Facebook Publication Date: 7/3/2020 15:07
***REQUIRED READING; NEW NORMS APPLY; ABSOLUTELY NO REACTS. NO FEWER THAN 500 COMMENTS AND TWO RESPONSES TO OTHER’S COMMENTS. AGAIN, NOT ONE REACT.***
A couple of days ago, underneath one of the videos (goth look; crazy lady–you’ll find it) I printed part of the exchange between Cathy/Kate and myself. I stopped, after a fashion, for a few reasons.
It rapidly turned, for me, from being a place where I could ‘match wits’ with the woman (or her proxy) who attempted to both harm this community and impugn me, to my feeling deeply sad–and full of no small amount of compassion for the woman who would do what she (and some of her cohorts) did to sabotage what I felt and still do feel was a worthy effort. Without doing what could look like an assessment, I did find her words disturbing, and eerily similar to how things rapidly devolved in my dealings with Jim and Kate a week ago.
It felt that continuing to engage with her would be a punch-down. On my part. The woman, Kate or not, who said those things to me here and in the email exchange is not, thankfully, the sort of person I usually have to deal with, and to only meet her at the level of verbal sparring and not to acknowledge and consider what is going on inside her would be as bad as her words to me and to us. I chose to end the engagement. Something is wrong; deeply amiss. I cannot *not* see that. So, yes compassion is warranted.
But. So is accountability.
Despite the challenges and deficits that Cathy/Kate may well be working under, and which does and should engender a level of compassion, understanding, and sorrow, one cannot exempt her from the standard of discourse and engagement that I exhort and demand from each of you, and which I also demand from myself.
Because all of this turns on what I harp on daily: Capacity; Volition; Agency.
Cathy/Kate had the capacity to turn on her computing device, and to make the keypad work and to form sentences meant to wound. She had the volition to use her intellect and her choices around the letter to sabotage our efforts, and then to further use that intellect and her fine finger motion skills to move around a keyboard to be unkind. She had the agency to determine that she would be the person to choose to actively harm, and to punch down herself, and to weaponize my disclosures to this community.
And if Cathy/Kate does indeed have students, she made my point for initiating the letter writing campaign more trenchant and relevant and valid as ever. I never wavered from my position that we were taking right action. This exchange cements it. Calling a person ‘borderline’, narcissistic, and worse is bad enough here, to me.
But I run this joint. I better be ready to deal with the Cathys and the Kates of the world.
But, this.
We had witnessed this effort before–by Kate and Jim, when she called into question the mental health status of Holly, our newest staff member. That was the most chilling part of the exchanges between the three of them; that they would resort to impugning a young woman of color as an attempt to bully, intimidate, silence, and preen for their peers. (It was also the most discouraging aspect of the fact that the 98% of you who saw that happen in real time, and who saw the receipts, still chose, in your inaction, to stand with Jim and Kate. and now Cathy)
As well, Cathy also held herself to be a high level educator, like Jim and Kate are. None of them should be in a classroom where, with the slightest provocation (or no provocation at all) they would use their gifts to attempt to maim and wound and bloody those they feel are lesser. That they, with the smallest pushback would use their talents and standing and authority against Black and brown students–and let me be quite clear. If they would do it here, they sure as hell do it there. Who you are online is who you are. Period.
It could not stand then. And it cannot, will not, stand here. Not when there are thousands of people who are witnesses and are doing there best to walk an honorable path here; both the white people in this space dedicated to lessening and mitigating the harm endured by Black and brown people, *and* the Black and brown people who had to witness and endure secondary trauma.
So, no. She is not afforded a pass. Nor is she allowed to use my own ethos and sense of fair play and my self-imposed restraints of kind candor and Meeting the Other to insist upon a distorted double standard; one for me, and one for herself.
As we say here, everything is fodder. Everything is instructive. Find yourself in Cathy/Kate, because it is in you, and if you are not diligent in self examination, and vigilant in rooting that toxic root, it will taint and maim and stunt the orange trees you are nurturing and watering.
This kind of deadly poison will not infect our orchard.
It will not.
_______________________________
Lace: Hey, Cathy.
It’s Lace Watkins, founder of Lace on Race.
