I think the problem comes if somewhere like a university decides to designate its entire campus as some sort of "safe space" - this is highly damaging because conflicting ideas and arguments become shut down entirely, and students especially should be exposed to everything, not kept "safe"
Safe space isn't about conflicting opinions or ideas. It's about people's personal experiences this is what you don't get. Not everything needs an opinion. If I say that my uncle killed my dog or that I'm trans would you like to say your opinion? Why? Unnecessary. Safe space is as the name implies a safe space for people to come out of the closet for being whatever or for having whatever life experience that requires no opinion. Tell me. If a friend of yours trusts you enough to say he likes power rangers... Why would you punish him with your opinions such as "power rangers is for kids"? The point of safe space is sharing life experiences, not sharing opinions or arguing about politics all the time.
There was a time that humans wanted to be stronger and to surmount their problems. Now, we glorify the notion of being offended. We run from ideas that we don't agree with.
The reason “safe spaces” on college campuses is an issue is because college is a place for your ideas and ideologies to be intellectually challenged at every point. Of all the places to be made intellectually or emotionally safe, college would be least among them. True learning involves the deconstruction and recreation of ideas, something impossible if you’re constantly coddled and made to feel entirely comfortable.
Yeah but not people aren’t trying to make the whole college a safe space. Just certain places. Media will skew your views and make you think that the whole world are like those crazy sjw’s. You need to take into account that crazy things garner attention. It is not reality.
I do not know the safe space stuff, does a safe space protect you from getting your face punched in or groin kicked in or a bullet fired into a safe space?
@@milesbennettdyson6667 Safe spaces protect you from encountering ideologies other than your own. It's an 'emotionally and intellectually safe space.' Obviously, if safe space meant no physical bullying, and being *physically safe* in all manners, then it would be a great thing, and is in fact present in the vast majority of places. Safe space the way I and many others are using it means safe from other people's real ideas.
@@milesbennettdyson6667 This great video explains your question very conveniently-- ruclips.net/video/Zms3EqGbFOk/видео.html&ab_channel=UChicagoInstituteofPolitics
I hoped this would explain the concept well. But it’s clear that a safe space for one means that you can’t allow those who oppose you to speak (college campuses). A
Safe spaces are for the purposes of discussing personal problems? I thought it was just a place safe from interpersonal abuse such as in any work place. Intersectional friction will arise.
@@ElioGreco-ig2ni This reminds me of the DEI practice of separating people by race to discuss race relations. 1) Nonwhites do not like to discuss it in a white majority group because the nonwhites feel targeted. 2) Florida politicians cite this practice and call it "racist."
If people want to live in a gated community with restricted behaviors approved by a board that is their right. If they choose to communicate in safe spaces with restricted speech that is their right. As long as they do not infringe on anyone else's freedom who cares.
I absolutely support the idea that groups of people (LGBT people, people of different races, ethnic groups and faiths), should be able to create safe spaces of their own, so they can share experiences in a comfortable environment. Within those groups, they should be the ones to decide. The only thing I disagree with, is attempting to make all spaces "safe spaces", and especially resorting to things like no-platforming. The daily, general environment (especially in academic settings) should be a place where we all can challenge each other, no matter what beliefs or experiences you have.
What about racial identitarian groups or racial affinity groups? Are those okay as well? Would you be okay with a section of a school that only allowed whites in? And if not whats the difference? Identity politics always backfires when you dont like one of the groups within
If you get triggered-that is, have PTSD, or Aspergers', or an anxiety disorder, it can be really damned useful to have a place to calm the hell down when you are having a reaction. It can help you pull yourself together and go on with your day. When you brought up the term "safe space," I initially thought we'd be talking about places for triggered people to calm down in, like a campus study room where you have to be quiet? Good things. BTW? getting up in a triggered person's face...is totally counterproductive and an asshole move. If I was having a hard PTSD trigger event, and someone got in my face and said "Triggered?" Then started laughing at me? I might kick them as hard as I could in the balls. (Face it guys, it *would* be balls). I might go to jail for the privilege, but I wouldn't feel bad about kicking them, honestly.
Guys, why does nobody pay attention to the main topic? We're talking about demand and supply. You can get any safe place you want, for how long you want. For a certain price. I'm reasonable, I rent my safe space [room] for 20 bucks an hour.
The problem is when people designate a safe space in a space where there should be a diversity of ideas and where people aren't just being judgmental jerks but are just asking questions. It's so subjective and difficult to figure out someones intent it can be used to just stifle discussion rather than what it should be used for like in the AA meeting example.
A place where one side gets to speak and anyone who disagrees must be quiet isn't a safe space. It's an echo chamber. And we already have those, they are called political meetings. Universities should not be reserved for one-sided speech without opposition.
Thousands of that generation have died in Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm a Marine Corps vet, what branch did you serve in? I'm also in college, which college are you enrolled in or have graduated from? Prior to chastising college students, you should be certain that your comment is free from grammatical and spelling errors.
@@cruisinusa5110 I disagree. It actually takes strength to be open and vulnerable about what ails us and work to become even stronger and better as individuals and as a group. It makes us human. I fail to see how that's whining. Some people just feel insecure when it comes to emotions.
I don't know one person who advocates acting in a safe space the way you describe a dissenter would act. Nor have I ever heard or read about anyone who criticizes the use of safe space meetings as you describe such meetings. While I'm sure there are lots of people who think alcoholics are weak or the Big Book nonsense, but I've never heard of anyone going to an AA meeting for the purpose of expressing such opinions. Nor do I think anyone would support a person doing that. I'd appreciate someone providing a link to something that shows such people and situations actually exist. I previously thought objections to safe spaces were limited to situations where a person or group declare a given public place (eg, a college class), where a diversity of opinions should be permitted, to suddenly be a safe space.
Safe spaces are another word for "club". Or in many cases it's a support group, like alcoholics' anonymous. Trigger warnings are shown at the start of every movie you've ever seen in the theater, or said out loud before anything "graphic" on the news. TV has always been extremely censored. You can barely find a network that will let you say the word fuck or shit. Try exercising your freedom speech to talk about atheism at a religious event, and see if anyone thinks you're the victim when you're shouted down. Do you lose your mind about all of that shit as well? Are these all heralds of the end of civilization too? No, all of your outrage, and your sheer hysterical terror, is spent on the wacky antics of fucking college kids. Keep Ben Shapiro's ad revenue coming.
