely noises about how, "Oh, that's when it came to light.. uh... at that time," seeming to admit on tape (unknowingly) that they clearly spent time in early August digging up information with which to fuel some kind of retaliatory action like this. Because the last critique I did for the Loft was in October of 2022, I believe. It did have GLBTQIA+ content and I do remember having a complex discussion with the client. So, it is possible that the client, who is also queer, did take something I said as offensive. I will never suggest that just because I'm queer that I'm absolved of the possibility of homophobia or what have you.
None of this really matters, because its very, very clear that in many ways, this is bull. If the Loft is so concerned about creating GLBTQIA+ safer spaces AND there was a complaint against me that suggested to them that I was problematic in this regard (and let's even give them the benefit of the doubt and believe, which I don't, that their stated reason that it took over a year for someone to approach me about this is because somehow the previous Education Director was blocking "justice" being served) they should have been GOOD ALLIES to the queer community and come at me hard. Say it! Write the email that says, "Dear Lyda, it has come to light that you are a Bad Actor and known to be anti-GLBTQIA+ and we don't stand for it!"
If someone in my community is a bigot, I shout bigot! That's what allyship looks like!!
Why, instead, write an email that says, "there are some programming changes happening, including phasing out the program you're using wet.ink and la, la, la about strategic and budgetary concerns, good luck with your future endeavors, Love, the Loft" ?? (Obviously paraphrasing here. I believe I quoted them directly in my previous post if you want to re-read the actual communication)
When I asked them that, they said, well, it says in the email "participant feedback" among this long laundry list of other, very innocuous reasons. WHICH it does say, but as an organization of writers, it should also be clear to them that sliding in to a list of words that otherwise are entirely about strategic planning and programmic shifts, does not, in fact, give connotation of "we heard something bad about you from a student" but instead, "we surveyed our general student body and they're looking for other kinds of programming."
And if you are so sure... WHY BURY THAT?
Also why all the insistence that this is private. If I'm a bad actor and you are sure of it, should you not be willing to say that out loud and on the public record!!
So, again. This is clearly all been manufactured to some extent AFTER they received pressure from the Star Tribune and (possibly) MPR. I told them that was clear. And this is when they tried to insist that I never speak of this again out loud because this is a private and confidential conversation and I said, "You can't actually ask me not to talk to anyone about this because you made it abundantly clear that I no longer work for YOU. There is no non-disclosure part of your contract, anyway, and, even if there were, I am no longer bound by that. I am a free agent who can speak to whom I like, about what I like." (That is nearly a direct quote. I believe I actually also said something about how I would use social media to talk about this as my conscious deemed fit, but I get poetic like that under pressure; I blame my theater background.)
But, it is, in effect over because they have an accusation that I can never truly counter because they refused to give me details. They wouldn't say what I said or whom I said it to, nor even when exactly I might have said it *(other than the date it "came to light.")
So, that's the end of this ugly business. If there is one thing I wish I had said it's this: "If the Loft is truly committed to making itself a safer place for GLBTQIA+ folx, then I hope they are extending that to their teaching artists as well. If they will not stand up for their queer teaching artists then it's not a safe space and without queer teachers, the queer students will NOT feel safer."
Yet, it so painfully clear, this is not their real agenda. Not as an institution, nor in firing me.
One quick addendum. The whole teen summer issue: The same person who used to give me manuscript critiques is the same person I had feelings at. She recently was promoted to the position of Education Programming director--thus, finally in a position to make a decision to pull my class.
So... mmmm.
[BIG BREATH] Letting it go now.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 08:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 09:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 09:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 10:07 pm (UTC)I really, really want to laugh it off.