I’m not writing you to convince you of anything.
I *am* curious though.
There were at least two choice points you needed to process and walk through before you came to your decision.
Why, at the eleventh hour, when you knew it would cause hardship for my staff, did you choose to opt out?
More cynical minds than my own could well discern a whiff of the intentional and the undermining.
I’m sure there was none of that surrounding your choice.
That said, what then?
Cathy: Hi Lace,
Sorry if it seemed that I waited until the 11th hour, but I just got home from work a little while ago and am going through my email.
My choice wasn’t to cause hardship for you and your staff, but as I said to Joy, I think it’s important to voice both support and dissent to the action. I read through everything in the subthreads and it seems like this was a disagreement that was turned into something else entirely. I don’t think that Kate and Jim are solely responsible for what took place, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to try to get them fired. I hoped the letters would help me see things from your perspective, but they seem to rely on hyperbole.
Cathy
Lace: Cathy:
Obviously, we disagree. But this is not the place to prosecute the merits. You see a man who made a young woman weep and triggered her enough to have to process it with a third person, and a man who called me a charlatan and a cult leader as a ‘good man’. Yes, we do indeed disagree.
But if you determined he was such a man of honor, why did you enter the process at all?
Again, you had two choice points and no fewer than 5 posts and 3 videos to affirmatively decide or decline. You could well have chosen to do nothing at all; instead you made a conscious choice to enter into the process. That’s a puzzle.
The posts were linked to the invitation, where *you* had to make the choice to ask for the form, get the form, fill it out to request the letter–and there were numerous requests from my staff, particularly Danielle, that if you wanted to decline, you could so so without negatively affecting the signing process for others. A simple note would have taken you off the list. You chose not to do that, and *that* option was available to you.
Another curiosity: you noted to Dani that others had refused in the same manner as you. How might you know that? Was this a coordinated effort? Because, again, those more cynical than I could readily see how that could be a real possibility–which makes your choice, at best, specious.
A query: up till now, I have never seen your name. How long have you been a part of this community.
As well, this.
That same cynical person could easily say you went through the process to see the letter so you could distribute it to the ‘good man’ and his female friend you champion. Again, I didn’t know of your existence in the community till less than an hour ago; you have never posted, and the only action you have taken in the spirit of lessening and mitigating the harm endured by Black and brown people perpetuated by white people is an action you have reneged upon.
So I will ask you point blank. What that the reason for your entirely unnecessary machinations? And those of those people you have no reason to know of, but do? Was this a coordinated campaign?
Thanks in advance for your honesty and for being a good and honorable actor.
Cathy: Lace,
I think you’re mistaken. I said that it’s important for others to see dissent. I didn’t say that I knew of others, as I obviously couldn’t.
Also, I didn’t see a man who made a young woman “weep.” I saw a strong young woman argue for something she believed in and was encouraged by the group to do so, but it didn’t go as she wanted. She seems well known to the group and perhaps it would have been more responsible, knowing that she was triggered, for you to have considered her mental well-being as this got out of hand. As the leader and a professional educator, I would think you owe it to your community to prioritize their well-being before your feelings of having been insulted.
Nothing coordinated. A friend shared information about the incident and it sounded terrible until I read through it for myself.
The more I communicate with you, the more it is clear that your motives for trying to get two people fired seems to be because you are were insulted. Your concern for whatever harm you think was caused to that young woman seems to be used to hide your real intentions.
Lace: On both counts regarding the young woman, you’re mistaken. I was indeed impressed with her, considering it was the first time I encountered her.
You are mistaken in this way as well, and in this I would invite you, and strongly, to use the fictive imagination and empathy you seem to be lacking with the young woman in question.
I am asking you to hold two things in your hands, Ms. Clayton–and because of the nature of this correspondence, I do ask you refer to me as Ms. Watkins–
I am asking you to hold both of these things: that she was indeed strong in the face of assault, and as well, that she could have been in conversation with others–including me, where she was indeed upset. I am not altogether surprised that you lack the ability to see that both of these things are true–but yes. They were.
Had that not happened, I might well have let this go. But it did. And cruelty to others cannot go unchecked.
