"You do not respect our space."
"She does not want to talk to you. She does not even want to see you ... you better back up."
"Do you fundamentally stand behind what she said... even when it's offensive ... even when it denigrates me?"
"It is not about creating an intellectual space."
If you are not familiar with these statements by now, you should be. The first and second were made by students at the University of Missouri and directed towards an Asian-American student freelancer who was taking photographs for ESPN. The third and fourth were made by students at Yale University directed towards a white professor of psychology, Nicholas Christakis. Both scandals made national headlines this past week, just as we experienced controversy relating to a death threat right here in Durham.
"Safe spaces," along with "trigger warnings" originated within the feminist movement. The idea was to protect sexual assault survivors suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and to create areas where people can feel comfortable. Research shows sudden exposure to triggering events can have a negative effect on those with mental health issues, and being cognizant of this can help those on their way to recovery. It is built on the notion that "buried memories ... lie just below the surface of consciousness, ready to be triggered." Safe spaces are meant to allow everyone in a physical area to feel comfortable. In this respect, the roots of safe spaces are in generally accepted (although contentious) science. For me, trigger warnings are appropriate to help those suffering from PTSD, and the concept of the "safe space" as described above is appropriate in allowing vulnerable people to speak genuinely.
Yet, when I watched the video of the freelancer at Mizzou trying to photograph the safe space students had created in the middle of a public quad, I was repulsed. A mob of students, infuriated at the thought someone could enter the public quad after they were already standing there, tightened together. After a heated exchange, they began walking forward, physically pushing him out. This mob of more than one hundred people genuinely felt this one photographer was the one oppressing them. Safe space for whom?
An oddly similar event happened on our own campus several weeks ago. During a Black Lives Matter rally at the Chapel in response to racial slurs defiling flyers on campus, a woman asked Zeta Tau Alpha sorority to halt their philanthropic event. This event, in a public space on campus, and where there had likely been months of logistical planning, was seen by the woman not only as intruding on the hastily planned rally, but perpetuating racial intolerance. The BLM movement does not necessarily share this reaction, but I later saw numerous people "liking" her article, indicating this sentiment is widespread. Safe space for whom?
Watching Christakis address 30 or more angry students, who questioned his assertion that speech shouldn't disrupt classrooms and who told him he shouldn't be able to sleep at night, likewise repulsed me. Students were upset his wife had sent an email contending the administration shouldn't dictate what students should or should not wear for Halloween, and they were adults who needed to be able to make their own decisions on how to dress themselves. Activists say some costumes are orientalizing ethnic traditions, culturally appropriating customs and doing so in a context of systemic racism. They say they are offended.
An ironically similar contention was made on this campus at the beginning of the year. The Tab, a new publication at Duke, ran an article about the freshman who refused to read the graphic novel Fun Home with the statement "I'm totally against the bikini" in its title. I saw numerous statements calling him paternalistic and misogynistic at Duke and on external media. The socially conservative argument he makes is that revealing clothing objectifies females and violate his religious beliefs. He said he was offended.
Less than a year ago, students on this campus sought to have the Editorial Page Editor of the Chronicle removed because of his political beliefs. This petition gained nearly 1,000 signatures. These students sought to extend the "safe space" to Duke University's independent student newspaper, generally a bastion of free speech and a public forum for ideas. Students were upset.
This past Halloween, some also voiced concern over "slutty soldier" costumes, which did not prompt backlash although this segment of society is often directly associated with PTSD. There are servicemen and women, students in ROTC and ex-soldiers on this campus. If safe spaces originated to protect those who have suffered trauma, this should, theoretically, unleash a massive campaign censoring these costumes. Students were not upset.
This baffles me.
Why are students, and society at large, selectively offended? Who decides what is offensive? Can anyone decide? Who decides which spaces are safe? Is a university supposed to have offensive and challenging ideas? Is a student newspaper? Is a university an intellectual space or a safe space? Are these mutually exclusive? Can words be violent?
I do not have these answers.
As the Duke community knows, some speech is not tolerated. This includes writing "Death to all F*** @ Jack" on a dormitory, which combines bigoted language, targeted death threats and hate speech. This includes defiling a Black Lives Matter poster with racial slurs. Slander, libel, harassment, death threats and similar types of speech shouldn't be tolerated. We should be proud to have strong students who publicly show solidarity with the LGBTQIA+ and the people of color communities on campus.
Bracketing these despicable hate crimes aside, I am left wondering if the idea of a "safe space" has strayed from its goal. I am left wondering if student activists have "weaponized" and appropriated safe spaces. I am left wondering if safe spaces are systemically shutting down dialogue on campuses around the country. I am left wondering if student activists, through the controversial Yale Halloween email and otherwise, are trying to institutionalize safe spaces.
If words can be violent, I am left wondering if safe spaces can be too.
Tyler Fredricks is a Trinity senior. His column runs on alternate Thursdays.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.