Women's Encuentro Dispatch:

We request that the Owl Collective, as it is currently conceived, continue to perform the tasks of maintaining the Icarus Project. We recommend the transition from the current power holders to a more expansive collective structure being guided by a Transition Team comprised of individuals who resonate with the goals of the Icarus Project. We would like to see this Transition Team include only people who are self-selected rather than people who have been invited. These folks need to reflect diverse voices that have been overlooked in the past.

Person one:

It needs to include openness, slow and conscious intentions, inclusion and easy ways to participate, regardless of functionality or
skill-sets. I would like to see the owl collective either dissolved or radically opened up and widened.  I would like to see more of TIP's leadership coming from the local groups and the dedicated web users, and less from the "organizers." The changes that we all want to see in society will begin on the ground, from the roots and grow taller from there, not the other way around. What have been the organizers at the top needs to become the foundation at the base, laid to build higher on its shoulders. I would like to see TIP making conscious steps to be more of a network and less of a singular organization. This work is not dependent on funding in a non-profit model, it is it's own form of activism based on a peer-support model.  It's about community building, skill sharing, inclusiveness and self-determination.

Person Two:

• I would like to see TIP move towards a lot more openness, and a more limited scope and scale of projects.
• I would like to see TIP operate slower, with patience and a thoughtfulness that creates a lot of room for good process, inclusiveness, and different kinds of ability.
• I would like to see the owl collective either dissolved or radically opened and widened.
• I would like to see more of TIP's leadership coming from the local groups and the dedicated web users, and less from the "organizers."
• I would like to see TIP be more of a network and less of an organization.
• I would like to see TIP rely less on funding and a non-profit model and more on an activism and peer-support model. If this means that TIP organization/staff needs to get smaller to accommodate a smaller budget, and have smaller goals, and promote itself less in the media as a big international movement, I don't see what's wrong with that.  I think that the impetus towards growth, growth, growth is really capitalist in a certain way and not actually very community building. From what I can figure out, community takes time, patience, attention, and relationship building, not lots and lots of new ideas coming from the top down.
• I would like to see the next Encuentro be an actual encuentro -- as in, Encounter. As in, people meet up, in person, and get to know each other, share food, and life, and conversation. People talk, play instruments, and hang out. Several different people write about it each day and post on the website so members of the online community who couldn't come can see what's happening. Maybe there are regional encuentros, to minimize travel and its impact on the environment and our pocketbooks. Who knows?  I would propose that such an encuentro not be organized by the owl collective. I would propose that such an encuentro (or encuentros) not even happen unless the whole icarus network wants it to happen. And if they don't -- then something else happens. Or nothing, and we heal.

Person Three:

• I would like to see icarus develop it's goals and mission statement into something concrete, with an understanding that not everyone in the world will be served by it, nor agree with it and that this is ok.
• I would like to see actual communities developing so that people feel less alienated and learn more about how they can live healthy lives by sharing/developing their skills.
• I would like to see the flashy manic elements toned down to give room for those that move at a slower pace, remembering that there is wisdom in both.
• I would like there to be more critical thinking around medications, alternatives, the health industry, etc, with room for discussion and disagreement in a healthy way.
• I would like there to be more dialogue around healthy ways to live on or off meds, without either side feeling defensive or shame.
• I would like there to be less talk of jobs and structure and more talk of practical &/or spiritual ways of living with madness. In the future I would like to see concrete spaces for people to connect, taking TIP off the net and further into the lives of people.

Closing remarks for all…

My observation is that money is the biggest root of our issues, or rather paid positions. It creates divisions between people, creative ideas, work that needs to be done, who has been around longer, experience, directed towards certain types of madness or labels, and so on. Paying people for creativity or "organizing" of creative ideas or people is very odd, capitalistic, hierarchical and patriarchal due to what is generally considered worthy of payment. I think it is amazing that people give the project money, but it is my firm belief that the project would flourish if the money went not towards salaries but towards projects (farm, community center, materials...). The issue has been raised that people will not do the work if they are not compensated but I disagree. If it is something people love and believe in people will make it happen. I didn't volunteer for the site those years because I was getting paid, but because I loved the community. Local groups are not started because people will make money, but because they love the message.  People don't need to be bought if the message is clear and the results are tangible. Contributions will come because people want to be a part of a community that accepts them for who they are and will ultimately fight to keep it alive.