It is not a reasonable at all. Time and again, we have seen 'safe spaces' facilitate the permeation of a single version of the truth, reinforced by fellow 'believers,' whilst ostracising non-believers. Likewise, promoting the idea in young minds that they can retreat to some 'safe space' when faced with the realities of life, where few exist, is setting them up for a fall from a taller building. On what planet can this be seen as beneficial?
@@tim290280 You'll never know how weak this argument is because all your critics will lose their twitter accounts anyway, so what difference does it make.
@@tim290280 Title XI is interpreted in such a way that a university can lose its funding if it sponsors scholarship that is deemed discriminatory. Trump just signed an executive order that effectively bans criticism of Israel on college campuses. None of this is happening on your planet, I see.
@@tim290280 Uh... I thought we're talking about universities becoming safe spaces. You asked me for an example and I gave you one. This conversation is about as stupid as arguing if the Civil War happened or not. There is literally nobody who thinks academic freedom is a thing on American campuses, not left or right.
@@tim290280 The *utterly obvious* point is that the logic of the safe space extends to universities. I've shown you a clear example of that and there are countless more. The reasoning behind the executive order is the reasoning behind safe spaces generally. What don't you get?
I believe the problem stems from ''enforcing'' safe spaces to the point that anyone who doesn't agree will be targetted for harassment it is the root cause of why people argue that establishing safe spaces will lead to no real ''safety'' of ideas/opinions/groups etc.
Very understandable explanation of safe spaces: why they're necessary in certain circumstances, and why they're not restrictive of free speech outside the space.
We already don't have free speech outside of the space. And one of the spaces in question is American universities, literally all of them designated permanent safe spaces by law because of Title IX.
Only problem is they don't exist. The best "safe space" is a strong mind and the ability to hold 2 conflicting ideas in your mind simultaneously and make up your own mind.
and the other best safe space is called home. These weak minded individuals want to be protected from diffrent idea's and opinions 24/7, since when did words become so dangerous for them? Back in my day you were called a pussy if you baited, nowadays you're a VICTIM.
The term “safe space” is misleading itself. It’s a childish concept. Maybe helpful momentarily for some in a controlled environment but how about you grow into those tattoos and help people become adults instead. No safe spaces in the actual world. Anyone worrying and being affected by their personal choices and others reaction to them is stuck in perpetual emotional adolescence and needs more than a safe space to recover from that very common side effect of our mentally molested culture. So safe space sounds great but actually is naive .
The guy literally explained why you are wrong in just about every way. It is not "mentally mature" to be constantly subjected to the vitriol of society trying to tell you that you are less than. Everyone, including you, needs a fucking break. Do you like to camp? Great news it is a Safe Space from technology. Do you go on Vacation? Guess what, that is a safe space too, safe from work and school. Do you like to play games or read comics? Yup those stores are safe spaces to, safe from anyone who would judge people who are fans for being fans. Do you ever go to a restaurant? Then it looks like you have been to and are a frequenter of safe spaces from having to cook. Why shouldn't victims of abuse have be afforded the same places? How about alcoholics or drug addicts? What about people contemplating suicide? What about teenagers and the CONSTANT pressure here in the good ole USA to make decisions that will affect the REST OF THEIR LIVES before they are even "mentally mature" enough to drink or vote? "Safe spaces" have always existed, its just that now that some groups want to have access to them (more importantly away from your "opinions") so that they can breathe. You can't live in a safe space, there is no absolute escape from derision. But god forbid anyone want a break, and be called "mentally immature" for wanting that.
I don’t have any problem with them per se, the problem would be when people think say on a college campus that it should extend across the whole campus. There are some exceptions where it’s probably justified (e.g. someone like Milo who from what I understand actively used to out trans people at the colleges he spoke at) but generally if some conservative speaker is doing an event that you’d have to go out of your way to interact with it just seems childish to demand that it be shut down
@@Alex_Deam That was just a comparison about the principle of having a safe space (which you'll notice I never argued against), it doesn't really bear much relevance to what most people are talking about as far as the general debate on safe spaces www.comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-victoria-derbyshire-no-platform-poll/ This poll had support for banning transphobic speakers because they supposedly threatened a safe space at 54% for and 19% against with the rest expressing no opinion, so of the people that expressed an opinion it was close to 3/4 who essentially wanted this sort of safe space spread over the whole campus like I said
NoRace best economy of your life time is under trump just saying 🤷♂️ not to mention trump wanted to investigate actual corruption by joe Biden how can you be mad about that
@@truthfactsandconspiraciest7583 Trumps economy is about as 'great' as his business skills. Hint: 6 bankruptcies is not a win. What's that? Can i prove it? Sure. Trump’s unemployment: therealnews.com/stories/employment-numbers-fully-employed-low-pay-no-security "The unemployment rate is near a 50-year low of 3.7%, but the proportion of Americans with a job was higher in the 1990s. More Americans are now out of the workforce, taking care of children or relatives, or going to school, while others became discouraged about their job prospects and stopped looking. The government doesn’t count people as unemployed unless they are actively searching for jobs. Wages were rising at a faster pace back then, too." I note you and yours never mention the labour force participation rate: "And while the rate is lower as the percentage of Americans in retirement has grown, the participation rate among people aged 25 to 54 - which the BLS considers to be prime working age - has also slipped. So while the total number of people working is higher, the labour market may not be as historically healthy as Trump wants to make it seem." www.businessinsider.com.au/trump-record-high-employment-jobs-numbers-boast-meaningless-2019-11?r=US&IR=T ruclips.net/video/V3FPmu2_J_0/видео.html no, the economy is not fine: www.cnbc.com/2019/09/02/heres-a-list-of-recession-signals-that-are-flashing-red.html www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/8/15/20806882/recession-warning-yield-curve-stock-market-dow money.com/slowing-economy-signals/ apnews.com/d9da6a34207a4da3ad272044a2fd8b53 ruclips.net/video/rE5gaFddoj8/видео.html And if the fed is having to pump billions per week into the economy to stave off a crash, things are not good. Why GDP is no use for measuring how well an economy is doing: ruclips.net/video/m4ylSG54i-A/видео.html theweek.com/articles/886198/booming-stock-market-shows-america-diseased www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/02/kill-gdp-to-help-save-the-planet/ Falling Life Expectancy www.cnbc.com/2019/07/09/us-life-expectancy-has-been-declining-heres-why.html It's real. You can thank trump for that too. Failing work safety and quality: www.epi.org/publication/deregulation-year-in-review/ Trump’s promises not kept: www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/ www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/21/category-broken-promises/ theweek.com/articles/874781/trumps-litany-broken-promises
College classrooms/lecture halls and auditoriums should not be safe spaces, they should also not be openly hostile spaces either. For those with PTSD, moderate to severe neuroses and managed psychoses there should be spaces with structures/rules in place to minimize directed or misdirected harm. Behaviour that shouldn't be tolerated in ANY public space should be misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, misandry, racism, ableism, etc.
