Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “Conflict is Not Abuse: Overstating Harm, Community Responsibility, and the Duty of Repair” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

Conflict is Not Abuse: Overstating Harm, Community Responsibility, and the Duty of Repair

Sarah Schulman

3.86 · Rating details · 1,929 ratings · 412 reviews

From intimate relationships to global politics, Sarah Schulman observes a continuum: that inflated accusations of harm are used to avoid accountability. Illuminating the difference between Conflict and Abuse, Schulman directly addresses our contemporary culture of scapegoating. This deep, brave, and bold work reveals how punishment replaces personal and collective self-cri ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 299 pages

Published October 4th 2016 by Arsenal Pulp Press

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Conflict is Not Abuse, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Conflict is Not Abuse

Lists with This Book

The Anatomy of Prejudices by Elisabeth Young-Bruehl

Female Masculinity by J. Jack Halberstam

Books Mentioned By ContraPoints

20 books — 13 voters

Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race by Reni Eddo-Lodge

Da B00k Zone

15 books — 3 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 3.86 ·

Rating details

· 1,929 ratings · 412 reviews

Sort order

Start your review of Conflict is Not Abuse: Overstating Harm, Community Responsibility, and the Duty of Repair

Oct 21, 2016 Merritt K. added it

The response to this book was determined in part before it was even released, and I suspect many potential readers will dismiss it on hearsay about the author, which is both a shame and deeply ironic considering the book's topic. Or, people may encounter the audacious title and believe this is an apologia for violence, which it isn't. In fact, many of the book's claims seem pretty uncontroversial to me, and I expect would to many of these potential readers: the state has become the arbiter of va The response to this book was determined in part before it was even released, and I suspect many potential readers will dismiss it on hearsay about the author, which is both a shame and deeply ironic considering the book's topic. Or, people may encounter the audacious title and believe this is an apologia for violence, which it isn't. In fact, many of the book's claims seem pretty uncontroversial to me, and I expect would to many of these potential readers: the state has become the arbiter of various forms of conflict; people claim the language of abuse because to be conflicted is seen as not worthy of pity or assistance; and, perhaps this is somewhat controversial, that there are similarities in traumatized and supremacist responses to normative conflicts or situations which provoke a need to self-examine.

Actually, my main issues with the book lie in that it doesn't go far enough at times. For instance, Schulman posits that 'bad groups' are behind most shunning behavior, whether those groups are on the level of the nation-state or small circles of friends. There's ample sociological research on why and how groups expel individuals to enhance solidarity that goes back to Durkheim, but very little of this is present in the text. The repeated solution we're provided with is to 'stop hiding behind technology' and to have transformative, face-to-face interactions with those with whom we are in conflict.

Again, I'm sympathetic to Schulman's position, but the dynamics of mediated versus face-to-face communication are sketched out here in a way that ignores the huge amount of research and theory that's been built up around information technologies and social media. In place of evidence, we're given echoes of Sherry Turkle: we 'all know' email and texts let us hide and stifle real, human contact. It's an unsatisfying approach that will likely further alienate young readers, who will probably also be turned off by Schulman's dismissive gloss on the complex politics around trigger warnings on college campuses.

Which is a shame, because there is a lot of value in this book. The chapter on HIV criminalization alone represents decades of firsthand experience with the topic, and that's probably why it's one of the strongest parts of the book. Much of the text is more polemic, based on the author's personal experiences with occasional bits of historical or scientific evidence tossed in to strengthen these anecdotes, which is perhaps why they read as a little thin. But the chapters on HIV, Palestine, and the history of the women's movement let Schulman play to her strengths as a knowledgable, persuasive activist in these areas, and paint a compelling picture of the dynamics of shunning her thesis revolves around.

Perhaps because the chapters on more interpersonal dynamics are more, well, personal, they don't hold up in quite the same way. Many of the examples Schulman describes resonated with me, also a queer woman, but they may ring hollow to those outside these communities. It's tough, because the thesis of the book is clearly meant to be of broad generalizability, but so many of the examples provided are from specific communities that the evidence doesn't seem to line up with the scope. The link between interpersonal dynamics to large group dynamics also isn't quite as smooth as it could be. I expect some readers will easily accept Schulman's portraits of shunning around Palestine and HIV while contesting the depiction of many interpersonal abuse claims as fundamentally about conflict.

