Awww, Does Someone Need an Inside-Outside Mask Directive?

For those who attended the Social Justice Caucus, you might remember a thread of conversation about the SJC identity. Who is the SJC and what is our goal/mission statement? Who are we at the core, and what do we wish to show and do for AATA, the counseling community and the communities we serve?

This would be a great opportunity for us to come together and begin a dialogue about what Social Justice means to each of us. In doing so, we find commonalities that will guide our scope and shape our actions.

So we ask: Where does Social Justice start, and when is it reaching past the scope of its intent? Or does it ever? Is it highly personalized or supremely focused? Who feels comfortable engaging in social justice activity without endangering their own identity(s)? Are there any issues of social importance that some feel should wear certain faces? If so, does that make that particular issue exclusionary and thereby negate the whole point, or does it strengthen the work we do?

These are important questions, and I'm sure there's a thousand more. We welcome any and all thoughts for an honest discussion on what will be some very powerful issues. But I also think that one thing I can safely say is that our roles in Social Justice are going to be highly personalized. They will be based on experience and belief, values and cultural affiliations. And we would do well to honor and respect all of the opinions and truths of everyone.

The pebble in the pond and the ripple effect comes to mind. Small changes begin great reward. The awareness of our own frailties and beautiful imperfections can help inform our experience in setting change in motion.