There's been a lot of 토론 in this spot on the general idea of progressive "softies" who need "safe spaces" to avoid being "triggered."
The talk of these kinds of people generally devolves into hyperbolized stereotypes of wimpy college students using it as an excuse not to do their homework, for example. Acronyms like "SJWs" get thrown around, and people express their frustration about feeling like they're walking on egg shells, 또는 censored, 또는 having to cater to other people's over-sensitivity in order to avoid being accused of an "ism" of some sort 또는 another. People feel like they're being attacked for their opinions.
The 질문 invariably becomes: Why do we need so many 안전한, 안전 spaces, and why do I feel like my freedom of expression is at risk?
So I'm here to answer those 질문 in a non-judgmental way, and to explain what these places are and who they help. Hopefully, I'll be able to do this in a way that doesn't offend 또는 frustrate you. 당신 know -- safely.
Allow me to begin 의해 defining a few terms. A safe space is supposed to be places located on the internet and offline (like in colleges and schools) where individuals can go to express and discuss sensitive topics and have a supportive atmosphere. In order to keep these spaces "safe," there are often rules that are enforced as much as they can be 의해 moderators and other facilitators of discussion. Certain views -- for example, hate speech, bigotry, and oppressive commentary -- are strictly not allowed.
An echo chamber is a 우주 where people always agree and repeat the same ideas, providing positive feedback for specific opinions deemed "right" 또는 "truth" to the point that it becomes almost indistinguishable from fact. No one brings up new ideas in echo chambers, 또는 challenges the prevailing opinions.
A trigger is a term that evolved from psychology, specifically in relation to trauma and those who have endured it. A trigger warning, 또는 less controversially a content warning in 기사 and other media is meant to be a yellow flag for anyone who has experienced trauma that the 기사 또는 media might discuss. Usually, triggers include sexual assault, violence, drugs, alcohol, 또는 abuse of any sort.
Privilege is something that everyone (for the most part) has in some shape 또는 form. A lot of times, privilege is just seen as something 당신 have 또는 don't have (particularly if 당신 are a white male), but it's far 더 많이 layered than that.
I could write an entire 기사 on its own about privilege (link), but for the purposes of this article, let's just define it as something 당신 have 의해 luck, genetics, 또는 circumstances, that gives 당신 an advantage over those who don't (whether 당신 are aware of it 또는 not).
In this context, let's focus on the privilege of not having experienced trauma. After all, it's generally these people who criticize trigger warnings and 안전한, 안전 spaces.
"Wait, Cinders," I hear someone saying. "I've experienced trauma, and I also think 안전한, 안전 spaces and trigger warnings are for pussies."
OK, I hear you. I'm generalizing again, and I'm sorry. But consider your trauma for a second. How did 당신 옮기기 through it? Did 당신 have a family to support you? Did 당신 have money for a therapist? Did your insurance cover it? Was the law on your side? Were 당신 able to overcome your trauma and live a mostly normal, and healthy life afterwards?
If 당신 answered yes to any of those questions, 당신 may have had resources available to 당신 that other people did not. And that's privilege.
Just because it isn't a problem for you, doesn't mean it's not a problem for someone else.
It's easy to tell people to just "get over" something, when it's not something we ourselves have personally been through. That's when we need to realize that our experience is not these people's experiences, and they are the expert on their own lives. That's why we have trigger warnings; so that people can make informed decisions about the content they read.
Because trigger warnings are generally related to violence 또는 trauma and not political ideas, they don't contribute to echo chambers, either. Especially as the people using trigger warnings are generally liberals. And they help people to brace themselves for what they are about to read, if they chose to go on.
Remember: 당신 have not experienced their trauma. So give them a break, huh?
Let's get back to 안전한, 안전 spaces. If there are rules about the things that are allowed to be said here, how is it not stifling freedom of expression and creating an echo chamber?
What a great question! I 사랑 this 질문 because its 심장 is in the right place, and it wants to promote the exchange of ideas and get rid of echo chambers.
To be clear, echo chambers are not only pointless, they can actually be harmful to progress. Hearing the same ideas over and over again can solidify them into a person's brain until they are unwilling to listen to anything else, 또는 try anything new. Liberals and conservatives alike are guilty of this. Liberals and conservatives create their own echo chambers, and this is one reason that the world is so divided right now into us-versus-them camps.
But 안전한, 안전 Spaces are not echo chambers.
안전한, 안전 spaces are a place for the marginalized and the victimized. Think of them like mental and emotional rehab. 당신 wouldn't let alcohol into an AA meeting. No emotional abuse is accepted in a meeting for emotional abuse survivors. That's why these rules exist. They are there to promote healing, to build bonds, to build community, and to show people who have been stepped on and ostracized and humiliated that they are not alone, that they have a tribe, and that they are protected.
