During my March 25 call with OPRD Volunteer Coordinator Allison Watson, she asked me about my views on "the end of the world" using the same tone Ryan did at the day use area meeting.
I recognized instantly where that came from and what its purpose was, and I knew from that moment onward that Allison was not actually listening to me, she was documenting my expulsion. I told her that what I observe is instability in our systems, and nothing more, because it was deeply inappropriate of her to be asking me such a question.
This question was inappropriate professional conduct and represented a weaponization of personal information I had shared in confidence with my direct supervisor Logan during a vulnerable moment.
The Original Context
Logan and I took a walk during my time at Honeyman. He had just spent 90 minutes in the Welcome Center talking about himself—his background, his concerns, his perspectives. The following day, I reciprocated by sharing why I had moved into an RV and relocated to the coast, and what I had sacrificed to make that transition.
This was not conspiracy theorizing. It was pattern recognition based on observable systemic instabilities—economic volatility, climate change impacts, social fragmentation, and institutional breakdown. These are documented realities, not fringe beliefs.
The Distortion
What I shared as reasoned analysis of systemic risk was later reframed by Allison Watson as apocalyptic thinking, used to pathologize my character and justify institutional dismissal.
The Sexual Targeting Claim
Allison also claimed I told Logan "I was worried he would kill me." This is a significant distortion of what I actually said.
What I shared was my concern that in an authoritarian phase—a documented historical pattern—my sexuality would be weaponized against me, and that people like him (institutional actors, authority figures) would be the mechanism through which such targeting would occur.
Logan visibly recoiled when I said this. At the time, I interpreted his reaction as discomfort with the subject matter. Later, I understood: he was actively doing exactly what I had described—using institutional position to target my identity.
The Betrayal
This walk represents the moment Logan betrayed my trust. It was the only time during my service that I opened up to him personally, sharing both my strategic thinking and my vulnerabilities as a queer person navigating institutional spaces.
He took that vulnerability and weaponized it—first in internal communications, then in the dismissal process where personal confidences became "behavioral concerns."
The Pattern
This represents a classic institutional tactic:
- Elicit vulnerability through false intimacy and reciprocal sharing
2. Document private thoughts as professional concerns
3. Pathologize reasonable analysis as extremist thinking
4. Weaponize identity-based fears as evidence of instability
5. Use personal confidences to justify institutional retaliation
Professional Misconduct
Allison Watson's use of this information violated basic professional boundaries:
- Inappropriate inquiry: Asking about personal beliefs unrelated to volunteer service
- Confidentiality breach: Using information shared privately with direct supervisor
- Pathologizing: Framing systemic analysis as mental health concerns
- Identity targeting: Using sexuality-based fears to justify dismissal
The Strategic Purpose
This line of questioning served to:
- Distract from documented management misconduct
- Reframe institutional accountability as personal instability
- Create psychological profile justifying permanent dismissal
- Weaponize vulnerability shared in confidence
Why This Matters
When volunteers share personal context with supervisors, that information should remain confidential unless it directly impacts service safety. Using personal beliefs and identity-based concerns to justify retaliation creates a chilling effect that discourages authentic relationships and honest communication.
The fact that my analysis of systemic instability—made in early 2025—has proven increasingly accurate does not retroactively justify its weaponization against me.
Current Reality
The "end of the world" thinking they pathologized looks increasingly like competent risk assessment. Institutional breakdown, climate disruption, social fragmentation, and authoritarian targeting of marginalized groups are not conspiracy theories—they are observable realities requiring adaptive responses.
Living in an RV, maintaining mobility, developing resilience skills, and building community connections outside traditional institutional frameworks represents practical preparation, not apocalyptic thinking.
The Deeper Violation
Beyond professional misconduct, this represents a fundamental betrayal of human trust. I shared my deepest concerns about institutional targeting of queer people with someone who was, in that moment, engaged in institutional targeting of me as a queer person.
The irony is brutal: I warned Logan about exactly what he was doing to me.
Documentation Note: This record exists to prevent further weaponization of personal information shared in confidence. The original context was vulnerability and trust-building. The institutional use was retaliation and pathologization. The difference matters.
See /lexicon/foundational/collapse for a comprehensive understanding of my actual views.