I've been hitting all this book's weaknesses and maybe that's a hedge against the accusation that by even considering it in detail, I am also, by transitive property, an apologist for abuse and violence -- a dynamic included in the book's analysis. To be sure, this is a somewhat uneven book that's more of a passionate and wide-ranging expostulation than an academic inquiry. But that argument, that intervention, is timely and worth making, and my hope is that enough people will read it to allow for a discussion of it on its own merits, rather than the whispered claims that surround it -- the kinds of claims the book itself so boldly takes on. ...more

flag 140 likes · Like · see review

Oct 09, 2016 Finn rated it really liked it

Sarah Schulman says this in the introduction, but in order to get anything out of this book I feel I must stress it: This is not a book that is to be treated as "right" or "wrong."

I say this mostly because I'm afraid many will read some of the more disagreeable notions and dismiss the whole project. I, personally, found many ideas within the book "wrong" and others spot-on "right" and a lot more that I would have worded differently to accommodate readers' feminist code of ethics and/or political Sarah Schulman says this in the introduction, but in order to get anything out of this book I feel I must stress it: This is not a book that is to be treated as "right" or "wrong."

I say this mostly because I'm afraid many will read some of the more disagreeable notions and dismiss the whole project. I, personally, found many ideas within the book "wrong" and others spot-on "right" and a lot more that I would have worded differently to accommodate readers' feminist code of ethics and/or political correctness (which I wager much of her readership is feminist and/or politically aware/sensitive).

What I want to tell my friends to do is read the Intro, Chapters 3, 5, 6, and the conclusion first. Chapters 4, 7, and 8 next. And then if you must, Chapter 1 and 2. I read the book in order, but half way through chapter 2 I was dismayed. There were too many offensive turn-offs to struggle through. Or too many examples of conflict that were petty and hard to take seriously. I also disagreed with some of her premises, like her assertion that there is a cut and dry distinction between "conflict" and "abuse," or that refusing communication with someone you're in conflict with is, by matter of fact, cruel and childish.

But as I settled myself into the book I became much more compelled by a lot of what she was saying and let my critical self go a little easier on her. The truth is she hits the nail on the head over and over again in illuminating the trend of those in conflict escalating the situation to avoid facing the whole truth of the matter, particularly if the whole truth requires self reflection. Perhaps her most controversial point in the book was the one that resonated the most with me: The people who are most likely to overstate harm are those who are triggered and reminded of past abuse or those who stand to lose certain social or political privileges. The tactics used to escalate conflicts and avoid accountability are strikingly similar between a person suffering from untreated or unprocessed PTSD and someone from a privileged position ("supremacist behavior" is what she calls it). What's going on internally is totally different of course, but externally both are known to overreact to a conflict, refuse any knowledge that may threaten their version of what has happened, and portray themselves as a victim and the person (or people) they're in conflict with as an abuser. The supremacist does this to maintain power and privilege. The traumatized does this because they're stuck in a past nightmare.
In both cases though, Schulman advocates for community intervention that seeks truth and reconciliation. And she also cautions against socially dysfunctional groups (be they family, friends, nation, clique) who unquestioningly "support" the person overstating harm and join in and escalate conflict.

This book is problematic. It also is what I've been waiting a long time for. I really want my friends to read it so we can talk about it together and tease out some of the weird parts and expand on the ideas that do put words to things we've experienced or done.
Really, it's just a relief to hear a firm argument for conflict resolution! For years I've felt so frustrated that the culture in my political community of how to handle conflict is to either stick your fingers in your ears and ignore it or to humiliate or banish someone. Even though I think these responses are sometimes warranted, I think they've become our only go-to's. Why does it seem so off the table to consider righting wrongs in a way that doesn't involve shunning, that might include reconciliation?

For those of you in the Bay, I heard she's speaking at Alley Cat books at the end of this month. Hit me up if you want to go! ...more

flag 86 likes · Like · see review

Aug 09, 2017 Micah rated it it was ok

Before the actual review: IF YOUR ACQUAINTANCE SAYS THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH AN ABUSIVE SITUATION PLEASE DO NOT FUCKING SIT THEM DOWN AND ASK THEM IF THEY'RE SURE IT'S *REALLY* ABUSE BECAUSE ONCE SARAH SCHULMAN SAID TO DO SO.
JUST
DO
NOT

PLEASE

Figure shit out in a way that doesn't involve questioning a potential survivor's narrative to their face, thnx

Okay, so the next thing about this book: FuuuUUUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck

