It is important to understand that when we talk about safe(r) spaces, we are talking about spaces that challenge speech and behaviours that perpetuate oppression. Oppression is not a single instance of a discriminatory or prejudiced comment. It is systemic marginalization. None of us experiences oppression in exactly the same way; we exist in social locations determined by many intersections of identity. And none of us operates solely in the context of being oppressed. Each of us, to some degree, experiences privilege. Because of this, each of us, to some degree, oppresses others. The intent of safe(r) space is to recognize these power imbalances, and to try in some small way to undo them. It is not to arbitrarily silence people or limit self-expression.
The examples provided in Mr. Husk’s article (“There should be no double standard for safe spaces,” Nov. 1, 2012) regarding a supposed lack of equality in the way that safe(r) space policies are enforced on our campus all involve privileged identities. White, Christian, cis* men in our society are at the top of power hierarchies when it comes to race, religion, and gender identity. They may absolutely experience oppression based on other facets of their identities, but these specific privileges must be recognized and challenged. Telling people not to wear racist Halloween costumes is not oppressive. Pointing out that there is a disproportionate number of privileged individuals whose voices are being heard on a particular issue is not oppressive. Safe(r) space policies in no way exclude anyone, but they necessarily recognize the maldistribution of power that exists on our campus and in the world.
I am responding to this specific opinion piece because as the programming co-ordinator for the GLBTQ Centre, I have been implicated as part of Mr. Husk’s “evidence” regarding the improper application of safe(r) space policies on campus. That sort of accusation is not something I take lightly, either in my personal capacity as a Carleton student or as a CUSA employee. The sticker he refers to as a “Christian pride” sticker was actually an advertisement for a specific organization, with a link to their website. After beginning my employment and seeing the sticker on our office door, I visited the website only to discover that it had not been updated in multiple years and, perhaps because of this, it contained outdated identity-related language that is considered offensive by many members of the LGBTQ+ community. I asked a volunteer (who identifies as a Christian) to remove the sticker as, otherwise, it would appear we were endorsing this kind of language. The comments that were apparently overheard by Mr. Husk seem to have been taken entirely out of context, given the reality of the situation.
Safe(r) space should absolutely exist for all Carleton students, but that necessitates challenging the systems of oppression that have created a need for those policies. Calling out behaviours and speech that are sexist, racist, ableist, transphobic, homophobic, etc. is not a violation of safe(r) space. Rather, it is the very action that will lead to those spaces becoming a widespread reality.
– Erica Butler,
GLBTQ Centre programming co-ordinator
