Bridging vs. Affinity
Introduction
We believe that social change moves at the speed of relationships, and that relationships move at the speed of trust. As the pandemic made all too clear, no one individual or group or organization can tackle our biggest problems alone. We have to work together, and that demands we be able to talk with one another. To quote former Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy, “relationship is the foundation of dialogue.” And dialogue is the foundation on which we build something better. What does it take to honestly examine our own stories, and to listen as others share theirs? And how might we use those stories and the truths they reveal to create a more equitable future? Sometimes, precisely what it takes is giving people a chance to talk with others who “get it.” Though that might seem counterintuitive, we need both **bridging spaces—**where people can connect across identity lines, or across an array of experiences—and **affinity spaces—**where people can connect with others who share their identity or experience. This module will explore both spaces: what are they, when should we use which, and how they can help us meet our goals.
Watch
Video transcript
Let’s start with some definitions:
-
Affinity Groups are designed to strengthen our individual and collective resolve by speaking about the truth of our experiences from our particular identities or experiences. You might create an affinity space so that people have community in an otherwise isolating experience, or you might build affinity groups as a part of a larger series of gatherings. Although it may seem counter-intuitive, breaking out into affinity spaces based on common experience builds resilience and capacity to have hard conversations across differences.
-
Bridging Groups are an opportunity to escape our echo chambers, and to connect deeply with folks of different backgrounds, different faiths and different beliefs, different racial and ethnic identities, different genders and sexualities, different worldviews, and yes, even different voting habits. And over time, they can even be a chance to build meaningful relationships with people you wouldn’t meet otherwise. Together we seek to repair the breach in our interpersonal relationships across political, ideological, and identity differences, by bringing participants together for a chance to go beneath the headlines, and to understand the real stories that have shaped who we are.
I’d like to give you two examples to consider:
- We advised a group in Philadelphia who was looking to bring people together in order to address gun violence in their community. They decided on doing a series of gatherings for people in multiple faith communities. The affinity spaces were not based on identity, but on experience. They created an affinity space for folks who had specifically lost someone to gun violence. It felt important for this group to be able to share with others who would understand before they pivoted to a diverse ideological group to have a conversation about policy.
- Whenever we have a gathering to talk across racial lines about race and racism in a particular community, we always include at least one, if not two, affinity gatherings for people to dialogue with others from their particular racial group. Affinity groups for the BIPOC participants focus on being a space of healing, and a chance to reflect on the unique struggles their communities face in their particular city or workplace. Affinity groups for the white participants focus on examining the role of race in their own lives, and on building awareness of what it means to be white allies in the work of equity, diversity and inclusion.
One important note is to be really sharp about what exactly your affinity groups are going to be. Remember that none of us exists in monolith. We each contain a multitude of identities and experiences that shape our perspectives and who we are. You want to avoid asking someone to choose one of their identities over the other in your series. For example, if you’re going to have a series on race, you want all of your affinity groups to be aligned with racial identity. You want to acknowledge intersectionality — a term coined by Dr. Kimberlé Crenshaw, which recognizes where different sources of power or oppression (for example, race and gender) intersect and collide. This means you would not include a separate affinity space based on gender or sexuality, therefore demanding that participants choose one identity over another.
Case Study & Activity
While the examples in the video are about affinity groups as part of a larger gathering series, The Dinner Party is a great example of an affinity experience that stands alone: everyone who is part of The Dinner Party is between the age of 20-45 and has experienced a significant loss, and joins this community to navigate life after loss with others who understand. As this community has grown, they have created even more specific affinity groups within it: some based on identity, some based on loss experience. Spend some time exploring the current table options on The Dinner Party community platform. Then, take a look at these two table examples:
What do you notice?