Power Dynamics

Power always flows both ways. This page is about what that looks like in practice — specifically between participants and facilitators — and how to tell the difference between accountability and harm.

Everyone Creates the Container

At a workshop, retreat, or play party, who creates what happens?

Most people would say: “The facilitators. They’re in charge.”

This is a myth.

In reality, everyone—participants, assistants, staff, and facilitators—are all significant creators of the container. Every person present shapes what happens through their actions, reactions, presence, and choices.

If you think a facilitator has more power to determine what happens than you do, you may be mistaken. You may have:

• More power than them
• Equal power used in different ways
• Simply more willingness to use your power than they have

Facilitators aren’t all-powerful gods running the event. They’re humans with patterns, limitations, and vulnerabilities—just like everyone else.

Sometimes participants have more power over facilitators than facilitators have over them:

Participants have offensive options that facilitators don’t. Facilitators are expected to act responsibly. Participants often aren’t held to the same standard—and even when they behave inappropriately, mobs may still take their side.

When Participants Use Their Power to Cause Harm

Most people don’t think about this:

Participants can use their power to harm facilitators and staff. Not in theory. In practice. Regularly.

It’s also easier for participants to harm facilitators than the reverse — because the asymmetry works in the participant’s favor:

• Facilitators are held to professional standards. Participants often aren’t.
• Facilitators can’t push back without looking like the aggressor.
• Facilitators depend on reputation for their livelihood. Participants can attack anonymously.
• Society expects facilitators to be accountable. It often gives participants a pass.
• Mobs side with the person crying, not the person holding boundaries.

A facilitator who uses their power to cause harm gets called out, cancelled, and removed. A participant who does the same often gets sympathy, support, and followers. This is top vulnerability — the facilitator is in the unprotected position.

This asymmetry is real — but it’s not destiny. A facilitator who understands these dynamics, who can show their humanity under pressure instead of fawning or retaliating, changes the equation entirely. The asymmetry is most dangerous when it’s invisible. Once you see it, you can navigate it.

When Does Power Become Harmful?

If you are a participant, you have power. Significant power. The question is how you use it.

This is NOT causing harm:

• Sharing your genuine experience to protect others
• Calling out harmful behavior you verified actually happened
• Setting boundaries and leaving when they’re crossed
• Asking for accountability proportional to what occurred
• Offering your perspective and wisdom to facilitators when you see something they might be missing

On that last point: if you’ve been through significant experiences and gained insight, you may have perspective that even experienced facilitators lack. Don’t assume they’ve seen everything—they haven’t. Your wisdom is a resource. Offer it respectfully.

This IS causing harm:

• Using reputation damage as a threat to get compliance (“Do what I want or I’ll destroy you”)
• Mobilizing a group against someone without verifying what actually happened
• Using accusations to punish someone — not to protect others, but because you’re angry
• Exaggerating or fabricating claims to maximize damage
• Starting a witch hunt based on feelings, vibes, or gossip rather than verified facts
• Intimidating staff into letting you violate boundaries
• Inflicting HIGH severity consequences for LOW severity mistakes

The difference between accountability and causing harm:

If your actions look like the right column, you’re not holding someone accountable. You’re using your power to cause harm.

The Double Standard

When a facilitator uses their position to coerce someone, everyone sees it immediately — a person in power, using that power to get what they want at someone else’s expense.

When a participant threatens a facilitator’s reputation, livelihood, and safety to get what they want — that’s the same dynamic, reversed. When participants mobilize against facilitators based on unverified accusations and emotional contagion — same dynamic. When someone uses the power that comes with being wronged to destroy someone who made a mistake — same dynamic.

We recognize it instantly in one direction. We’re often blind to it in the other.

You Are Not Exempt

If you’re reading this and thinking “but I would never do that”—good.

But: have you ever repeated an accusation you didn’t verify? Joined a pile-on because others were upset? Made a judgment based on vibes instead of facts?

Those are the first steps toward the kind of harm this section describes.

You have more power than you think. And unrecognized power is the most destructive kind.

The same standards that apply to facilitators apply to you. If it would be harmful for a facilitator to do it to a participant, it’s harmful for a participant to do it to a facilitator.

Example: The Over-Responding Participant

Something happens at a retreat. A participant has an over-response. Their reaction is HIGH severity to what was actually a LOW or MEDIUM issue.

They’re furious. They’re yelling, making threats, physically intimidating others. This is a righteous predator in action — someone causing significant harm from a place of moral certainty.

What should happen: The facilitator sets a boundary. “You can’t threaten people here. If you continue, you’ll need to leave.”

What often happens:

The facilitator fawns.

They’re scared. They’re thinking:

• “What if they go home and write hate mail?”
• “What if they start a witch hunt online?”
• “What if they get violent?”
• “What if other participants side with them?”

So instead of enforcing boundaries, the facilitator appeases. They let the behavior slide. They prioritize de-escalation over boundary enforcement.

The participant now has power over the facilitator.

Not because they have legitimate authority—but because they’re willing to use aggression, and the facilitator is afraid of the consequences. The participant’s filters and the facilitator’s fawning are complementary patterns — each one reinforcing the other.

Even When the Facilitator Does Everything Right

Let’s say the facilitator doesn’t fawn. They set clear boundaries:

“I understand you’re upset. But you cannot threaten people in this space. If you continue, I’ll ask you to leave and not return.”

Even now, the participant still has power:

• They can go home and write hate mail
• They can start a witch hunt on social media
• They can rally other participants against the facilitator during the event
• Others might side with them out of mob judgment—because they saw someone upset and the facilitator “kicking them out”

The facilitator did everything right. And they’re still vulnerable to someone willing to use the power of being wronged to cause disproportionate damage.

Example: High-Profile Relationships

This dynamic isn’t limited to workshops. It happens everywhere.

Consider a famous, wealthy, influential person — a public figure. At first glance, they appear to have immense power in their marriage:

• They have money
• They have status
• They have influence
• Their spouse may derive significance from being married to them

People assume: “Obviously the public figure has power over their spouse.”

But when the marriage ends, the spouse can:

• Sue for amounts that exceed what the public figure owns
• Make public accusations (true or false)
• Cry victim to the media
• Mobilize public opinion
• Destroy reputation with claims that are difficult to disprove

Suddenly, the “powerless” spouse has more power than the “powerful” public figure.

If you cry victim loud enough, you become the perpetrator.

This isn’t about who’s right or wrong. It’s about recognizing that power dynamics are never one-way—and the person who appears powerless often has weapons the “powerful” person doesn’t.

Denying your power doesn’t make it go away. It just means you wield it unconsciously—and often destructively. If you have power, you have responsibility.

Related

• All Power Is Mutual — The deeper theory behind everything on this page
• Responsibility — Unrecognized power = unowned responsibility
• Appropriate Response — Over-response and proportionality
• 100% Control — Recognizing your own power
• Before You Judge — Mobs have power too
• Drama Triangle — The Victim role’s hidden power
• Fawning — When facilitators fawn to participants
• Why Rescuers Are Dangerous — The righteous predator pattern