Safe spaces and trigger warnings aren't for the weak. They're for the survivors. They're for soldiers, fighting battles we never see because they hide them so well. They're for people who were kicked out of their homes 의해 people they thought loved them. People who were betrayed in the most personal way 의해 a stranger, 또는 worse, someone they thought they could trust. People who are yelled at and harassed every 일 walking down the 거리 just because of their faith, 또는 skin color, 또는 sex. They're for people who are just struggling to get through the 다음 day, who want to talk about the things that are bothering them in a place where they know their feelings and experiences won't be mocked 또는 criticized.
And yet, mocking those survivors is exactly what some people are doing. Whenever I see a comic, 또는 watch a pundit, belittling people who need 안전한, 안전 spaces as over sensitive liberals, these are the people I imagine them insulting. Not victims, but veterans, of battles that the people criticizing know nothing about.
안전한, 안전 spaces do not infringe on freedom of expression, because people who disagree with it are free to express that literally anywhere else. That's why there are so many 기사 criticizing 안전한, 안전 spaces! That's why we can have a conversation! Because, in all honesty, the 토론 spot and the Internet in general isn't a 안전한, 안전 space. It's a war zone for battling opinions and conflicting ideas and progress. And it fights the good fight. But there's a place for 안전한, 안전 spaces, too.
Safe spaces are for healing, not debate. They are a respite from the battles these people are fighting. A place to find a tribe.
Safe spaces promote diversity of ideas 의해 allowing people to speak without fear of criticism. There is a time and place for criticism. The internet is rife with 포럼 for it, like this one, where people are allowed to point out flaws in ideas. And I 사랑 that the 토론 spot is one of those places. But sometimes, because of privilege (yup, said that word again), some ideas are stifled.
In the 토론 spot, at least a few years ago, the liberals outnumbered the conservatives 의해 a heavy amount, and I link this fact at length, fearing this would become another liberal echo chamber. The liberals had the privilege, and the conservatives could barely say anything without getting pounced on 의해 three other users willing to 토론 their view. How could they even defend themselves?
In 안전한, 안전 spaces, we can guarantee diversity of thought because there is diversity of perspective. Barring hate speech doesn't mean barring dissent. And we can hear from marginalized groups who don't normally get a voice. Where do 당신 think the trans rights movement came from; out of thin air? It came from 안전한, 안전 spaces.
In short, try not to be so dismissive of 안전한, 안전 spaces, trigger warnings, 또는 the people they help. It's not about being overly sensitive, 또는 not being tough. It's about empathy. It's about giving veterans a break from the war, and helping them keep fighting.
It's about being an ally; not an enemy.
The talk of these kinds of people generally devolves into hyperbolized stereotypes of wimpy college students using it as an excuse not to do their homework, for example. Acronyms like "SJWs" get thrown around, and people express their frustration about feeling like they're walking on egg shells, 또는 censored, 또는 having to cater to other people's over-sensitivity in order to avoid being accused of an "ism" of some sort 또는 another. People feel like they're being attacked for their opinions.
The 질문 invariably becomes: Why do we need so many 안전한, 안전 spaces, and why do I feel like my freedom of expression is at risk?
So I'm here to answer those 질문 in a non-judgmental way, and to explain what these places are and who they help. Hopefully, I'll be able to do this in a way that doesn't offend 또는 frustrate you. 당신 know -- safely.
Allow me to begin 의해 defining a few terms. A safe space is supposed to be places located on the internet and offline (like in colleges and schools) where individuals can go to express and discuss sensitive topics and have a supportive atmosphere. In order to keep these spaces "safe," there are often rules that are enforced as much as they can be 의해 moderators and other facilitators of discussion. Certain views -- for example, hate speech, bigotry, and oppressive commentary -- are strictly not allowed.
An echo chamber is a 우주 where people always agree and repeat the same ideas, providing positive feedback for specific opinions deemed "right" 또는 "truth" to the point that it becomes almost indistinguishable from fact. No one brings up new ideas in echo chambers, 또는 challenges the prevailing opinions.
A trigger is a term that evolved from psychology, specifically in relation to trauma and those who have endured it. A trigger warning, 또는 less controversially a content warning in 기사 and other media is meant to be a yellow flag for anyone who has experienced trauma that the 기사 또는 media might discuss. Usually, triggers include sexual assault, violence, drugs, alcohol, 또는 abuse of any sort.
Privilege is something that everyone (for the most part) has in some shape 또는 form. A lot of times, privilege is just seen as something 당신 have 또는 don't have (particularly if 당신 are a white male), but it's far 더 많이 layered than that.
I could write an entire 기사 on its own about privilege (link), but for the purposes of this article, let's just define it as something 당신 have 의해 luck, genetics, 또는 circumstances, that gives 당신 an advantage over those who don't (whether 당신 are aware of it 또는 not).
In this context, let's focus on the privilege of not having experienced trauma. After all, it's generally these people who criticize trigger warnings and 안전한, 안전 spaces.
