What should the role of fluffers be (and perhaps not be) during build and strike?
This thread is carried over from a Facebook discussion, and I’ve tried my best to capture the main points (but I'm only human).
There is a second thread about feeding build, strike and fluffing crew - please make your comments on the relevant thread (I had high hopes of putting together the second thread this evening but this took me ages so will come back to it tomorrow/friday if someone else doesn't)
Best hopes
(taken from facebook thread - feel free to add your hopes)
- That fluffers/fnuggers efforts are recognised as equal to other build and strike crew members.
- That fluffers/fnuggers support strike team to achieve the goal of packing up site within the timeframe set by the site owner.
- All crew members' wellbeing is considered and people aren't left totally burnt out at the end of build and/or strike.
Roles of fluffers
1. Offering supportive conversations / interactions
Alison commented on the wellbeing of the build and strike teams:
“Unfortunately strike is probably the most stressful part of the burn”
Claire has shared that her role in fluffing / fnugging has been:
"cheering you on, hugging you and listening to your stress." Jamie affirmed that she has found Claire's conversations "therapeutic af"
Anna De Buiscuit shared that she has participated in strike by:
“spen[ding] the day counselling numerous members who were struggling emotionally and psychologically with various issues they were struggling with.” And that she feels this is an “invisible service”.
She also share that she “spent the night before strike looking after a Burner who was so drunk he was not safe to be left alone.”
Alison and Claire agree that offering supportive interactions can lead to better decision making and is supportive to the wellbeing of build and strike crew.
Alison also shared that “while a gulp of water, a snack and a 5minute shoulder rub are much appreciated by the strike team at appropriate moments, this is different from taking hours off to have deep and meaningful conversations. Strike leaders aren't despots, and you'll find they are great at making sure their crew is looked after, but there is a job to be done. Fluffing is there to help make it happen. It's a matter of judgement and two-way communication (as much the responsibility of fluffing lead as strike lead!)”
Alison suggests that “sit-down heart to heart conversations should be done outside working time where reasonably possible.”
Claire says:
I think most people are sensible enough to realise that when people are halfway up a tree it's not productive to entice them down with Apple pie and the promise of a free hour of counselling.
Alison says
“Sometimes the best thing a fluffer can do is to remove themselves and as much MOOP as possible, and transfer themselves back to London to help with getting things into storage. There's always time to provide the shoulder to cry on when the job is done."
Claire asked / commented:
“Who is having all these hour long conversations? 😂 Honestly, I'm just wondering?
I walked around for hours both days bringing food and hugs and listening to what was needed so I could ask other people and make sure it happened. But that took five or ten minutes at the most other wise I would have been knackered and never gotten around.
Claire explained that longer conversations happened more in the evenings:
In the evening around the fire there were longer conversations sure, people talking about things that hadn't arrived, things that had arrived but weren't working.
2. Rehydrating and feeding people who are building and striking [note this is separate to conversation around feeding fluffing team which is in a separate thread]
e.g.
Gulps of water and a snack (Alison)
3. Aligning with strike team aims
Alison says:
“we only have access to the glade for a very short period of time, we have very high standards when it comes to Leave No Trace, and we need to make sure the owner is happy. The logistics challenge of getting everything off site back to storage in proper order is huge. The strikers who organise all this do an amazing job of dealing with the stress after building for weeks and burning their hearts out, but strike is a matter of getting the job done in the immediacy.”
Alison also said:
“Fluffing must be incorporated into the same goals as strike - ie to get everything done ASAP. And if someone is about to pack up the kitchen, of course they get a meal. It's always good for fluffers to check in with strike lead as to what they think the fluffing requirements will be for the day. “
4. Generally offering a helping hand when needed
e.g.
Holding a flashlight, helping to put up tents, helping Desanka to prep food / wash up, organise food donations, moop sweeping, helping to get other people on site to help with build/strike tasks.
