ACR’s Response to Robert Benjamin’s article titled: Dirty Little Secrets: ACR’s ‘Girly Man’ Non-Controversy

Robert’s article raises questions and concerns about ACR and its decision making process. ACR board and staff leadership agree with Robert’s goal of engaging a broad ring of members in the decisions that affect the future of the organization.

Robert notes that we live in a world full of conflicts and calls on ACR to invite members to engage in discussions related to the real conflicts of our day. ACR leadership has historically found itself in conflicts within the organization (merger is one example) and within the field (certification is one example), and we acknowledge that more can be done to invigorate and engage members in the conflicts of the day.

ACR welcomes constructive criticism and dialog and the opportunity to respond to correct some specific factual errors in Robert’s article that result in presenting a negative picture of the organization and of a conference that was well received.

The article calls for transparency regarding the ACR Board and its meetings. In fact, all ACR Board meetings are open to members except for Executive Sessions when confidential personnel matters need to be discussed. Last year in Sacramento ACR members sat in on our Board meeting.

Another point of clarification is that the Governor was never considered to deliver a keynote address. The ACR Sacramento Conference Committee queried whether ACR should invite him to very briefly open the conference and welcome conference participants to California. The Board engaged in a spirited and principled conversation on this question and came to consensus that he should not be invited to the conference.

It is also worth noting that Governor Schwarzenegger’s “girly-man” remark referring to State lawmakers was not part of the decision not to invite him to the conference, because the remark was made after the Board made its decision. For some, the Governor’s subsequent remark reinforced that the right decision had been made, but, the remark was in no way part of the prior decision.

Robert and others have offered reasons for inviting the Governor to open the conference. Many of their comments were voiced during the Board’s discussion. Below are some different points of view that were also raised at the time the Board was considering including the Governor in the conference:

Gov. Schwarzenegger was an actor known for action films that included a substantial amount of violence and had been accused by 36 women of sexual harassment. Reported responses to such accusations seemed disingenuous to some. It was expressed that this kind of behavior was not consistent with ACR’s mission, vision, values, and diversity and equity policy.

There was also concern that the Governor’s presence would generate negative reactions that would be discussed throughout the conference thus negatively impacting the whole climate of the conference. Some believed that ACR members would express their disapproval by walking out of his speech.

Others suggested that Gov. Schwarzenegger should be invited to the conference, not as an individual, but as the elected leader and senior representative of the state of California, which was home to the conference.

We understand that Robert is suggesting that such conflict within the conference might have invigorated participants and engaged participants in the conflict of the day. His perspective has merit and many of his points were discussed during the Board’s consensus decision-making process. In the end, the Board decided that it was in the best interests of ACR not to engage in this kind of conflict at the annual conference.

As conflict resolution professionals, we understand that decisions are not always popular with everyone and that people will likely disagree. Such is the nature of our work. We believe it is important to note that although the Governor was not invited to the conference, and therefore the Board did not engage the conference participants in the conflict surrounding the Governor’s statements and actions, ACR did engage in the conflict, considered different perspectives and reached a decision.

ACR is open to dialogue that reflects our standards: respectful disagreement, honesty and equity, acknowledgement of diverse opinions, and constructive criticism. As ACR board and staff leaders we will encourage all members to take active ownership in this dialogue.

There is much to talk about. We invite everyone to our annual conference in Minneapolis this September to continue the dialogue.


David Hart

David A. Hart is Chief Executive Officer of the Association for Conflict Resolution. Prior to accepting the CEO position, David served as director of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Mediation Program at the Key Bridge Foundation in Washington, D.C. David has served as executive director of local, state, and… MORE >


Larry Fong

Dr. Larry Fong has been in psychological practice for over 20 years. His international consulting practice spans the areas of business, legal and personal consultation. Dr. Fong has a permanent teachers certificate and has taught at all grade levels. He was Supervisor in both Family Court Services (Provincial Court of… MORE >

Featured Mediators

View all

Read these next


Mediation of Family Disputes

JAMS ADR Blog by Chris PooleHon. Richard Bennett (Ret.) is a full-time neutral with JAMS and previously served on the Napa County courts for 21 years, including three years as...

By Hon. Richard Bennett

Perspective-Taking Leads to Enlightenment

Recently I wrote about “Why Perspective-Take: The Rainbow.” I was planning on writing about perspective-taking in two consecutive blogs. A day or so after I posted this blog, I was...

By Caryn Cridland

From Grievance To Resolution Using The Nudge Principle In Mediation

From the CMP Resolution Blog of John Crawley, Lesley Allport and Katherine Graham.The ‘Nudge’ principle recently embodied in the Coalition Government’s Nudge Unit was first developed by Richard Thaler and...

By John Crawley

Find a Mediator