I originally found this book through the Autostraddle interview and was c ...more

flag 81 likes · Like · see review

May 31, 2021 Mara rated it really liked it

Shelves: recommended-to-me, subscription, audio

This is a prime example of a book that I enjoyed for how much it made me think, not necessarily because I agreed with everything the author was arguing. I'm not entirely this frame is the right one for every kind of conflict, but I think particularly for online communities who are wrestling with the balance of accountability versus "cancellation," these notions of overstating harm and shunning could be useful jumping off points to help move a subcommunity forward after a conflict ...more

flag 43 likes · Like · see review

Feb 21, 2020 Michael rated it liked it

Shelves: 2020

Alternately insightful and irritating.

flag 42 likes · Like · see review

Apr 07, 2017 Gina rated it it was ok

Shelves: read-in-2017

I wish I had checked the author, considering how much I hated Gentrification of the Mind. The premise of this book is solid: individuals and groups often overreact to perceived or minimal danger and claim abuse and/or accuse others of abuse when the situation is more nuanced and reciprocal than that.

The problem with the way that the argument is presented is that it gives a very broad overview, invoking governmental power and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, while relying on personal examples fr ...more

flag 40 likes · Like · see review

Oct 11, 2016 Morgan M. Page rated it it was amazing

Sarah Schulman's remarkable Conflict is Not Abuse offers a nuanced look at conflict, group behaviour, and the consequences of overstating harm. Her book - which examines conflict and overstatement of harm on the local, national, and international scale - couldn't be more well-timed in an era of increasingly hostile responses to difference across culture. Whether it is the ceaseless flamewars of the Tumblr generation, the national scapegoating of people living with HIV through HIV criminalization ...more

flag 38 likes · Like · see review

Feb 15, 2017 C.E. G rated it liked it

Shelves: fun-nonfiction

I started out being really into this book, feeling personally challenged by it and writing down some quotes like, "Refusing to be self-critical in order to solve conflicts enhances the power of the state." I found it valuable to look at how both Supremacy and Trauma can lead to unhealthy responses to conflict.

However, the more I read, the more I felt like this book was Sarah Schulman intellectualizing her obsession with past rejections. Like, the title of the book includes "the duty of repair" ...more

flag 31 likes · Like · see review

Jan 31, 2019 Bryn (Plus Others) rated it did not like it

Shelves: not-finishing

I am going to do exactly what Schulman says humans being should never do; I am going to decide that Schulman's beliefs about how to treat other human beings are so pernicious and unpleasant that rather than remaining in relationship to her book, I am going to quit reading it and do something else with my time. She may have excellent points about community responsibility, but I will never know, because I am going to withdraw, withhold myself from the book, and in doing so profoundly harm this tex ...more

flag 28 likes · Like · see review

Aug 11, 2021 Jess Owens rated it liked it

2.5 rounded up.

Discussion: https://youtu.be/feUX4dhMr4Q ...more

flag 24 likes · Like · see review

Apr 01, 2017 Maggie Gordon rated it liked it

Shelves: non-fiction

Conflict is Not Abuse is a book I suspect many people will hate. However, it says some important and astute things about how society deals with conflict and abuse. Specifically, Schulman is writing a call to action for people to sort out problems with communication rather than label them as unworkable too quickly. She differentiates situations where one person abuses their power over another from situations where parties are mutually encountering difficulties with one another. She argues that co ...more

flag 19 likes · Like · see review

Jan 23, 2017 Madeleine rated it liked it

Shelves: theory, queer

* some gorgeous writing and really helpful correctives on the politics of victimhood. as someone who has been thru trauma it was so helpful to read about the narrative that when u face trauma ur expected to become a "virgin" who has done nothing wrong. that narrative also hurts people who have faced harm as they feel they can never live up to it.
* this is supposed to be a pragmatic book on how to communicate across difference within activist circles. but it's discussion on trigger warnings, like ...more

flag 17 likes · Like · see review

Feb 05, 2021 Justin Goodman rated it did not like it

Just read (or listen) to David Graber's "The Bully's Pulpit: On the Elementary Structure of Domination." Follow that up with Hi‘ilei Julia Kawehipuaakahaopulani Hobart and Tamara Kneese's "Radical Care." Then read the Audre Lorde cited in the latter essay.

This book is profoundly harmful in its confusion. Instead of pointing out how it reinforces the culture of shame victims of trauma go through (as done in this review from The New Inquiry), or how it reads like an attempt to target college deans Just read (or listen) to David Graber's "The Bully's Pulpit: On the Elementary Structure of Domination." Follow that up with Hi‘ilei Julia Kawehipuaakahaopulani Hobart and Tamara Kneese's "Radical Care." Then read the Audre Lorde cited in the latter essay.