It's hard to disagree with your last sentence. The thing is, those things are probably the most rare in the very places where safe spaces are talked about the most e.g. college campuses. Unfortunately, what we see instead is that those labels are used as weapons to shut down viewpoints that someone doesn't agree with which is what tends to draw criticism from those labelled "conservatives" regardless of their political beliefs.
Literally anything can be disregarded as misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, misandry, racism, and ableism. That's not speculative, it's how these absurd speech codes are used in practice in almost every instance. And how do I know if somebody is a homophobe or misogynist if I can't hear them speak? How would I know one way or the other? Am just supposed to take their word for it when we're not only ejecting that person from whatever space, but running them out of a job or even blacklisting them from banks? Whose word do I take for it again? Did you know people now lose bank accounts for having politics that people who obsess about transphobia disapprove of?
@@BlakJetTek They'll say the same thing to you when it finally blows up in your face. History suggests it will. Did you think they're going to treat you better t han you treated them when the political winds finally blow hard enough in the opposite direction? Civilized society requires reciprocity. Difficult lesson to learn.
Knowing Better used his own experiences as a veteran. I like that idea because those on the right like to think they venerate the troops. It also works for the idea of being triggered. People get the idea that a veteran may have PTSD, that the sound of fireworks or a backfiring car might trigger that PTSD. So it’s the example I tend to use when I make the case that it’s really not nice to mock the idea of being triggered- I mean, you wouldn’t want to mock veterans would you? How unpatriotic!
I recently debated with Conservatives about gun control. They ultimately said that mental health and drug use are to blame for mass shootings. So if mental health is important for the safety of society, why are safe spaces a joke? Great video.
Speaking openly about your issues with alcoholism with a therapist or at an AA meeting is significantly different than having a “safe space” on a college campus. Safe spaces become an issue when they are overused, and when not used in appropriate places. For example, when that Yale professor was yelled at by an emotionally unstable student because of a email his wife sent; the student was yelling at him for making the campus an unsafe space. Also, there’s a necessary difference between colleges and a therapist’s office, it’s good to know the difference. Imagine if mathematics programs in colleges were so obsessed with their student’s emotions: nothing would ever get done. If you need a “safe space” on a college campus, either call your mommy and daddy, or actually go see a therapist. That’s simply how the adult world works. In an actual place of work, you will not be catered to as conveniently as you would like to be, life’s difficult, you’re mortal, figure it out.
I was - I think I do understand the INTENTION of safe spaces, which is a noble and useful intention, but it seems very often to get corrupted into something else, something sinister and something used as an excuse for censorship
As you define them, of course, those kinds of places are crucial but I do think there is a tendency to expect those safe spaces everywhere. For instance, the backlash from certain quarters regarding Joe Rogan's endorsement of Bernie. There's a lot of shouting about how he should reject the endorsement because Rogan is a transphobe that has given Milo Yianopolis or Alex Jones a platform. Joe Rogan is a douche bag, plain and simple, but that doesn't negate the fact that he does genuinely feel that Bernie is good and his interview Bernie was comprehensive and awesome. I am disinclined to use phrases like "SJW" or "cancel culture" but to an extent, they do have some currency here. Things like the trend of bookers on college campuses demanding performers pass some sort of political and social litmus test is also problematic. This demand for safe language or environments where, in order to participate, you must adhere to some imposed code is dangerous to a free society, conducive to echo chambers and a hindrance to developing personal empathy. Lenny Bruce, Richard Pryor or George Carlin would probably be run off of campus on a rail today. For sure if you're talking about abuse, addiction, gender and sexuality and lots of other things trolls need to be shouted down or removed entirely but translating that to society at large might just create a generation of self-involved sociopaths that won't see beyond their own hands.
@@lucianobv007 I know it offends you and hurts your fee-fees to realize there are some places and some times where your opinions don't need to be heard, but that's the way the world works. Better just toughen up, cupcake.
@@lucianobv007 In the real world, people have the right not to listen to you. No idea you have ever had or will ever have is so important that it entitles you to deprive them of that right.
The negative reaction towards events where, for instance, white people aren't invited stems from an affect I would describe as "offended sense of liberal equality". During most of the time, people are brought up with the idea that everyone's the same, should have equal rights and so on and that defining population groups by innate differences is a thing of the past. However, practically speaking, society isn't always like the ideal it strives towards. Thus, there are most likely still different experiences of the same society which go hand in hand with differences in physiognomy and other identitarian markers/differences in the degree of marginalisation. Thus, as someone who is black, you might have made the experience that, when in a mixed-race environment, people who do not share your physiognomy don't make the same experiences as you and thus, question yours. As a rule of thumb, you might say, limiting or even denying the access of people with pale skin to an event where such instances are discussed, makes it easier to talk about your specific experiences of society. However, there are thousands and thousands of white folks who don't consider themselves to be like the white person who interrupts a disclosure of racism-based experience on the ground that "racism is over" and you are just "overly sensitive", yet who also will be excluded on basis of their skin colour. They will feel like they are judged based on something they have no control over, and unfairly so. Practically speaking, your events might attract a certain kind of white folks which are very critical of your accounts and your attempt at "profiling" might be the most effective one to exclude them, but it obviously offends every sense of "liberal equality" most people are raised with. This in turn leads to a backlash where safe spaces seem to be an example of "reverse racism". The biggest problem I see with standpoint epistemology is that, while certain experiences might make it look like being white and being ignorant isn't a mere correlation, but a causation, you cannot extrapolate a general rule based on your personal experience without being prone to the inherent flaws of inductive reasoning (e.g.: having an experience which is not representative for the whole); thus, there will be a significant amount of, f.e., white folks who are pissed off about your decision to exclude them for a good reason. I still don't think, safe spaces shouldn't exist (they are a direct consequence of the (positive) freedom of association and the (negative) freedom of dissociation going hand in hand), but I think the reproduction of racist dynamics is a part of it, especially as long as identitarian characteristics are a proxy for knowledge and attitude.
