Skip to main content
Advertisement

Modern tribes: the university safe-space officer

‘If you look at the safe-space policy it very specifically excludes anyone who uses the expression “not all men”’
Modern tribes: university safe-space
Illustration: Ben Lamb for the Guardian
Hey sorry, I’ve had a complaint, you’re making people uncomfortable, you can’t stay in here wearing that. The clue’s in the signs? Well if you look at the revised safe-space policy it very specifically mentions onesies, a lot of people here have had some very distressing experiences around onesies, maybe you should be asking yourself why you picked a tiger one that covers half your face, that could be really troubling and intimidating to some people with issues around people who want to dress up as charismatic megafauna, is it really asking too much for you to respect that? So their bad experiences weren’t with you? I’ll have to take your word for that, but if you look at the safe-space policy it also very specifically excludes anyone who uses the expression “not all men”. Because it could make some of your fellow students very anxious about being around someone who might openly invalidate their dearly and closely held beliefs. It doesn’t matter if you don’t plan to, all these guys saying they are a special case is unacceptable microaggression, is it so hard for you to understand that, excuse me would you please stop trying to dominate this conversation?
No, please be mindful, keep it on, can’t you see that you taking it off – I don’t care if you’ve got clothes on underneath – could be even more of a trigger than the actual onesie? Well if you really need help with that you need to get your head around victim blaming, then we’ll launch a disciplinary procedure, talk about how safe people would feel around you. Don’t you think everyone has a right to feel genuinely welcome here, why do you think we no-platformed Germaine Greer? We’ve excluded people much more important than you. Bonkers? Wow, did you really just say that? I’m not being hostile but you’ve just confirmed why we need this to be a safe, totally non-judgmental environment. Do you think anyone would even apply to university if it put them at risk of meeting bigots like you?

comments (12)

Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.
This discussion is closed for comments.
We’re doing some maintenance right now. You can still read comments, but please come back later to add your own.
Commenting has been disabled for this account (why?)
Loading comments… Trouble loading?
  • 0 1
    "What is most interesting about those who are anti safe space is that it's individuals who don't need safe spaces who have a problem with it"
    - That's... a tautology, isn't it? It's quite clear that it's individuals who don't need safe spaces who have a problem with it. Those who need safe spaces probably don't have anything against them.
    The correct question is: Who are the people that don't need them? It's not like all women, queer people, people of color, immigrants need them. And it's not like all men, straight people, white people don't. Privilege is always a relational concept - you're privileged in comparison to somebody else.
    Try to be more critical of what you read and check your beliefs, cause maybe they don't describe the empirical reality effectively enough.
    Reply |
  • 0 1
    What is most interesting about those who are anti safe space is that it's individuals who don't need safe spaces who have a problem with it. They feel the need to dress it up as extremism or some sort of nanny state symptom. Check your privilege before denying someone a space where they can feel unharassed By your lack of understanding.
    Reply |
    • 0 1
      "What is most interesting about those who are anti safe space is that it's individuals who don't need safe spaces who have a problem with it"
      - That's... a tautology, isn't it? It's quite clear that it's individuals who don't need safe spaces who have a problem with it. Those who need safe spaces probably don't have anything against them.
      The correct question is: Who are the people that don't need them? It's not like all women, queer people, people of color, immigrants need them. And it's not like all men, straight people, white people don't. Privilege is always a relational concept - you're privileged in comparison to somebody else.
      Try to be more critical of what you read and check your beliefs, cause maybe they don't describe the empirical reality effectively enough.
      Reply |
  • 5 6
    Thanks for writing this- it has come to damn ridiculous level.
    "Safe spaces" are spaces where it is ok to attack and invalidate a person *for* being male or white, or any other characteristic which is deemed 'unfair' or 'privileged'. Have a complex and controversial point to rise? Wore once a onesie 2 years ago? Must be "onesie tears".!
    They are also spaces in which people who are neither male, nor white who want to critically examine and deconstruct concepts of masculinity or whiteness are being accused of 'derailing' and being 'apologist'-in other words the conceptual building blocs of those 'discussion groups' are never allowed to be subjected to analysis, because it is easier to just rally around invented 'enemies', rather than analytically understand how oppression is structured, and maybe also understand that 'the enemies' might themselves be victims of the same oppression, they are 'accused of' benefitting from. Its a mentality which prohibits complexity of experience and which divides the world into 'goodies and baddies'.
    Not "safe spaces" but more " suffocating and claustrophobic mutual agreement spaces with the prohibition of free thought, and critical analysis".
    No theory, ideology or political movement will achieve anything if its practitioners want to be sheltered from critical reflection on their ideas- they will forever be confined to their narrow mental boxes and wonder why their political objectives are never reached.
    I've never seen a better educated and more mentally narrow group of people than those who subscribe to the 'spaces safe from other ideas' ideology.
    Just how could universities teach free thought and at the same have produced students which are fearful of it, I don't know.
    Reply |
  • 2 3
    There are hundreds, literally thousands of exclusive environments on this planet that divide societies and create resentment. Why don't you humiliate one of them? Want some examples? Why not try, I don't know, The Guardian newspaper building, for example? Or the restaurant table you maybe able to have because of your job? I am not here to be abusive just simply to point out that either you're on the inside or the outside. Pick one.
    Reply |
    • 4 5
      There is nothing wrong with exclusive environments- the problem is that those environments
      1) proclaim to have as their premise safety and comfort of those participating & yet permit essentialising and bullying of some of its participants on the basis of their race or sex, because 'reverse racism/sexism' does not exist- hence making those people feel unsafe is acceptable.
      2) Those spaces are not like any other exclusive space- in that they have as their premise being fearful of the outside world- and at the same time also being hateful towards those who are outside.
      People inside the restaurant are not afraid and hateful of pedestrians, and don't sit inside ridiculing them, whilst at the same time feeling sorry for themselves for not being able to walk on the street, neither are other inside/outside groups, but 'safe space' types are precisely that- resentful and hateful towards those who are not in their group.
      Reply |
  • 4 5
    How ironic, a middle aged, middle class white feminist making fun of the safe space policies of the younger generation in her Guardian column.
    Safe space policy is designed to stop political conversations from being dominated by the likes of her, as they historically have been. Young feminists use it as a way of being inclusive of those who are pushed out of feminist discourse by other oppressive structures like class, race, gender identity and sexuality. Students across the country are experimenting with radical inclusivity to change the face of political movements and while their efforts are not always perfect it is our duty as people who seek equality to support them, not undermine them.
    Reply |
  • 6 7
    After the election, I needed a laugh. Thanks.
    Reply |
  • 1 2
    Jesus wept...
    Reply |
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
SECURITY WARNING: Please treat the URL above as you would your password and do not share it with anyone. See the Facebook Help Center for more information.
desktop
0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%