This book is profoundly harmful in its confusion. Instead of pointing out how it reinforces the culture of shame victims of trauma go through (as done in this review from The New Inquiry), or how it reads like an attempt to target college deans' curriculums and conservative Democrats who quickly adopted progressive label (like Magally suggests), or focus on how a memoirish style doesn't work when you're trying to conflate apartheid states and relationship disputes, I want to quickly say why my two short recommendations are better than this book.

This is a book completely untethered from a historically grounded analysis or an analysis of power, and feels like it would sit comfortably on a shelf with consultant-oriented books like White Fragility and Lean In.

By understanding supremacy as a collection of individual actions, Schulman misunderstands power, and so can make the (frankly parodical sounding) claim that trauma and supremacy are equivalent in any manner. It leads her to misunderstand that the actions she claims are similar between them (e.g. shunning, which she calls, without clarification, a form of harassment) aren't both informed by a desire to dominate - and have that desire "in order to feel comfortable," whatever that means - but by a relationship to oppressive systems. Those who identify with the system want to preserve that relationship, and those who are oppressed and traumatized want control in an attempt to gain autonomy from it.

In that sense they are clearer, more concise, and provide actual practical ways to respond to the situation. And they don't trip over themselves with such outrageous statements like "Email creates repression and anxiety" and "We are no longer allowed to drop by unannounced when things are fraught," as if changes in social norms and communication tech are the cause of generations-long conflicts.

If you're looking for something more personal, something therapeutic-oriented, and found this book a helpful description of conflict in trauma, I also genuinely recommend reading bell hooks' essay "Revolutionary Black Women: Making Ourselves Subject" which details the same concept (how trauma can create repressive mechanisms) but in a way that affirms the experience of trauma and envisions self-affirmation as both interpersonal and politically revolutionary. ...more

flag 16 likes · Like · see review

May 16, 2017 Erin rated it liked it

I have so much to say about this book. It was frustrating, radical, oversimplified, deeply complicated, powerful, provocative, brilliant, problematic, insightful and self important. I really do believe it should be widely read mostly because I want to talk about it with everyone.

Highlights for me include resisting the idea that people are disposable, emphasis on reparation, the importance of taking DEEP accountability, and the linkage between community shunning and privilege/White supremacy.

Fo ...more

flag 16 likes · Like · see review

Jul 25, 2021 Lola Sebastian rated it it was amazing

Shelves: best-nonfiction

Everyone should read Conflict is Not Abuse and from hereon out will refer to it constantly. I’m not surprised by the backlash tho. It’s a challenging text that demands a lot of critical thinking and demands you re-evaluate your positions on a few topics as you’re reading it. And people (especially internet people) hate that. They hate being told that they’re wrong, or that they should be more thoughtful and considerate.

…Which is exactly why they should read this book.

So I guess my final thought ...more

flag 14 likes · Like · see review

May 13, 2017 Bookworm rated it it was ok

Made me think, don't agree with all of it. "Snowflakes." Liberal college campuses are denying speakers freedom of speech. Oh, don't like what I said? Do you need a safe space? Are you triggered? Are you upset over the election?

While this book is not specifically about any of the above, I definitely thought of some of the ongoing discussions/arguments (depending on how you put it) and the conflicts that arise. Author Schulman takes the reader on why and how things like texting and emails are har Made me think, don't agree with all of it. "Snowflakes." Liberal college campuses are denying speakers freedom of speech. Oh, don't like what I said? Do you need a safe space? Are you triggered? Are you upset over the election?

While this book is not specifically about any of the above, I definitely thought of some of the ongoing discussions/arguments (depending on how you put it) and the conflicts that arise. Author Schulman takes the reader on why and how things like texting and emails are harmful for communication, the difference between conflict and abuse (and how to resolve them), how this dynamic can manifest on both the personal level and within the public sphere, and so forth.

I was not familiar with her background prior to reading this book but despite some of the mixed reviews I thought this would be an interesting book that would be good reading. And it was, but I'm not sure how helpful this can be since I couldn't help but feel the author is writing very much from her own personal experiences (which in itself is not terrible but not always applicable to other people) and may not fully realize some of the complex issues that go on in many of the situations she writes about.

For example, I honestly wondered if she's had bad experiences with the silent treatment or ghosting. She blames the person who refuses to talk for "withholding" and that it's detrimental to everyone involved. Or she talks about an example of receiving an email cancellation for a lunch date and says "Email creates repression and anxiety" (pg 45). She honestly reminded me of anecdotes that I've heard where the romantic relationship ended yet one partner insists on "hashing it out" or "working through our issues" or whatever but it becomes a long, dragged out process where's clear that partner just doesn't want to let go and often doesn't accept it until the other party deliberately puts up barriers (cutting off all contact, blocking on social media, sending a third party to communicate to leave them alone, etc.).