I think the poor toy crab you flicked off your shoulder deserves his own safe space, one where he can be safe, sure and cuddled, like a little mini rig out of a beach, with a little pool, tiny deckchair, and crab sun oil, so he can come out of his shell and not feel crabby. Rights for toy crabs!
Yes, I agree. How do they call in the USA what I want? I can't use "safe space" because that has now been linked to ethics. I can't use "low arousal" because that has now incorrectly been linked to sex. There are no words for me. I do it for a different reason. When conservatives complain, what they say, does not apply to me at all. I love biology, physics, etc. I see a safe place, a place where people don't play roles and do confidentiality, and explain their needs, wants so that the other understands why and the intention and gives situational awareness and the other asks first about the why, the how, the pro's and con's until understood and said your faults in private To gain insight. From my experience, conservatives also believe in false-positives, false-positives. They are not different. They also have pre-ideas, myths, biases. That can lead to revenge based on false believes, hurting others. Ethcal belief=ventromedial prefrontal cortex Math= bilateral intraparietal, dorsal prefrontal, and inferior temporal regions. =intention = deonthological ethics www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-a-mathematician-s-brain-differ-from-that-of-a-mere-mortal/ Neurons with inverted tuning during the delay periods of working memory tasks in the dorsal prefrontal and posterior parietal cortex www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-a-mathematician-s-brain-differ-from-that-of-a-mere-mortal/ The fact that ethical belief showed a similar pattern of activation to mathematical belief suggests that the physiological difference between belief and disbelief may be independent of content or emotional associations. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071212202008.htm
When I saw your definition, my initial reaction was, "Oh, come the eff on. That's a motte & bailey if I've ever heard one." But reason prevailed, and so I listened onward. Then you elucidated upon that definition: "Any person ... interrogating, *_disbelieving,_* or insulting the speakers will be asked to stop and, if necessary, leave." This, at least the disbelief portion, is incompatible with the provided definition. To eliminate the possibility of dissent or disconfirmation is to negate the possibility of genuine conversation. What we are left with is mere oratory. A true safe space for discussing potentially uncomfortable or fraught topics is one in which disagreement is agreeable, in which we can speak our minds and be sure that we will be heard and listened to with respect, where our ideas will be considered seriously, and where we offer the same courtesies to others. That aside, however, you make a rather large jump from "safe spaces can be legitimate in some circumstances" to "no safe spaces are indicative of hypersensitivity". That we might consider AA's safe space proper does not entail that we ought to consider a safe space a reasonable response to the presence on campus of a person with whom you disagree. In short, my initial impression was unfortunately correct. This is a giant motte & bailey. The initial definition is utterly anodyne, but the way you apply it slips in ideas that are anything but. You hide the ridiculous by omission and only speak of the banal. Might as well say that yakuza are perfectly reasonable organizations, then only talk about how they do some charitable work. If you want the bailey, defend it. Don't retreat to the motte.
@EA Steckel Well, normally that'd be a no, but considering it's so ludicrously cold that my garage door froze stuck ... I suppose you can have an extra forty eight hours.
Just watch "Jonathan Haidt The Coddling of American Mind" on "Real Time with Bill Maher" or read his Book. Prof Haidt puts it in one sentence: "How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure".
Those are some starting points, but what is the psychological or philosophic theory at work? What is the origin of the modern idea of “safe spaces”? What are safe spaces for? Are they for healing, or growth, or validation, or relaxation? Are they for discussion? What happens in them that makes them worth defending? What role should safe spaces play in society? How are these different from other group gatherings, like a church service or a football game? How might society be improved with larger adoption of the practice of holding safe spaces? Are there any valid drawbacks to them? What if you hit the street and did the same thing out in public?
"my home is my castle", and a castle is quite safe, If you leave your castle you are not safe anymore at least not regarding to ideas.
I think the problem comes if somewhere like a university decides to designate its entire campus as some sort of "safe space" - this is highly damaging because conflicting ideas and arguments become shut down entirely, and students especially should be exposed to everything, not kept "safe"
This is literally all universities already by law because of Title IX.
This has literally never happened. Cool strawman tho
Safe space isn't about conflicting opinions or ideas. It's about people's personal experiences this is what you don't get. Not everything needs an opinion. If I say that my uncle killed my dog or that I'm trans would you like to say your opinion? Why? Unnecessary. Safe space is as the name implies a safe space for people to come out of the closet for being whatever or for having whatever life experience that requires no opinion. Tell me. If a friend of yours trusts you enough to say he likes power rangers... Why would you punish him with your opinions such as "power rangers is for kids"? The point of safe space is sharing life experiences, not sharing opinions or arguing about politics all the time.
@@nugget6635 well said
There's no such thing as a safe space. People are jerks no matter where you go.
Finally someone who understands reality
@Sergio Quintanar García hmm yes stay in your "safe space" and ignore reality
@Sergio Quintanar García cry about it
Sorry. The perspective reflected in your comment is way too adult and worldly wise.
@@hornedowl_ you ignored their entire argument. This is the logic of conservatives
"Just because You're offended, it doesn't mean you're right." - Ricky Gervais on The View
/anti-woke ex-Democrat
What you want is a support group.
There was a time that humans wanted to be stronger and to surmount their problems. Now, we glorify the notion of being offended. We run from ideas that we don't agree with.
The reason “safe spaces” on college campuses is an issue is because college is a place for your ideas and ideologies to be intellectually challenged at every point. Of all the places to be made intellectually or emotionally safe, college would be least among them. True learning involves the deconstruction and recreation of ideas, something impossible if you’re constantly coddled and made to feel entirely comfortable.
Yeah but not people aren’t trying to make the whole college a safe space. Just certain places. Media will skew your views and make you think that the whole world are like those crazy sjw’s. You need to take into account that crazy things garner attention. It is not reality.
I do not know the safe space stuff, does a safe space protect you from getting your face punched in or groin kicked in or a bullet fired into a safe space?
@@milesbennettdyson6667 Safe spaces protect you from encountering ideologies other than your own. It's an 'emotionally and intellectually safe space.' Obviously, if safe space meant no physical bullying, and being *physically safe* in all manners, then it would be a great thing, and is in fact present in the vast majority of places. Safe space the way I and many others are using it means safe from other people's real ideas.