May these words be cast out as a banishing spell so that each of us can heal and move onto creating a stronger community.

Person Four:

In general, a huge issue that i have with tip is that there is no formal built-in accountability generated from outside sources when projects are planned.  Which I think is part of why the pattern of deeply problematic power (sharing) dynamics was allowed to continue relatively unchecked, because checks of power only came from other internal staff, who are all caught up emotionally and socially and sometimes romantically with each other.

In the future, I think something akin to a board, that ensures that paid staff (who gain legitimacy and funding on the grounds of its membership on the web and on the ground) and other projects that are directly related to icarus national, must be accountable to their constituents.  Something like the individuals on the collective calls, but with much more information sharing, transparency, and decision making power being afforded to the "board."  This would also help to break down the staff/volunteer hierarchy.

Person Five:

I've been thinking a lot about some of our options in structuring Icarus and what might be most useful. I think the Gay Liberation Front might be our best role model in terms of structure. They were a national organization (1969-72ish) with independent local chapters that shared a similar vision and mission. Locally, each was an umbrella organization, with independent "cells". This is similar to the spoke-and-hub model.

They held general meetings where the cells reported back; this is where new members came and were introduced to the group itself and the various cells. These could happen monthly, so people would have an easier time committing to attend (I'm thinking here of NYC Icarus and how daunting it is to bottom-line a weekly meeting, a large part of why the group petered out).

This structure would also "resolve" some of the dialogues I see in Icarus by making room for many sides of the dialogue to be active. I'm thinking for example of the longtime dialogue over whether Icarus is just for "bipolar" folks or for the crazy community at large (and the many different experiences/"diagnoses"/patterns within that community). People of differing experience could spinoff and talk/act about that in ways that feel useful to them, while maintaining their connection to the larger umbrella organization. I'm also thinking of the dialogue over support versus action — this would make room for both, for people to do what they felt comfortable with and energized by.

Person Six:

ok. So here's some thoughts I have about the Icarus change/transition. Many of these are questions. These questions are not necessarily intended for you all to answer. Rather, I think that answering some of these questions may help the group (whoever we/you want to define as "the group") more fully understand what type of transition, and transition to what, it will most benefit from.

• I want to see Icarus open to all, so no one needs to be asked, or have to ask, to join.
• I have a lot of questions about the owl collective, and what it could look like. What is its purpose? What is the "job description/responsibilities" of the owl collective? (some things that come to mind: acting as the glue, maintain website, create publications, raise funds, pr, give workshops).
• What is the priority of the owl collective: national? local? International?
• Based upon the purpose, "job description/responsibility," and priority of the owl collective, do members of this group need to be located in the same region?
• Ideally, how do we envision the owl collective functioning? Does it need to exist?  (this ties into what its purpose is)
• With a more open membership, a clear definition of how one can acquire decision making privileges (ie: attend three meetings) that is made public would be very nice. (I see a button on the website that says "get involved" or something like that and it clearly outlines how one can go about doing that, and that process is the same for everyone)
• I can see Icarus running as a cooperative, in a lot of ways. What the owl collective/paid folks are doing could be guided by the membership as a whole. Since web communication methods are already set up, a transition to this type of communication, and to the collective being held accountable to the membership, could happen pretty easily.
• I would love to see, within the group as a whole, a continuation in a commitment to anti-oppression work, addressing power and privilege within the collective
• I really like the idea of regional Icarus Encuentros--- like regional social forums,  with workshops, skill shares, etc. members from regional groups can give report backs, sharing what they've been up to
• I guess my biggest question in all my thoughts is, what if icarus looked like a federation of Icarus collective regional groups? What if it used a model based on cooperatives? Each of those groups would be members, and the members could work together (like a cooperative) to define the direction and actions of the national group. This would create a member-driven, bottom-up, model for making decisions for the collective. Jeez, we could even have annual general meetings, where all members that were able could gather together to talk about what they've been up, what they want to see the collective doing, etc.

Multiple People:

• A need for Sascha to step back from a position of power and enter into some kind of counseling
• A need for TIP to deal with incidents of sexual power imbalance or sexual harassment promptly in the future.