Or, in another example in the introduction, she talks about how her high school guidance counselor warned her not to tell her parents about her sexual orientation due to their homophobia. She writes that by doing so "he upheld the distorted thinking, unjustified punishment, and exclusion." Schulman continues to write that if she is in a similar situation now with her students, she offers to speak to the parents, to provide alternatives, "to intervene and stand up to brutality in order to protect its recipient and transform their context" (pg 27).

I honestly found that quite misguided. She made it about her and what she would do but what about the students? What is their background, could they be in danger if they were outed to their parents/peers/community, do they have resources, do they WANT to come out? I do not share her experiences but this made me incredibly uncomfortable. Certainly there are many situations where having someone like a professor speak on your behalf can be quite helpful but I was puzzled by the lack discussion on the possible dangers too.

That said, I think there is merit to the book. I can agree that sometimes there is a reaction for too quick of a judgment in situations that really could be resolved by an honest conversation where both parties do want to resolve the situation before it escalates. Email and texting are handy as forms of communication but sometimes there is an essence lost when communicating that way.

But in the end, I feel the author thinks there should be a greater level of engagement and assumes too much: that both parties want to resolve the situation amiably, that there is an equal dynamic (the want for communication *can* become abusive by demanding someone's time, emotional labor, maybe even money if it requires travel or phone minutes, etc.). On a personal level I can respect that and have encountered people who feel the same way that Schulman does: more communication, that people should be willing to educate, etc. But I do thinks she projects a little too much of her own personal preferences and feels entitled to something that not everyone wants to give.

People also liked her chapter on HIV and the chapter on Israel and Palestine but honestly I can't help but be a bit jaded as to how much of her own personal biases may have played a part after the initial chapters. They were also not topics that interested me (and quite frankly felt out of place--sometimes the author really didn't do a great job in switching/transitional between the personal and the not so much). At times it also felt like the author put down a lot of words but didn't actually SAY anything substantive.

Again, it made me think and I would be interested in reading more but at the same time it felt like the author is in a bit of a bubble. I'd borrow it from the library or get it as a bargain book.
...more

flag 13 likes · Like · see review

Aug 29, 2020 Mehrsa rated it really liked it

This book was so thought-provoking. I can see how it would be controversial to many because she wades into every controversial topic that ever existed in the book, but it's a refreshing and fascinating take. ...more

flag 11 likes · Like · see review

Jun 12, 2017 Mike rated it liked it

Oof, I don't know how to rate this book.

The highlights of Schulman's Conflict Is Not Abuse are as follows: (1) Chapter 4, which deals with the criminalization of HIV-positive individuals in Canada, because it teases out what seems to be an inevitable dynamic of state control even within something as glorified by progressives as nationalized health care, as well as underscoring a serious point about an insatiable appetite for punitive response that creates a cascading clusterfuck of error and mis Oof, I don't know how to rate this book.

The highlights of Schulman's Conflict Is Not Abuse are as follows: (1) Chapter 4, which deals with the criminalization of HIV-positive individuals in Canada, because it teases out what seems to be an inevitable dynamic of state control even within something as glorified by progressives as nationalized health care, as well as underscoring a serious point about an insatiable appetite for punitive response that creates a cascading clusterfuck of error and mistake; (2) a fascinating "case study" of how the occupation of the Gaza Strip unfolded "live" over social media (or, at least the way Sarah Schulman's filter bubble curated it for her), if only because it's such a fresh execution of the events as well as a way to create an effective, if a bit broad, analogy about how nation-states can shun, trigger, shame, react on trauma, react from Supremacy, overstate harm, or punish the people in the present for other people's sins of the past (just like people do on a small-scale); and (3) a brilliant section about how the integration of LGBTQ+ citizens into the traditional "family" model also makes them more susceptible to the pitfalls of statehood ideologies, of becoming more conservative and segmenting a vibrant community. Actually, the whole chapter on family is excellent because it argues the notion of a "good family" is contingent upon a definition of loyalty that involves being immoral to people in the "out-group", thereby aping a brutish form of tribalism; it also tells a stunning anecdote of a Hungarian mother who burned Monet paintings that her son stole so that he could evade punishment, a championed exercise in maternal protection that caused immeasurable loss to the cultural wealth of the world. I do think the gay community needs to be more careful about who and what it is giving up by diving headfirst into the eternally problematic mainstream, and that chapter outlines precisely why "family" is overrated and why "Arrested Development" had it right until it got it wrong.