@@milesbennettdyson6667 This great video explains your question very conveniently-- ruclips.net/video/Zms3EqGbFOk/видео.html&ab_channel=UChicagoInstituteofPolitics
@@benisjamin6583 not in Compton. Say safe space around any of the homies and you end up with a huge hole in the head.
I remember a time where your safe space was your house or car. The only people allowed where people you like
I hoped this would explain the concept well. But it’s clear that a safe space for one means that you can’t allow those who oppose you to speak (college campuses). A
Safe spaces are for the purposes of discussing personal problems? I thought it was just a place safe from interpersonal abuse such as in any work place. Intersectional friction will arise.
of course, it is a protection from psychological bullies and manipulators
@@ElioGreco-ig2ni This reminds me of the DEI practice of separating people by race to discuss race relations. 1) Nonwhites do not like to discuss it in a white majority group because the nonwhites feel targeted. 2) Florida politicians cite this practice and call it "racist."
If people want to live in a gated community with restricted behaviors approved by a board that is their right. If they choose to communicate in safe spaces with restricted speech that is their right. As long as they do not infringe on anyone else's freedom who cares.
I absolutely support the idea that groups of people (LGBT people, people of different races, ethnic groups and faiths), should be able to create safe spaces of their own, so they can share experiences in a comfortable environment. Within those groups, they should be the ones to decide. The only thing I disagree with, is attempting to make all spaces "safe spaces", and especially resorting to things like no-platforming. The daily, general environment (especially in academic settings) should be a place where we all can challenge each other, no matter what beliefs or experiences you have.
I wish I could like this comment 100x.
What about racial identitarian groups or racial affinity groups? Are those okay as well? Would you be okay with a section of a school that only allowed whites in? And if not whats the difference? Identity politics always backfires when you dont like one of the groups within
Only weak snowflakes believe this crap
If you get triggered-that is, have PTSD, or Aspergers', or an anxiety disorder, it can be really damned useful to have a place to calm the hell down when you are having a reaction.
It can help you pull yourself together and go on with your day.
When you brought up the term "safe space," I initially thought we'd be talking about places for triggered people to calm down in, like a campus study room where you have to be quiet? Good things.
BTW?
getting up in a triggered person's face...is totally counterproductive and an asshole move.
If I was having a hard PTSD trigger event, and someone got in my face and said "Triggered?" Then started laughing at me?
I might kick them as hard as I could in the balls. (Face it guys, it *would* be balls).
I might go to jail for the privilege, but I wouldn't feel bad about kicking them, honestly.
Good luck finding a job with a safe space.
and how would the losers you just said, gonna do when they go in the real world
If it's just "community meetings" then it is cool.
It isn't just community meetings. Nobody cared when it was.
@@juliusebola9389 go on?
@@juliusebola9389 Yes, julius, we are awaiting a more thorough explanation.
What they want and need is a support group.
Guys, why does nobody pay attention to the main topic?
We're talking about demand and supply. You can get any safe place you want, for how long you want. For a certain price.
I'm reasonable, I rent my safe space [room] for 20 bucks an hour.
lmao. Dude you can get mugged, stabbed and killed anywhere. Rent a bunker and throw the keys away.
Problem come when people walk around with safe space.
It seems the speaker seeks to define "safe spaces" as places for private discussions.
The problem is when people designate a safe space in a space where there should be a diversity of ideas and where people aren't just being judgmental jerks but are just asking questions. It's so subjective and difficult to figure out someones intent it can be used to just stifle discussion rather than what it should be used for like in the AA meeting example.
I feel like that rather being an intrinsic issue of safe space is an issue of judgement and would vary on a case by case basis.
A place where one side gets to speak and anyone who disagrees must be quiet isn't a safe space. It's an echo chamber. And we already have those, they are called political meetings.
Universities should not be reserved for one-sided speech without opposition.
Safe space? Hahahah the Luxury of first world problems.
Jesus Christ one generation storms Omaha beach another wants a safe space because college is to scary
Thousands of that generation have died in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I'm a Marine Corps vet, what branch did you serve in?
I'm also in college, which college are you enrolled in or have graduated from?
Prior to chastising college students, you should be certain that your comment is free from grammatical and spelling errors.
@@cruisinusa5110 I disagree. It actually takes strength to be open and vulnerable about what ails us and work to become even stronger and better as individuals and as a group. It makes us human. I fail to see how that's whining. Some people just feel insecure when it comes to emotions.
I don't know one person who advocates acting in a safe space the way you describe a dissenter would act. Nor have I ever heard or read about anyone who criticizes the use of safe space meetings as you describe such meetings.
While I'm sure there are lots of people who think alcoholics are weak or the Big Book nonsense, but I've never heard of anyone going to an AA meeting for the purpose of expressing such opinions. Nor do I think anyone would support a person doing that.
I'd appreciate someone providing a link to something that shows such people and situations actually exist.
I previously thought objections to safe spaces were limited to situations where a person or group declare a given public place (eg, a college class), where a diversity of opinions should be permitted, to suddenly be a safe space.
I think you are correct
it is easier to create a straw man and knock it down then to face the other side of the argument.
What?? Common sense? How dare you!
Laughed out loud, Ribb.👍
Safe spaces are another word for "club".
Or in many cases it's a support group, like alcoholics' anonymous.
Trigger warnings are shown at the start of every movie you've ever seen in the theater, or said out loud before anything "graphic" on the news.
TV has always been extremely censored. You can barely find a network that will let you say the word fuck or shit.
Try exercising your freedom speech to talk about atheism at a religious event, and see if anyone thinks you're the victim when you're shouted down.
Do you lose your mind about all of that shit as well? Are these all heralds of the end of civilization too?
No, all of your outrage, and your sheer hysterical terror, is spent on the wacky antics of fucking college kids. Keep Ben Shapiro's ad revenue coming.
It is not a reasonable at all. Time and again, we have seen 'safe spaces' facilitate the permeation of a single version of the truth, reinforced by fellow 'believers,' whilst ostracising non-believers. Likewise, promoting the idea in young minds that they can retreat to some 'safe space' when faced with the realities of life, where few exist, is setting them up for a fall from a taller building. On what planet can this be seen as beneficial?