Because you are right Ms. Clayton. I am expected to have, and do have a thick skin. As you say, ‘As the leader and a professional educator, I would think you owe it to your community to prioritize their well-being before your feelings of having been insulted.’
You are correct. But there were other people of color in this exchange, watching violence unfold at the hands of ‘your good man.’
I processed with them as well. Again, that you cannot extrapolate that is unfortunate, but not surprising, given your endorsement of Golden.
And in any case you are not in any position to determine or to decide for a person of color what harmed them and to what extent of violence they endured. Right there, that tells me you either have not been in my community for any period of time at all (a query of mine you ignored) or on the off chance that you were, that nothing whatsoever landed or internalized.
Finally, you completely skipped over my very overt queries.
Which were:
‘That same cynical person could easily say you went through the process to see the letter so you could distribute it to the ‘good man’ and his female friend you champion. Again, I didn’t know of your existence in the community till less than an hour ago; you have never posted, and the only action you have taken in the spirit of lessening and mitigating the harm endured by Black and brown people perpetuated by white people is an action you have reneged upon.
So I will ask you point blank. What that the reason for your entirely unnecessary machinations? And those of those people you have no reason to know of, but actually, probably, do? Was this a coordinated campaign?’
Ok. we can end here. Be well.
Cathy:You as well.
Lace: Ms. Clayton:
I’m going to take an action I think I have taken maybe four times in two and a half years.
Lace on Race is an opt-in opt-out space, that is to say, people become part of the community of their own volition, and they depart of their own accord.
In this case however, given the disturbing nature of this conversation, and where your sympathies squarely lie, I do not feel that you are safe for brown and Black people.
And I would not, and will not, inflict that upon them, particularly after an incident that you at best minimize and at worst find laughable.
I’m going to ask you, very overtly and directly, to please not be a part of the Lace on Race community.
You are right, my first responsibility is to lessen and mitigate the harm of brown and Black people perpetuated by white people, and I do not at all think that we share the same ethos.
So I would ask you not to traverse my virtual property nor to enter into my virtual living room.
The community deserves better.
With resolve,
Lace Watkins
Cathy: Lace,
That is certainly your discretion, and it doesn’t seem to be out of place with what appear to be significant mental health issues. It seems that you have a great deal of trouble coping with disagreements and rather than addressing the disagreement, you split people into good and bad, and portray yourself to be a victim/martyr. Also, given that you also pushed somebody you know to be struggling with trauma issues into arguments that would only further harm her well-being, and then used her pain as a way of encouraging people to take action on your part because you felt personally slighted, it would seem that there’s some mixture of narcissism and borderline personality disorder driving your actions and lack of regard for other people.
I pray that you seek help.
Cathy
Lace: Lace Watkins
Wed, Jul 1, 4:46 PM (2 days ago)
to Cathy
It is my discretion.
And my discernment.
That you may find lacking, but that has served me well.
Well enough for the Washington Post, Vox Magazine, CTV (these just in the past month), and an at least somewhat successful consultancy.
Thanks for the diagnosis, and also for the respect you failed to show as you used a name I specifically asked you not to use.
If you’d bothered to read anything at all that I’ve ever written I’ve been very upfront about my challenges. That you would use them to weaponize the pain I have endured speaks to your character, but then again, you endorse Dr Golden.
So. Welp.
Again, and to be clear, a man who, and I say this as a spiritual formation coach, who is also trained as trauma, codependency, and domestic violence counselor, showed signs of an abuser in his interactions with my community, and particularly that young woman.
Ms. Clayton, I know exactly what I saw.
Say what you like. He just showed your entire hand. And your entire character. Your choice to endorse that man–and possibly Kate as well, means you have neither moral or ethical or any level of discernment I can respect.
It’s no wonder you did what you chose to do–you still never definitively denied you are aligned with him. And you still never specifically denied that you wanted access to the letters.
The funniest part is, that if Jim or Kate had simply asked for them, we would have provided them. We have been nothing but transparent and above board. The letter is no surprise; I told him what I was doing. It’s nothing I haven’t already said publicly, and to his supervisor. You all made this subterfuge way more complicated than it had to be.
But then bad actors always do.
And so, it’s no wonder you are who you are.
Stay away from my community.