On the other hand, there are still components of this book that are a little hokey: in Chapter 5, Schulman does a quick survey of different fields and domains who seem to be validating what she is saying about shunning and triggering: she does casual, broad-brush assessments of the tenets of mindfulness, of Alcoholics Anonymous, and pop psychology to demonstrate how they, too, get at what she's getting at. The problem is it's just not that impressive: the throwing around of borderline personality disorder has having similar symptoms to those experienced by both the Traumatized and those drunk on Supremacy ideology is too lax and free for my tastes; she uses a corporate, TED-talk-famous mindfulness expert and could have done a better job going into MBSR even if it were a quick introduction; and I'm surprised Schulman is onboard with something deserving of as much skepticism as pop psychology, or championing something as demonstrably untrue and incorrect as the fundamentals of Freudian psychoanalysis. She chases it with a bizarre and altogether incoherent comparison of her own "Conflict is not abuse" ideology with the "ownership of personal responsibility" component of Alcoholics Anonymous, which is fine if Al-Anon didn't have its fair share of reasonable detractors. This whole chapter is redolent of a very contrived rounding up of the cavalry, a desperate plea to underscore her own authority by extracting as many alliances as she can out of the literature available to her. Once it gets to Al-Anon you get the sense she's sucking blood from a stone. There is more literature available to her, but it seems she didn't reach that far beyond her own periphery for them.

This is not to say Schulman is altogether incorrect: I think she's doing the right thing by looking into some of the mythologies and knee-jerk reactions we have about personal responsibility, overstating harm, and drawing meaningful parallels between the practices exercised by both the traumatized and the bigoted. She's careful to emphasize that reflection on your personal responsibility in a matter is meant for personal growth, not for apportioning blame or fault. Thing is, I know she is correct about this because the only way I personally was able to get over my sexual assault was to liberate myself from blame, look into why I let myself get carried away with losing my virginity as soon as possible, and confronting my assaulter directly. I had been uncomfortable saying rape for so long but succumbed to it once friends told me repeatedly I should just say that's what it was, and I feel that I capitulated to the demand for a simpler story and an easier victimhood even though it didn't ring true to my experience. "I was invited to victimology, but I am very glad that I'd found the strength to resist the image of myself as being more aggressed than I actually was," Schulman (72) writes, and this sentence resonated with me hard. The first paragraph of page 89, too long to copy here, is a must-read for any curious survivors.

I always enjoy a read that brings nuance, alternative modes of thought, daring, and a potential freeing to the table. She lets us know that traumatized people will often ally themselves with Supremacists, and are allowed to so long as it's politically convenient. This is a great way to do the "we're not so different, you and I" speech that is demonstrated by the rise in visible homonationalism in the US and Europe. For that, I really like the basics of what Schulman is saying, but I still think that Conflict Is Not Abuse could be a better book. Instead, Schulman relies on her own momentum as a non-scholarly, non-theoretical writer too much: she quotes her own Gentrification of the Mind with unnecessary regularity. Her complaint about how e-mail and text message removes tone and capacity for understanding is repetitive, tired, and better sold by the closing example of her book - which is fantastic - than by the pontificating of the earlier chapters. She rightly appeals to her own subjective experience with the disclaimer that it's her personal experience, but she's still presenting the events as if they are objective demonstrations to her case. At other points the writing is long-winded, too informal, confusing, erratic, or something akin to that. The first 2 chapters only held my attention sporadically.

On the other hand, Chapter 3 is essential reading for why we shouldn't call the police, and why we shouldn't rely on the police to put punitive measures on a partner when it may just require two Conflicted people coming together and communicating reasonably. Schulman's assessments of the police are on-point and rewarding in this book, no doubt. In fact, most of the substance here is. But I felt like Schulman chose a very specific methodology for this book more out of convenience than out of specific principle or intent. This is how she wanted it, no doubt. Conflict Is Not Abuse is not always agreeable but it's always smart. I honestly don't know how to rate it because of the chasm between its content and its form (and my inability to pinpoint some of my reservations with the form). There are also parts of it that I simply don't know how I feel about them or how to find out what I should feel about them.

I'll punt it and give it 3 and will evaluate it with time; it definitely changed how I view so much in my relationships and the conflicts existing in them, and I do strongly recommend it. Sigh, I don't know. ...more

flag 10 likes · Like · see review

Mar 13, 2020 Clare rated it liked it

For the political book club we decided March's read would be Sarah Schulman's Conflict Is Not Abuse, a book I had heard recommended before. I had mixed feelings going into it because, while I'd had it recommended to me by a variety of people, many of whom are perfectly lovely, I had also had it recommended by a non-zero number of people whose understanding of conflict not being abuse was transparently "When I do it it's conflict and when you do it it's abuse," so, yeah, that's awkward.