"If you're not afraid of new ideas you shouldn't be afraid of safe spaces" Holy shit that was perfect
@@tim290280 You'll never know how weak this argument is because all your critics will lose their twitter accounts anyway, so what difference does it make.
@@tim290280 Title XI is interpreted in such a way that a university can lose its funding if it sponsors scholarship that is deemed discriminatory. Trump just signed an executive order that effectively bans criticism of Israel on college campuses. None of this is happening on your planet, I see.
@@tim290280 Uh... I thought we're talking about universities becoming safe spaces. You asked me for an example and I gave you one. This conversation is about as stupid as arguing if the Civil War happened or not. There is literally nobody who thinks academic freedom is a thing on American campuses, not left or right.
@@tim290280 The *utterly obvious* point is that the logic of the safe space extends to universities. I've shown you a clear example of that and there are countless more. The reasoning behind the executive order is the reasoning behind safe spaces generally. What don't you get?
@@tim290280 What the hell are you even talking about?
Wish "safe spaces" were around in the 70's...then "politically correct" wouldn't have been invented !!
Around in the 1930s in Europe also, moving people out (or even worse) who did not agree with you.
What is a safe space?
Woke fragility
I believe the problem stems from ''enforcing'' safe spaces to the point that anyone who doesn't agree will be targetted for harassment it is the root cause of why people argue that establishing safe spaces will lead to no real ''safety'' of ideas/opinions/groups etc.
Very understandable explanation of safe spaces: why they're necessary in certain circumstances, and why they're not restrictive of free speech outside the space.
We already don't have free speech outside of the space. And one of the spaces in question is American universities, literally all of them designated permanent safe spaces by law because of Title IX.
Only problem is they don't exist. The best "safe space" is a strong mind and the ability to hold 2 conflicting ideas in your mind simultaneously and make up your own mind.
and the other best safe space is called home. These weak minded individuals want to be protected from diffrent idea's and opinions 24/7, since when did words become so dangerous for them?
Back in my day you were called a pussy if you baited, nowadays you're a VICTIM.
The term “safe space” is misleading itself. It’s a childish concept. Maybe helpful momentarily for some in a controlled environment but how about you grow into those tattoos and help people become adults instead. No safe spaces in the actual world. Anyone worrying and being affected by their personal choices and others reaction to them is stuck in perpetual emotional adolescence and needs more than a safe space to recover from that very common side effect of our mentally molested culture. So safe space sounds great but actually is naive .
The guy literally explained why you are wrong in just about every way. It is not "mentally mature" to be constantly subjected to the vitriol of society trying to tell you that you are less than. Everyone, including you, needs a fucking break. Do you like to camp? Great news it is a Safe Space from technology. Do you go on Vacation? Guess what, that is a safe space too, safe from work and school. Do you like to play games or read comics? Yup those stores are safe spaces to, safe from anyone who would judge people who are fans for being fans. Do you ever go to a restaurant? Then it looks like you have been to and are a frequenter of safe spaces from having to cook.
Why shouldn't victims of abuse have be afforded the same places? How about alcoholics or drug addicts? What about people contemplating suicide? What about teenagers and the CONSTANT pressure here in the good ole USA to make decisions that will affect the REST OF THEIR LIVES before they are even "mentally mature" enough to drink or vote? "Safe spaces" have always existed, its just that now that some groups want to have access to them (more importantly away from your "opinions") so that they can breathe. You can't live in a safe space, there is no absolute escape from derision. But god forbid anyone want a break, and be called "mentally immature" for wanting that.
I don’t have any problem with them per se, the problem would be when people think say on a college campus that it should extend across the whole campus. There are some exceptions where it’s probably justified (e.g. someone like Milo who from what I understand actively used to out trans people at the colleges he spoke at) but generally if some conservative speaker is doing an event that you’d have to go out of your way to interact with it just seems childish to demand that it be shut down
No platforming and safe spaces are two different concepts, you're confusing them
@@Alex_Deam They're related subjects and the venn diagram of people who support them would be pretty close to a circle
@@GiantSandles not really - perhaps everyone at Alcoholics Anonymous supports no platforming, but I don't see any evidence to believe that
@@Alex_Deam That was just a comparison about the principle of having a safe space (which you'll notice I never argued against), it doesn't really bear much relevance to what most people are talking about as far as the general debate on safe spaces
www.comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-victoria-derbyshire-no-platform-poll/
This poll had support for banning transphobic speakers because they supposedly threatened a safe space at 54% for and 19% against with the rest expressing no opinion, so of the people that expressed an opinion it was close to 3/4 who essentially wanted this sort of safe space spread over the whole campus like I said
All universities are legally space spaces already because of Title IX.
Trump Has a safe space called "Mitch McConnell's Senate"
NoRace best economy of your life time is under trump just saying 🤷♂️ not to mention trump wanted to investigate actual corruption by joe Biden how can you be mad about that
@@truthfactsandconspiraciest7583 Trumps economy is about as 'great' as his business skills. Hint: 6 bankruptcies is not a win.
What's that? Can i prove it? Sure.
Trump’s unemployment:
therealnews.com/stories/employment-numbers-fully-employed-low-pay-no-security
"The unemployment rate is near a 50-year low of 3.7%, but the proportion of Americans with a job was higher in the 1990s. More Americans are now out of the workforce, taking care of children or relatives, or going to school, while others became discouraged about their job prospects and stopped looking. The government doesn’t count people as unemployed unless they are actively searching for jobs. Wages were rising at a faster pace back then, too."
I note you and yours never mention the labour force participation rate: "And while the rate is lower as the percentage of Americans in retirement has grown, the participation rate among people aged 25 to 54 - which the BLS considers to be prime working age - has also slipped.
So while the total number of people working is higher, the labour market may not be as historically healthy as Trump wants to make it seem."
www.businessinsider.com.au/trump-record-high-employment-jobs-numbers-boast-meaningless-2019-11?r=US&IR=T
ruclips.net/video/V3FPmu2_J_0/видео.html
no, the economy is not fine:
www.cnbc.com/2019/09/02/heres-a-list-of-recession-signals-that-are-flashing-red.html
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/8/15/20806882/recession-warning-yield-curve-stock-market-dow
money.com/slowing-economy-signals/
apnews.com/d9da6a34207a4da3ad272044a2fd8b53
ruclips.net/video/rE5gaFddoj8/видео.html
And if the fed is having to pump billions per week into the economy to stave off a crash, things are not good.