"Wait, Cinders," I hear someone saying. "I've experienced trauma, and I also think 안전한, 안전 spaces and trigger warnings are for pussies."
OK, I hear you. I'm generalizing again, and I'm sorry. But consider your trauma for a second. How did 당신 옮기기 through it? Did 당신 have a family to support you? Did 당신 have money for a therapist? Did your insurance cover it? Was the law on your side? Were 당신 able to overcome your trauma and live a mostly normal, and healthy life afterwards?
If 당신 answered yes to any of those questions, 당신 may have had resources available to 당신 that other people did not. And that's privilege.
Just because it isn't a problem for you, doesn't mean it's not a problem for someone else.
It's easy to tell people to just "get over" something, when it's not something we ourselves have personally been through. That's when we need to realize that our experience is not these people's experiences, and they are the expert on their own lives. That's why we have trigger warnings; so that people can make informed decisions about the content they read.
Because trigger warnings are generally related to violence 또는 trauma and not political ideas, they don't contribute to echo chambers, either. Especially as the people using trigger warnings are generally liberals. And they help people to brace themselves for what they are about to read, if they chose to go on.
Remember: 당신 have not experienced their trauma. So give them a break, huh?
Let's get back to 안전한, 안전 spaces. If there are rules about the things that are allowed to be said here, how is it not stifling freedom of expression and creating an echo chamber?
What a great question! I 사랑 this 질문 because its 심장 is in the right place, and it wants to promote the exchange of ideas and get rid of echo chambers.
To be clear, echo chambers are not only pointless, they can actually be harmful to progress. Hearing the same ideas over and over again can solidify them into a person's brain until they are unwilling to listen to anything else, 또는 try anything new. Liberals and conservatives alike are guilty of this. Liberals and conservatives create their own echo chambers, and this is one reason that the world is so divided right now into us-versus-them camps.
But 안전한, 안전 Spaces are not echo chambers.
안전한, 안전 spaces are a place for the marginalized and the victimized. Think of them like mental and emotional rehab. 당신 wouldn't let alcohol into an AA meeting. No emotional abuse is accepted in a meeting for emotional abuse survivors. That's why these rules exist. They are there to promote healing, to build bonds, to build community, and to show people who have been stepped on and ostracized and humiliated that they are not alone, that they have a tribe, and that they are protected.
Safe spaces and trigger warnings aren't for the weak. They're for the survivors. They're for soldiers, fighting battles we never see because they hide them so well. They're for people who were kicked out of their homes 의해 people they thought loved them. People who were betrayed in the most personal way 의해 a stranger, 또는 worse, someone they thought they could trust. People who are yelled at and harassed every 일 walking down the 거리 just because of their faith, 또는 skin color, 또는 sex. They're for people who are just struggling to get through the 다음 day, who want to talk about the things that are bothering them in a place where they know their feelings and experiences won't be mocked 또는 criticized.
And yet, mocking those survivors is exactly what some people are doing. Whenever I see a comic, 또는 watch a pundit, belittling people who need 안전한, 안전 spaces as over sensitive liberals, these are the people I imagine them insulting. Not victims, but veterans, of battles that the people criticizing know nothing about.
안전한, 안전 spaces do not infringe on freedom of expression, because people who disagree with it are free to express that literally anywhere else. That's why there are so many 기사 criticizing 안전한, 안전 spaces! That's why we can have a conversation! Because, in all honesty, the 토론 spot and the Internet in general isn't a 안전한, 안전 space. It's a war zone for battling opinions and conflicting ideas and progress. And it fights the good fight. But there's a place for 안전한, 안전 spaces, too.
Safe spaces are for healing, not debate. They are a respite from the battles these people are fighting. A place to find a tribe.
Safe spaces promote diversity of ideas 의해 allowing people to speak without fear of criticism. There is a time and place for criticism. The internet is rife with 포럼 for it, like this one, where people are allowed to point out flaws in ideas. And I 사랑 that the 토론 spot is one of those places. But sometimes, because of privilege (yup, said that word again), some ideas are stifled.
In the 토론 spot, at least a few years ago, the liberals outnumbered the conservatives 의해 a heavy amount, and I link this fact at length, fearing this would become another liberal echo chamber. The liberals had the privilege, and the conservatives could barely say anything without getting pounced on 의해 three other users willing to 토론 their view. How could they even defend themselves?
In 안전한, 안전 spaces, we can guarantee diversity of thought because there is diversity of perspective. Barring hate speech doesn't mean barring dissent. And we can hear from marginalized groups who don't normally get a voice. Where do 당신 think the trans rights movement came from; out of thin air? It came from 안전한, 안전 spaces.
In short, try not to be so dismissive of 안전한, 안전 spaces, trigger warnings, 또는 the people they help. It's not about being overly sensitive, 또는 not being tough. It's about empathy. It's about giving veterans a break from the war, and helping them keep fighting.
It's about being an ally; not an enemy.