The boo ...more

flag 9 likes · Like · see review

Apr 19, 2021 akemi rated it it was ok

Shelves: trauma-recovery, pure-ideology, black-passings, femme-af, queer-owos

holy fuck, this was a trip.

so, general premise:

we need to differentiate conflict from abuse. conflict is a situation that generates discomfort, anxiety, anger or fear. abuse is a situation where one's body or being is under threat.

too often we conflate conflict with abuse. this is bad, because once the other is marked as an abuser, they are often cut off from their social circles, harassed, arrested or, at extremes, killed. Our culture of believing victims of abuse, without hearing the other si

...more

flag 9 likes · Like · see review

Nov 06, 2017 Anna rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Shelves: activist

I did not care for this steaming pile of victim-blaming garbage. It's like everything you ever hated about. I would definitely recommend not taking this book's advice to interrogate your peers if they disclose having been abused to play detective about whether they were "really abused." There's a whole lot of WTF throughout, but the section where the author makes excuses for a woman punching her in the head (?!) If someone punched me- first of all I would file a police report (and I might get fl ...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Jan 03, 2017 Casey rated it did not like it

The overall focus of the book is interpersonal relationships which is not what I expected going in. Schulman was right to preface the book by saying it isn't a book to be agreed with or disagreed with because there is a hell of a lot to disagree with, or at least seriously wonder about. ...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Oct 07, 2016 Scott rated it it was amazing

I flew through this book, which resonated strongly and speaks to the possibilities of restorative justice on personal, interpersonal, and global levels. It illustrates how a supremacist society that so intensely polices who deserves compassion (and why) can lead to traumatized behavior mirroring (& perpetuating) supremacy behavior - though for different reasons. It lays bare everyone's responsibility to self-reflect and engage in conversation and listen without hiding behind technology or misuse ...more

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Mar 18, 2021 Navya rated it liked it

Shelves: genre-non-fiction-general, 2021, topic-queer, challenge-readingwomen2021

This book was very spicy

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Feb 16, 2020 Esther Espeland rated it liked it

Shelves: zestys-books-for-friends-to-borrow

There was a lot I didn’t agree with but I value the questions it asked. Didn’t love her terminology, esp in her descriptions of “triggered events” but she brings an interesting perspective to discussions of community accountability and restorative justice. Def spent most of therapy talking abt it lmao

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Nov 16, 2019 Amani Ariel rated it liked it

I struggled immensely with this book. I was hooked after the introduction — Schulman presents some incredibly important ideas around the overstating of harm on interpersonal, structural and nation state levels. She presents ideas about abuse, conflict and the overstatement of harm in a way I’ve never read on the page and leaves me thinking deeply about my relationships to others and the world, and where there is a lack thereof. As I considered reading, however, I found Schulman to walk a fine li ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Nov 17, 2020 Zuri rated it really liked it

Shelves: audiobook, read-in-2020, non-fiction

Wow. What a wild ride. I listened to this book a couple months ago and it's around 10 hours and read by the author. Schulman is a fine reader, if monotone, but the book doesn't really require more than that. It is kind of in the middle of memoir and academic (sociology or history) nonfiction genres. I think the assertion of the book "conflict is not abuse" is definitely interesting, something to think and talk about. I'm not sure I can say if it is true or not yet, but I keep thinking about it, Wow. What a wild ride. I listened to this book a couple months ago and it's around 10 hours and read by the author. Schulman is a fine reader, if monotone, but the book doesn't really require more than that. It is kind of in the middle of memoir and academic (sociology or history) nonfiction genres. I think the assertion of the book "conflict is not abuse" is definitely interesting, something to think and talk about. I'm not sure I can say if it is true or not yet, but I keep thinking about it, and what I have learned in this book. The book is in 3 parts (there is a LOT packed into each part though..maybe too much).
I think, esp in this current moment when people are focused on abolition and mutual aid, learning about how to deal with conflict is super important. A culture based on policing will always go right to punishment and shunning, literally disappearing people into prisons over conflict. So I think in big (like not criminalizing HIV positive people who don't disclose their status when having consensual sex) and small ways, (like having a conversation with a friend about an argument before cutting them off) we can all think about the ways we experience conflict and how we respond to it. Because conflict will definitely happen, and it's normal and can be regenerative, but since we don't always have the skills to anticipate it, prevent it, and communicate through it, (or just don't want to) we end up throwing people away. That being said, I think there's more nuance than Schulman really writes about, which are mostly personal stories abt herself or her friends. In some places where actual domestic/interpersonal violence occurs, I just don't know if we can flat out say that hitting a partner or friend in an argument should count as conflict and not abuse. There's also a large section on the Israeli occupation of Palestine & the 2nd intifada, told through Facebook posts and tweets. I can't even begin to imagine what this looks like in book form, but Schulman just reading messages aloud one after the other gets tiring, and probably isn't the most effective way to talk abt people's differing opinions on that. But, I've brought this book up to my therapist a few times, and it tbh has been very helpful to me to think about how I deal with conflict with people I love or am/want to be in community with, and really communicating together to hear how each of us understood the experience of conflict so we can resolve it. I'll probably read this one again. ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Sep 12, 2020 Tintin rated it liked it