Why GDP is no use for measuring how well an economy is doing:
ruclips.net/video/m4ylSG54i-A/видео.html
theweek.com/articles/886198/booming-stock-market-shows-america-diseased
www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/02/kill-gdp-to-help-save-the-planet/
Falling Life Expectancy
www.cnbc.com/2019/07/09/us-life-expectancy-has-been-declining-heres-why.html
It's real. You can thank trump for that too.
Failing work safety and quality:
www.epi.org/publication/deregulation-year-in-review/
Trump’s promises not kept:
www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/
www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/21/category-broken-promises/
theweek.com/articles/874781/trumps-litany-broken-promises
Your just saying stuff typical. In reality you have Trump syndrome brother .Pretty sure that you manage to bring up POTUS to any discussion amazing.
@@arieldizon7676 Reality is a nice place...you should visit sometime.
It's not as good as Biden's safe space though, since only one of them is being prosecuted while the other gets a free pass.
College classrooms/lecture halls and auditoriums should not be safe spaces, they should also not be openly hostile spaces either. For those with PTSD, moderate to severe neuroses and managed psychoses there should be spaces with structures/rules in place to minimize directed or misdirected harm. Behaviour that shouldn't be tolerated in ANY public space should be misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, misandry, racism, ableism, etc.
It's hard to disagree with your last sentence. The thing is, those things are probably the most rare in the very places where safe spaces are talked about the most e.g. college campuses. Unfortunately, what we see instead is that those labels are used as weapons to shut down viewpoints that someone doesn't agree with which is what tends to draw criticism from those labelled "conservatives" regardless of their political beliefs.
Literally anything can be disregarded as misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, misandry, racism, and ableism. That's not speculative, it's how these absurd speech codes are used in practice in almost every instance. And how do I know if somebody is a homophobe or misogynist if I can't hear them speak? How would I know one way or the other? Am just supposed to take their word for it when we're not only ejecting that person from whatever space, but running them out of a job or even blacklisting them from banks? Whose word do I take for it again?
Did you know people now lose bank accounts for having politics that people who obsess about transphobia disapprove of?
@@juliusebola9389 they should've thought about that beforehand lol
@@BlakJetTek They'll say the same thing to you when it finally blows up in your face. History suggests it will. Did you think they're going to treat you better t han you treated them when the political winds finally blow hard enough in the opposite direction? Civilized society requires reciprocity. Difficult lesson to learn.
@@juliusebola9389 you're that far gone huh?
And how can save space protect you from real problems
Knowing Better used his own experiences as a veteran. I like that idea because those on the right like to think they venerate the troops.
It also works for the idea of being triggered. People get the idea that a veteran may have PTSD, that the sound of fireworks or a backfiring car might trigger that PTSD. So it’s the example I tend to use when I make the case that it’s really not nice to mock the idea of being triggered- I mean, you wouldn’t want to mock veterans would you? How unpatriotic!
I recently debated with Conservatives about gun control. They ultimately said that mental health and drug use are to blame for mass shootings. So if mental health is important for the safety of society, why are safe spaces a joke? Great video.
Because, in fact, they only promote censorship.
Guns are just a tool.
That CritCrab cameo! Nice!
Why safe space is not doing kids a favor is because it dosen't exist out in the world so you don't teach the kids to be ready for the real world.
So a safe space is a therapeutic concept not a political one? Right?
Mixing the therapeutical with the political is where it becomes problematic.
Speaking openly about your issues with alcoholism with a therapist or at an AA meeting is significantly different than having a “safe space” on a college campus. Safe spaces become an issue when they are overused, and when not used in appropriate places. For example, when that Yale professor was yelled at by an emotionally unstable student because of a email his wife sent; the student was yelling at him for making the campus an unsafe space. Also, there’s a necessary difference between colleges and a therapist’s office, it’s good to know the difference. Imagine if mathematics programs in colleges were so obsessed with their student’s emotions: nothing would ever get done. If you need a “safe space” on a college campus, either call your mommy and daddy, or actually go see a therapist. That’s simply how the adult world works. In an actual place of work, you will not be catered to as conveniently as you would like to be, life’s difficult, you’re mortal, figure it out.
Hiding from your problems solves nothing. "Safe spaces" just sound like giving you an excuse to be an osterich...
I was - I think I do understand the INTENTION of safe spaces, which is a noble and useful intention, but it seems very often to get corrupted into something else, something sinister and something used as an excuse for censorship
As you define them, of course, those kinds of places are crucial but I do think there is a tendency to expect those safe spaces everywhere. For instance, the backlash from certain quarters regarding Joe Rogan's endorsement of Bernie. There's a lot of shouting about how he should reject the endorsement because Rogan is a transphobe that has given Milo Yianopolis or Alex Jones a platform. Joe Rogan is a douche bag, plain and simple, but that doesn't negate the fact that he does genuinely feel that Bernie is good and his interview Bernie was comprehensive and awesome. I am disinclined to use phrases like "SJW" or "cancel culture" but to an extent, they do have some currency here. Things like the trend of bookers on college campuses demanding performers pass some sort of political and social litmus test is also problematic. This demand for safe language or environments where, in order to participate, you must adhere to some imposed code is dangerous to a free society, conducive to echo chambers and a hindrance to developing personal empathy. Lenny Bruce, Richard Pryor or George Carlin would probably be run off of campus on a rail today. For sure if you're talking about abuse, addiction, gender and sexuality and lots of other things trolls need to be shouted down or removed entirely but translating that to society at large might just create a generation of self-involved sociopaths that won't see beyond their own hands.
We need to be good at arguing, thats all..
No, we need to accept the fact that sometimes arguments aren't welcome.
@@Dorian_sapiens And the diversity of opinions? All arguments are welcome, bad ones will be refuted. It's simple.
@@lucianobv007 I know it offends you and hurts your fee-fees to realize there are some places and some times where your opinions don't need to be heard, but that's the way the world works. Better just toughen up, cupcake.
@@Dorian_sapiens No. The real world works through arguing. There is no chance to be a snowflake.
@@lucianobv007 In the real world, people have the right not to listen to you. No idea you have ever had or will ever have is so important that it entitles you to deprive them of that right.
Liked
Subbed
Notifications on 👍
In a world full of lions tigers and bears ...Why be a Turtle?
Oh my!
