aspaceman55
Member
[]
Wikipedia has a pretty good summation of the criticisms of safe spaces. If it was just a room here and there it wouldn't get much press
Writing for The New York Times, journalist Judith Shulevitz distinguished between meetings where participants mutually consent to provide a safe space, and attempts to make entire dormitories or student newspapers safe spaces.
I agree. Perhaps I'm speaking personally, but I feel like it''s become confusing to some people who may have perfectly good intentions and a willingness for understanding, but don't know which version of a "safe space" is being referenced when it comes up in conversation. I think it would help the conversation for both sides of the argument to dismiss those safe spaces which are blatant attempts to infantilize college-aged students.The problem with these discussions is that terms have become incredibly clouded.
Basically thisI just graduated from a pretty liberal public university in Chicago, and the closest thing to safe spaces we had were the cultural centers and gender and sexuality center. Those were mostly places that provided resources to anyone who asked, occasionally had guest speakers, and were places for students to hang out. Everyone was welcome.
Most students used those places as a spot to hang out with their friends and meet new people. Remember, this is how those liberal colleges are corrupting the youth with their safe spaces.
This is what privilege looks likeSafe spaces are for weaklings, and they cause division. The world doesn't work like this. There are many unpleasant truths.
Deal with it or try to make it better if it's something that can be changed.
...what new social bullshit are you dreading?I still want to get a Masters in either environmental or computer engineering and I'm absolutely dreading the new social bullshit I might have to deal with.
Going to grad school usually means being an assistant professor for classes. I just want to expand my education, not deal with adult children.
You sound like you need a safe space.I still want to get a Masters in either environmental or computer engineering and I'm absolutely dreading the new social bullshit I might have to deal with.
Going to grad school usually means being an assistant professor for classes. I just want to expand my education, not deal with adult children.
I still want to get a Masters in either environmental or computer engineering and I'm absolutely dreading the new social bullshit I might have to deal with.
Going to grad school usually means being an assistant professor for classes. I just want to expand my education, not deal with adult children.
My experience of queer safe spaces is that they exist for people with mental health issues, neurodivergency, those recovering from trauma and trans and non binary folks who are likely to get abuse in non safe spaces. They're pretty important, actually. I have neurodivergent friends who really struggle outside of spaces that can accommodate their specific needs, and lots of queer friends recovering from trauma or mental health problems that need that gentle and supportive environment to help them heal.
Maybe I'm wrong (could anyone tell me?) but at the moment I feel this is all just hot air by folks who don't want to accept that other people might have special needs. It upsets me to see "safe spaces" as a phrase become this monolithic concept linked to "snowflakes" and stifling discussion. Please correct me though, I don't have the answers, I'm just concerned for people who do actually need them.
Safe spaces are for weaklings, and they cause division. The world doesn't work like this. There are many unpleasant truths.
Deal with it or try to make it better if it's something that can be changed.
So you have two clashing voices in this discussions. The ones who think safe spaces means no dissenting opinions or something, "don't go college if you don't want to hear other opinions", and the ones that are like, "what are you talking about? That's not what safe spaces are"
I don't know, I think safe spaces have implicit or explicit agreements that can include not hearing certain opinions. An LGBT group is not a place for someone to share the opinion that LGBT individuals are all evil sinners and pedophiles that should be in jail. But that agreement should not extend to the entire campus.
Decorum and social norms are implicit agreements that attempt to create a safe space from undesired behaviors and opinions. In a class room, someone may have the opinion that it is appropriate to interrupt a lecturer with high-pitch screatches, so he does so. He has "shared" his opinion and acted on it, which creates a conflict. Someone or something needs to be done to enforce the implicit agreement of the safe space. If it doesn't get enforced, he has altered that agreement.
I still want to get a Masters in either environmental or computer engineering and I'm absolutely dreading the new social bullshit I might have to deal with.
Going to grad school usually means being an assistant professor for classes. I just want to expand my education, not deal with adult children.
As an instructor at a university, the majority of people complaining about safe spaces and intolerant campuses not honoring their free speech are really more upset that their ideas don't meet the scrutiny and intellectual rigor of a scholarly forum.
White supremacy, for example, doesn't belong in any university. How does the idea advance truth and understanding? What net positive does it add to our society by entertaining it? How is it compatible with enlightenment inspired, western values like liberty, democracy, and equality? That sort of thing.
This is the kind of litmus test I hold the idea people demand the university pay attention to, and in the overwhelming number of cases the idea fails to pass.
As an instructor at a university, the majority of people I've observed complaining about safe spaces and intolerant campuses not honoring their free speech are really more upset that their ideas don't meet the scrutiny and intellectual rigor of a scholarly forum.
White supremacy, for example, doesn't belong in any university. How does the idea advance truth and understanding? What net positive does it add to our society by entertaining it? How is it compatible with enlightenment inspired, western values like liberty, democracy, and equality? That sort of thing.
This is the kind of litmus test I hold for the ideas people demand the university pay attention to, and in the overwhelming number of cases the idea fails to pass.
Where do you come down on someone like Charles Murray giving a speech on a college campus?
Do you have any examples? Not doubting just wondering.Like with almost every facet of life... Things can have good meaning and implemented well.... and things can be taken to the extreme.