How the role is perceived compared to other build/strike team members
Claire explained that not everyone can do the lifting and carrying etc. - "The amount of effort put in is not just determined by how much you give, but by how much of what you had available in the first place was given."
Loz said:
"Absolutely not everyone is starting from the same baseline of personal reserves - or has the same length of tether."
Hilda said: "At Nowhere, fluffers are an integral part of the build team, and therefore part of build and fed. I'm guessing this was the intention at Nest too, but got lost in translation perhaps." [note build/strike food related comments in another thread]
Alison shared her reflections:
"As a former fluffing lead (and still a regular fluffer) I'm with you on the importance of fluffing and the vital part they play during build and strike.
Paul shared:
“ As for cantina food and 'workers' at Nowhere it ultimately doesn't matter what work you're doing, as long as you are doing something for the event (Fried and want to be alone? Here do inventory checks. Don't know anybody? Go fluff, you'll meet EVERYONE and they'll be glad to see you. Have a hankering to get hot and dirty? Here's a rebar pounder, fix the fence.)”
Other reflections on what has happened in the past:
Alison shared –
“I know that, in the past, there was a communication breakdown where some of the Strike team decided to relax at the beach when the short-handed crew were frantically taking everything down - including the beach-goers tents - to meet the owner's deadline, and that really wasn't fair.”
"the point is, does the fluffing that's being provided effectively contribute to the quick completion of strike? If someone is giving food and moral support to someone else, is it happening while chilling for hours or are people talking while also eg packing up the kitchen or doing an inventory? Or after people have stopped for the night?
But if the strike lead feels the fluffing is preventing them from doing their job effectively, then they are perfectly entitled to let fluffers know how much on-site support they can expect. Including meals, and, let's face it, Exeter services are only 20 minutes drive away.
Yes, it's important to manage stress, and fluffers are brilliant for this.
[Other reflections shared regarding feeding fluffing crew will be in separate thread to keep discussions focused]
Suggestions for ways forward:
Claire and Anna suggest having badges or something similar to identify fluffers.
Will Rogers shared: Nowhere is/was making an attempt to re name 'build' to 'setup' because there was a misconception that only people physically building are participating in setting up of the event, which is 100% not true. (suggestion agreed with by Amanda, Lauren, Nathan and Lexy). Although Lachlan shared that he feels the issue is also much more complicated than this suggestion alone.
Awareness for the need for emotional wellbeing support during strike (raised by Anna, Clare, Bess) - but maybe this should be disentangled from efficiency maximising fluffing and taken on by those who are called to do so in communication with other relevant orgs (strike co-ordination, welfare, fluffing)
Adrian Godwin Wed 19 Jun 2019 9:05AM
I guess the low-mobility area makes some sense, since I think that was the primary purpose of this year's site. Another way to handle it would be to set up a virtual camp with an arbitrary name. Wheelchair Warriors appeals to me.
Claire McAllen Sun 23 Jun 2019 7:34AM
Adrian, could you point me in the direction of information that explains how accessible is a derogatory term. I have done Internet searches and I can't find anything.
Adrian Godwin Mon 24 Jun 2019 6:31PM
I don't think it's generally derogatory yet. But for the people who like to be derogatory, any euphemism ends up that way.
Claire McAllen Tue 25 Jun 2019 2:35PM
I'm not sure we can limit a word because it might become derogatory or because people will use it in a derogatory way, otherwise we will be limiting all words.
I also don't see it as a euphemism, it is essentially exactly what it says it is, accessible.
Also you seem to claim knowledge that it means ghetto and that if people use it they are part of the problem.
I think constantly changing words because one person doesn't like the word is a problem.
If you don't like the word don't use it and don't label anything you own with it.
However, to make it seem as though there is an actual problem and then not back that up is not helping or giving better understanding.
Claire McAllen Sun 23 Jun 2019 8:12AM
I am confused about the issue of calling the camping area accessible. I thought the area was called accessible because it was flatter, close to many amenities such as the disability toilet and the theme camps.