Because you cannot choose whether or not to have pstd
The negative reaction towards events where, for instance, white people aren't invited stems from an affect I would describe as "offended sense of liberal equality". During most of the time, people are brought up with the idea that everyone's the same, should have equal rights and so on and that defining population groups by innate differences is a thing of the past. However, practically speaking, society isn't always like the ideal it strives towards. Thus, there are most likely still different experiences of the same society which go hand in hand with differences in physiognomy and other identitarian markers/differences in the degree of marginalisation. Thus, as someone who is black, you might have made the experience that, when in a mixed-race environment, people who do not share your physiognomy don't make the same experiences as you and thus, question yours. As a rule of thumb, you might say, limiting or even denying the access of people with pale skin to an event where such instances are discussed, makes it easier to talk about your specific experiences of society. However, there are thousands and thousands of white folks who don't consider themselves to be like the white person who interrupts a disclosure of racism-based experience on the ground that "racism is over" and you are just "overly sensitive", yet who also will be excluded on basis of their skin colour. They will feel like they are judged based on something they have no control over, and unfairly so. Practically speaking, your events might attract a certain kind of white folks which are very critical of your accounts and your attempt at "profiling" might be the most effective one to exclude them, but it obviously offends every sense of "liberal equality" most people are raised with. This in turn leads to a backlash where safe spaces seem to be an example of "reverse racism". The biggest problem I see with standpoint epistemology is that, while certain experiences might make it look like being white and being ignorant isn't a mere correlation, but a causation, you cannot extrapolate a general rule based on your personal experience without being prone to the inherent flaws of inductive reasoning (e.g.: having an experience which is not representative for the whole); thus, there will be a significant amount of, f.e., white folks who are pissed off about your decision to exclude them for a good reason. I still don't think, safe spaces shouldn't exist (they are a direct consequence of the (positive) freedom of association and the (negative) freedom of dissociation going hand in hand), but I think the reproduction of racist dynamics is a part of it, especially as long as identitarian characteristics are a proxy for knowledge and attitude.
Excellent.
I think the poor toy crab you flicked off your shoulder deserves his own safe space, one where he can be safe, sure and cuddled, like a little mini rig out of a beach, with a little pool, tiny deckchair, and crab sun oil, so he can come out of his shell and not feel crabby. Rights for toy crabs!
Yes, I agree.
How do they call in the USA what I want?
I can't use "safe space" because that has now been linked to ethics.
I can't use "low arousal" because that has now incorrectly been linked to sex.
There are no words for me. I do it for a different reason. When conservatives complain, what they say, does not apply to me at all. I love biology, physics, etc. I see a safe place, a place where people don't play roles and do confidentiality, and explain their needs, wants so that the other understands why and the intention
and gives situational awareness and the other
asks first about the why, the how, the pro's and con's until understood and said your faults in private
To gain insight. From my experience, conservatives also believe in false-positives, false-positives. They are not different. They also have pre-ideas, myths, biases. That can lead to revenge based on false believes, hurting others.
Ethcal belief=ventromedial prefrontal cortex
Math= bilateral intraparietal, dorsal prefrontal, and inferior temporal regions. =intention = deonthological ethics
www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-a-mathematician-s-brain-differ-from-that-of-a-mere-mortal/
Neurons with inverted tuning during the delay periods of working memory tasks in the dorsal prefrontal and posterior parietal cortex
www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-a-mathematician-s-brain-differ-from-that-of-a-mere-mortal/
The fact that ethical belief showed a similar pattern of activation to mathematical belief suggests that the physiological difference between belief and disbelief may be independent of content or emotional associations.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071212202008.htm
When I saw your definition, my initial reaction was, "Oh, come the eff on. That's a motte & bailey if I've ever heard one." But reason prevailed, and so I listened onward.
Then you elucidated upon that definition: "Any person ... interrogating, *_disbelieving,_* or insulting the speakers will be asked to stop and, if necessary, leave." This, at least the disbelief portion, is incompatible with the provided definition. To eliminate the possibility of dissent or disconfirmation is to negate the possibility of genuine conversation. What we are left with is mere oratory. A true safe space for discussing potentially uncomfortable or fraught topics is one in which disagreement is agreeable, in which we can speak our minds and be sure that we will be heard and listened to with respect, where our ideas will be considered seriously, and where we offer the same courtesies to others.
That aside, however, you make a rather large jump from "safe spaces can be legitimate in some circumstances" to "no safe spaces are indicative of hypersensitivity". That we might consider AA's safe space proper does not entail that we ought to consider a safe space a reasonable response to the presence on campus of a person with whom you disagree.
In short, my initial impression was unfortunately correct. This is a giant motte & bailey. The initial definition is utterly anodyne, but the way you apply it slips in ideas that are anything but. You hide the ridiculous by omission and only speak of the banal. Might as well say that yakuza are perfectly reasonable organizations, then only talk about how they do some charitable work.
If you want the bailey, defend it. Don't retreat to the motte.
@EA Steckel Well, normally that'd be a no, but considering it's so ludicrously cold that my garage door froze stuck ... I suppose you can have an extra forty eight hours.
Right on the money. Unfortunately this video is a misfire.
Yeah my safe space is my room. Like most people. In public get over yourself and quit crying.
someone didn't watch the video
@@MythicalRedFox someone did watch the video and doesnt give a shit what he said.
@ Then why are you bothering to respond if you "don't give a shit?" I think I hear your mon calling you up from the basement for spaghettios.
Combat hardened veterans commiting suicide at a higher rate say hi
@@xenoblad this combat veteran didn't commit suicide. And he says hi.
Just watch "Jonathan Haidt The Coddling of American Mind" on "Real Time with Bill Maher" or read his Book.
Prof Haidt puts it in one sentence: "How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure".
Yes, good, fine. Your reasoning is sound. But the spirit of the safe space is what people take issue with. They are largely weak and silly.
Like who cares its 2020
Those are some starting points, but what is the psychological or philosophic theory at work? What is the origin of the modern idea of “safe spaces”? What are safe spaces for? Are they for healing, or growth, or validation, or relaxation? Are they for discussion? What happens in them that makes them worth defending? What role should safe spaces play in society? How are these different from other group gatherings, like a church service or a football game? How might society be improved with larger adoption of the practice of holding safe spaces? Are there any valid drawbacks to them? What if you hit the street and did the same thing out in public?
I think that safe spaces go to far when it comes to political opinions.
sad excuse for a man