Signed,
The (Per You) The Crazy and (Per Jim) The Charlatan Cult Leader,
Lace Watkins
Founder
Lace on Race
Cathy: Lace,
I think I’ve made it very clear that I don’t know anyone involved in this situation. You host a group I appreciate your accomplishments and your struggles, but neither of those absolve you of the responsibility to be mindful of others under your guidance, especially given the qualifications you have listed. I do see that you don’t list any formal training, which leaves me concerned as to how you portray yourself to persons that are clearly looking to you for help.
I don’t know what you’re referring to in terms of using a “name” you asked me not to use. Perhaps you’re confused, but your increasing hostility and defensiveness are worrisome. You seem very preoccupied with the belief that people are spying on you or colluding against you. As you know, this is not healthy, especially given that you claim to be a spiritual coach but cannot regulate your emotions or respect differences of opinion.
Be well.
Cathy
Lace: Thank you, Cathy.
My aunt (you would call her crazy too) is also named Cathy (your spelling).
She has a birthday today. I gave her a love letter in the form of a video yesterday.
And then, here you come. The Anti-Cathy.
Catherine is the woman I have modeled myself after. It is her approbation I revel in.
She taught me to never do any of the things you have done in our correspondence: punch down; impugn and weaponize afflictions; and most importantly and sadly, cape for an evil man.
Cathy, the Cathy worth emulating and internalizing, marched for civil rights, and risked her life for me and my sisters and my nephews.
Cathy, my North Carolina Cathy worthy of respect that you will never know, is proud of the woman I have become. That is *all* that matters. I only value words from women I respect.
So, welp.
Cathy Clayton, if you ever managed to find anything in me to admire, I would root it out like so much kudzu. Because *nothing* you value, I want a part of my psyche, spirit, and soul. Not one particle.
I see what and who you value. And I want no part of it.
The crazy, narcissistic, charlatan cult leader has spoken.
Cathy: It is very sad to watch you decompensate over the course of an evening because I didn’t sign your letter, and it is beyond unethical to see you use your group in place of proper counseling and help. If you are credentialed in any of the areas you mentioned, I think that they need to be alerted to the danger you are posing to others, as should any outlet that offers you an platform for what is clearly a means for you to process your issues while profiting off of other’s insecurities. I feel bad because you are clearly not well, but you don’t seem to have the self-awareness or self-regulation to control your impulses or behavior.
Lace: It’s hard to have this conversation with a woman who doesn’t have a working definition of the word ‘decompensate’.
But by all means, continue.
Cathy: I think you’re behavior in this email exchange is a working definition.
Lace: Cathy, this is borderline (get it!! you called me borderline!!) amusing, but i have chicken to eat and trash to take out, which when, extrapolated, is painfully relevant here.
I know you think you’re the smartest one in the room. But.
Not with me on the sectional you’re not.
And Pro Tip from Lace on Race After Hours: if you want to flex your intelligence, listen to google when it gives you spelling corrections. You are welcome. That one’s for free.
Cathy: You know you’ve lost the argument when you have to pick out a spelling error to make yourself feel better.
And “Pro Tip” from someone whose career doesn’t involve begging for money online, what I wrote was a malapropism, not a typo. It was spelled correctly, but was incorrect for that syntax. Google can’t help with that, or whatever ails you, but spelling is clearly the lesser of the two issues.
Please don’t embarrass yourself by confusing the adulation of virtual friends with actual intellect, a functional skill set, or a successful career. You clearly have reached a point in your life and career in which you have forsaken substance and achievement in favor of podcasts from your couch with a virtual collection cup in your hand. You are like a washed up televangelist trying to cash in on whatever guilt you can extract from your audience.
Take it to heart. That one’s free.
(this is running long. the rest, including my wrapup, in comments.
Permalink: https://www.facebook.com/laceonrace/posts/pfbid025WZvMydWnDXNekVCmYY5XiEZ6CEjmmpC8szB2gVtyhXSbSrRcdJEBAfvj7QJWmUZl
Post Type: Text
Caption Type: N/A
Is Cross Post: 0
Is Share: 0
Impressions: 543
Reach: 385
Reactions: 1
Comments: 354
Shares: 3