The area was more accessible due to these features.
However much of the festival was not accessible to people with physical limitations, there were many hills that meant art and the temple were difficult to reach.
I would say these made them inaccessible.
Naming the camp 'wheelchair warriors' makes it sound firstly that it is for wheelchair users and secondly that people with disabilities are warriors which is itself a euphemism. . People with disabilities are people, they are no more or less warriors than any other person.
Some may self identity as a warrior and I have respect for their choice, some may say that are not warriors they face challenges just like everyone else and in that they are essentially just like anyone else.
Those who are blind, deaf, those with ambulatory disabilities could feel excluded by the name wheel chair warriors.
I was referring to the area as inclusion during the festival as I thought it was making it easier to be included, but to makes different areas for different inclusions would drawn attention to those people in a way that could feel very negative.
Also, people of colour and those on a low income don't necessarily want or need to be in a separate space from their friends and family.
The need for a space that makes facilities easier to access is important for people who struggle with hills and long distances to the toilets.
For instance free camping down to the theme camps was extremely difficult both ways. Even on the road.
There was only one toilet big enough for a wheel chair and that was in the accessibility area.
Adrian Godwin Mon 24 Jun 2019 6:36PM
All those things are true, no question.
I do think the camp was marked 'Accessible Camping Area' with the currently common meaning of 'accessible', rather than in just a general way.
Obviously any alternative name needs to be acceptable to all concerned. That was just my suggestion.
The comment about people of colour and low income was very tongue-in-cheek - meant to illustrate the unacceptability of such segregation rather than the slightest whiff of a serious suggestion.
Claire McAllen Tue 25 Jun 2019 3:12PM
So, I guess the other issue I want to address is the danger of a person with a disability talking on behalf of all people with disabilities and shutting down conversation by using 'buzz' phrases like 'you are part of the problem' or 'you don't get to speak on behalf of people with disabilities'.
This sets the dangerous possibility of a person using the platform to address their personal peavences and make it look as though this is for the benefit, or spoken on behalf of everyone else when that is not the case.
Also, many people can know a lot about disability or creating solutions for those who need better accessibility without being disabled and have the right to be heard even if they do not make the decisions such as carers, disability activists, disability solicitors, families supporting people with disabilities,people who design or sell mobility adaptations, engineers and allies.
Will such a small pool of people with disabilities if we ignore expert advice it could create greater hardship and would greatly limit what can be accomplished to make our burn accessible.
I will keep using the word accessible, because it isn't a euphemism and I get you don't like it and strangely decided to create facts to support that and then used buzz words to shut down conversation but to create another word would effectively be creating another euphemism.
This is everything I hate about so called 'empowerment' none of us are living in a vacuum and people abuse the power it gives them.
Good ideas can come from anywhere, let's not limit our pool of information to only the people with disabilities that come to the burn.
Claire McAllen Tue 25 Jun 2019 3:19PM
When it comes to using humour on a platform such as this tongue in cheek doesn't work unless everyone knows you and how you speak as there is no tone or facial expressions.
If you want to make a point then make it clearly.
Adrian Godwin Wed 26 Jun 2019 7:46AM
I still think it's a euphemism. Because the opposite, inaccessible, would naturally be taken to mean inaccessible to everyone, not to certain specific people.
Everywhere's inaccessible to SOMEONE. Even disabled toilets that need a RADAR key :)
But I'm very happy to read a strong and well-argued opposing opinion. This place is for debate and you're quite right to say that no one person should have their opinions go unchallenged.
respect :)
Adrian Godwin · Wed 19 Jun 2019 9:02AM
I guess if the word is used for a range of groups, that makes the use of it as a description even more dangerous. Perhaps it needs qualifying : we could have a low-income accessible area, a poor-mobility area and a coloured accessible area to be sure we get the right one. Or maybe a venn-diagram-like area to get the right combination.
No, not serious., I thank you for your comment that, I think, allowed me to clarify my point with a reductio ad absurbam example.