Safe spaces and turning away CERTAIN speakers is fine. Give people a place they are more comfortable in to a certain extent, and of course you don't want to invite the leader of the KKK or hate groups to have a place on campus.
But they've been taken to the extreme in some cases.
People are trying to ban things just because they don't agree with them. Don't ban conservative voices just because you don't agree with them.
As an instructor at a university, the majority of people I've observed complaining about safe spaces and intolerant campuses not honoring their free speech are really more upset that their ideas don't meet the scrutiny and intellectual rigor of a scholarly forum.
White supremacy, for example, doesn't belong in any university. How does the idea advance truth and understanding? What net positive does it add to our society by entertaining it? How is it compatible with enlightenment inspired, western values like liberty, democracy, and equality? That sort of thing.
This is the kind of litmus test I hold for the ideas people demand the university pay attention to, and in the overwhelming number of cases the idea fails to pass.
I would say the university has the right the invite whomever they see fit to speak at their campus, but the student body and faculty also have every right to protest people who they believe advance damaging beliefs antithetical to the spirit of the academy.
Protest is an essential part of the conversation, but the people who whine about getting protested at universities would have you believe otherwise.
Depending on the context that already does apply to the entire campus, especially private unis.
That's their prerogative, but it should probably be spelled out in a student agreement that's part of the application process.
I think college students should come face-to-face with bigotry. That way, students can be guided in learning how to combat it. But when they don't want to deal with it, they can easily find a place that includes the agreement that LGBT people should not be in jail.
If we're commited to freedom of speech, public universities should not have a student agreement that disallows bigotry.
A "bubble" and a safe space aren't equivalent though. The latter isn't there to isolate oneself and never hear dissenting opinions or whatnot. I'd liken it to a course selection. History is a broad and encompassing topic, but the syllabus for and discussion had in the Sumerian Culture course and the World War 2 course are going to be very different and distinct, focused on specific areas and nuances. You might be able to connect the two, or bring one up to make a point about the other, but more likely, it's going to be an odd tangent that muddles the topicPeople should watch the congress debate this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRrGLGqrs80
They pretty much, dem and repub, unanimously agree that Students should not be isolated from speech, the best way to deal with this is to engage, question and trust the student population to challenge these ideas and anyone expected to go to college and sit in their bubble is doing themselves a disservice. Also while it is fine to protest, it should be peaceful and respect other peoples rights to speak.
They disagree slightly over how best to enforce this, most believe it should not be regulatory but acknowledge there is an inherent problem with college administrators monkeying around with events they personally dont believe in.
Why do people still equate safe spaces with hiding from problems and being cowardly? That's not really what they're around for, in most cases.
A "bubble" and a safe space aren't equivalent though. The latter isn't there to isolate oneself and never hear dissenting opinions or whatnot. I'd liken it to a course selection. History is a broad and encompassing topic, but the syllabus for and discussion had in the Sumerian Culture course and the World War 2 course are going to be very different and distinct, focused on specific areas and nuances. You might be able to connect the two, or bring one up to make a point about the other, but more likely, it's going to be an odd tangent that muddles the topic
That's what a safe space does. It focuses discussion. (ie a spectrum peer group, an AA support group, etc)
White people needed safe spaces so badly they had full-on segregation until the 1960s.
It's the same idea. People with the same shared concerns, perspective, issues, struggles discussing and working together from that unique shared foundation. That foundation allows for a mutual understanding and relatabilityIm not sure I can equivocate alcoholism or mental health problems with being a certain race, sex, gender or sexuality, unless you are talking abotu safe spaces for other things.
It's the same idea. People with the same shared concerns, perspective, issues, struggles discussing and working together from that unique shared foundation. That foundation allows for a mutual understanding and relatablity
Where did you get that notion from?Well its not quite the same because alcoholism and mental health groups tend to deal with admitting that the problem is internal and not shaping society to work around your problem but finding ways to work within society. Whereas the narrative I tend to hear in safe spaces is "How society is fucked and how we are the victims", which might be true, might not be, but its a different kind of approach and id argue not entirely healthy, but its not like I am planning to stop people doing it, to each their own.
Well its not quite the same because alcoholism and mental health groups tend to deal with admitting that the problem is internal and not shaping society to work around your problem but finding ways to work within society. Whereas the narrative I tend to hear in safe spaces is "How society is fucked and how we are the victims", which might be true, might not be, but its a different kind of approach and id argue not entirely healthy, but its not like I am planning to stop people doing it, to each their own.
Where did you get that notion from?
I still want to get a Masters in either environmental or computer engineering and I'm absolutely dreading the new social bullshit I might have to deal with.
Going to grad school usually means being an assistant professor for classes. I just want to expand my education, not deal with adult children.
Is that the narrative you hear in safe spaces, or the narrative you hear about safe spaces?
You know what never mind, im good on equivocation for today
It's hard for me to imagine dealing with people like this. I'd probably just laugh in their face. And this is Yale. Supposedly the brightest of the bright.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QqgNcktbSA
Who don't you see? Dane Cook, Dave Attell, Sarah Silverman, etc.
ypu gotta be squeaky clean or immensely famous to hit a college campus, otherwise you probably aren't getting booked.