When Toxicity and Danger Returns

[Hy****]

My turn to ask for advice, also note, this has nothing to do with this community, all references are of people outside this community, as far as I'm aware.

What do I do when someone who has proven to ignore consent and position them-self as a teacher when they have no experience is let back into a social community one is part of?

They were given months to grow, yes, but their return is being celebrated by an organiser like nothing happened in the first place.

Things like this really sap the energy from me, and I'm unsure how best to respond. Any advice with reasoning would be helpful.

[ey****]

whilst I generally like the social communities; sometimes people do seemingly bizarre things

this is definitely one of them

I am (within certain limitations and context) a supporter of growth - but for someone to have been... problematic... and then disappear for 2 months and then return as a teacher.   There's too many red flags here.   

I guess... nobody needs to hear their teachings. And, perhaps other worded things about consent, including those who hide in plain sight, can be had.

[Cu****]

If the return is being celebrated by the organiser of your social community, surely they have done their homework to establish how the previous offender has educated themselves, during their time of absence, to now be heralded as a teacher, within that community. If not, why not?

The action of allowing someone back, who's been known to ignore consent, gives at least two impressions to that community;
1, that the person has done some serious hard work and proven themselves to have changed.
2, the organiser has been assured that the individual has changed and is now upholding the rules that everyone expects each member to abide by.
Does the social community have some kind of guide/rule book/agreed behaviour code? If so, then are there points of order that continue to be avoided by the returning member?
But, give the guy an opportunity to "hang" himself, for everyone to see that he hasn't changed. If the returnee leads a session and everyone attending knows full well that what's being demonstrated and presented is wrong, then everyone there has a moral duty to either slow hand clap, or call out the guy, illustrating why what he promotes, isn't true, or is dangerous.
To do nothing, isn't an option, and actually promotes the danger even further, because many might be too unsure, individually, to say something.
If the organiser doesn't get the message from everyone's responsive behaviour, then it's high time to leave, form a splinter group and distance yourself (and others) from the dodgy information being peddled.
Good luck.

[Hy****]

Two very valid and different views. It gives me a lot to think about. Thank you.