Infighting Is Not In-Bullying

Often, what we refer to as “infighting” isn’t infighting at all, because it’s not actually a fight—a fight implies that there are two or more sides attacking each other.

Particularly on the movement-wide level, what we call “infighting” is often actually in-bullying: it’s one party using their power or platform to attack another. Sometimes the person(s) being bullied will retaliate in self-defense, but the problem remains more one of bullying than of actual fighting.

Sometimes, advocates attack other advocates because the former truly believe they need to force the latter to change in order to serve the cause. Other times, though, the attacking advocates may have less noble motivations.

An advocate who engages in in-bullying often justifies their behavior by saying that it’s in the service of the movement. This causes anyone who challenges the bullying to seem like they’re harming the movement.

For example, suppose an older male leader of a workers’ rights group refers to “women” as “girls” because he doesn’t realize that this language is no longer appropriate. A volunteer in the group angrily confronts him, and he apologizes and promises to update his vocabulary. The volunteer nevertheless posts on social media that the leader is a “misogynist” who “abuses his power.” When others in the group point out that the post is harmful and unfair, the activist (and those the activist has recruited to stand against the leader) tells them they’re “coddling an oppressor” and that they care more about protecting the leader than making sure the group is equitable and therefore impactful.

Bullying can be devastating—even more so when done by someone in our own inner circle, on our own team.

Whether the problem is in-bullying or infighting, the result is the same: extensive harm to our groups and movements, and also to ourselves.