But you know how it is. It spins in my head because it's not like it's impossible, I suppose? I am always--like I'm sure you are as well--decently careful about how I word criticism and critique to my students. This person (if I'm right about who it might be and if there is an actual, real complaint) was younger than me and there is no question that language, particularly in the queer community shifts a lot. (I almost corrected the director and said, "Most of us who are inclusive just say queer now instead of the alphabet, because then we can include the kink community and others who might need protection under our umbrella.") And this is my point. I have been an out lesbian since 1987. We don't say certain words any more. I can't know for certain that the accusation isn't valid, particularly since they gave me no actual concrete evidence of what I was supposed to have said, written, or otherwise expressed.
And, my brain really does want to spin on this. This, even though it is the most ridiculous in so, so many ways, has been keeping me up at night. AND I'M SURE THEY KNEW IT WOULD. Like, a very vague accusation of any kind makes a thoughtful person who wants to do the the right thing as much as possible start to doubt every interaction.
So, I'm off to drowned in Star Trek the Animated Series. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 10:39 pm (UTC)(It's fascinating b/c my mum, a Straight Of a Certain Age, spells out the whole 2SLGBTQIA+ acronym out loud and I'm like. I'm bisexual. Can you not?)
The thing is, in a situation like this, a professional organization would ask for context. And discuss it with you directly. Otherwise you can have a pissed off student who makes up a random complaint about you saying something offensive, and you have absolutely no recourse (which is often how it works in K-12, to be fair). So even if they had the best of intentions, which I don't think they did, they handled it atrociously.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 10:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 10:19 pm (UTC)So, the first whiff I had of media interest was when I got contacted out of the blue by a reporter at MPR. They told me that my story was getting a lot of attention on social media. I am sure the reason it did is because I had @'d three of the people in my writers' group who knew the whole teen summer fiasco, and of those people two of them are Kelly Barnhill (local Newberry award winner and mainstream darling) and Naomi Kritzer (who many local reporters know through her writings about local elections.) The other? Adam Stemple who is also awesome! But, not as likely to have sparked this off.
They emailed me because my email is very, very publicly available. They asked for a conversation and so I gave them the whole story. They told me at the end there wasn't much of a story there (as you also correctly note,) in terms of a Breaking News angle, but told me that if there were other people who had beefs with the Loft to send them to them (this reporter's pronouns are they/them). My sense, and they broadly hinted at this, is that they are collecting stories on Loft misbehavior because... well, because the Loft, let's be honest. It doesn't have a great reputation (certainly not in SF/F, but also there have been previous missteps.)
The Star Tribune meanwhile sidled up to Naomi to get the skinny and so information got passed there, and I actually ended up writing to the Star Tribune person. I ended my note with a "I understand if this isn't newsworthy, but thanks for a chance to vent to a stranger." She wrote back an amazing note telling me that she was sorry I'd had to go through this and noted that there is "surprising therapeutic value" in rattling an institution's press secretary. She let me know that she did, in fact, follow up and do just that.
My guess is nothing will come of this now. But look for a mention of this incident the next time the Loft does something stupid or is dickish to some bigger name.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 10:28 pm (UTC)LOL. Great comment from somebody who should know. This person sounds like a good one to have on your side.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-08 10:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 06:19 am (UTC)Good on you for recording the call and being so meticulous about dealing with their nonsense. Because that's a lot.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 02:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 08:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 11:57 am (UTC)Sounds like you are better off without them.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 12:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-09 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-10 12:10 am (UTC)The.
Actual.
FUCK.
Seriously, I know that sometimes HR departments just make shit up to get rid of you, but seriously. Also, if they're telling your students, etc., that you're problematic, that is actionable slander. Most professional organizations will limit the information they share about you to "She worked here between [year] and [year]."
no subject
Date: 2023-09-10 01:10 am (UTC)One does have to wonder how this staff person got the impression I'd breached contract.
no subject
Date: 2023-09-10 08:06 pm (UTC)(You can't see my scowl through the internet, but IT IS THERE.)
no subject
Date: 2023-09-10 01:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-10 03:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2023-09-11 02:24 pm (UTC)