The general gist of Conflict Is Not Abuse is a concept that is basically described by the title, and I believe that this is an important distinction that Schulman thoroughly explores throughout the book. In particular, I enjoyed her reading of the Canadian state and HIV criminalization and the ceding of intervention to the police as a consequence of shunning behaviours.

At times the argument felt a bit like, well if we just talked face to face and didn’t hide behind our computers we could all ge ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Nov 30, 2016 Macartney rated it it was amazing

Shelves: lady-writers, new, gay-lit, hiv-aids

Surely to be a textbook for activists and engaged citizens for at least the next four years. Erudite and intricate. Wide-ranging, but well-focused. A true achievement that is built upon yet fuller than her previous non-fiction. If we can survive the dark days ahead, it will be because of thinkers and writers and truth tellers and idea explorers like Schulman.

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Dec 15, 2020 Lucy Monaghan rated it it was amazing

In her introduction, Schulman warns that she doesn't expect the reader to agree with everything she writes. She encourages thinking of her work as a play, where you come out thinking about its concepts and ideas, rather than decreeing "the play is right."

If you're unable to engage with Conflict Is Not Abuse in this way, you're going to hate it. If you can, you'll enjoy a confronting book that offers some invaluable insights.

Many of Schulman's assertions were ones I instinctively disagreed with. ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Nonfiction

239 users

Psychology

86 users

Politics

54 users

Social Movements > Social Justice

32 users

Feminism

30 users

LGBT > Queer

28 users

Sociology

23 users

Philosophy

23 users

Health > Mental Health

20 users

Self Help

17 users

See top shelves…

About Sarah Schulman

Sarah Schulman

483 followers

Sarah Schulman is a longtime AIDS and queer activist, and a cofounder of the MIX Festival and the ACT UP Oral History Project. She is a playwright and the author of seventeen books, including the novels The Mere Future, Shimmer, Rat Bohemia, After Delores, and People in Trouble, as well as nonfiction works such as The Gentrification of the Mind: Witness to a Lost Imagination, My American History: ...more

Books by Sarah Schulman

The Gentrification of the Mind: Witness to a Lost Imagination

More…

News & Interviews

Span Centuries with These 20 Time-Hopping Favorite Reads

Some of the best stories take a few hundred years to tell. But if you're in the mood for uncanny connections, hoping back and forth through...

Trivia About Conflict is Not A...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Conflict is Not A...

“My thesis is that at many levels of human interaction there is the opportunity to conflate discomfort with threat, to mistake internal anxiety for exterior danger, and in turn to escalate rather than resolve.” — 13 likes

“The real question is: Why would a person rather have an enemy than a conversation? Why would they rather see themselves as harassed and transgressed instead of have a conversation that could reveal them as an equal participant in creating conflict? There should be a relief in discovering that one is not being persecuted, but actually, in the way we have misconstrued these responsibilities, sadly the relief is in confirming that one has been “victimized.” It comes with the relieving abdication of responsibility.” — 9 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — Conflict is Not Abuse by Sarah Schulman

Conflict is Not Abuse: Overstating Harm, Community Responsibility, and the Duty of Repair

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Sarah Schulman

Books by Sarah Schulman

News & Interviews

Trivia About Conflict is Not A...

Quotes from Conflict is Not A...

See a Problem?

Preview — Conflict is Not Abuse by Sarah Schulman

Conflict is Not Abuse: Overstating Harm, Community Responsibility, and the Duty of Repair

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Sarah Schulman

Books by Sarah Schulman

News & Interviews

Trivia About Conflict is Not A...

Quotes from Conflict is Not A...

new topic
Discuss This Book