cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/2421185

Safe spaces are places that help build community and support between people that are marginalized in wider society (like LGBTQ+, African/Native/Asian Americans, autistic people, etc.)

In our day and age this is necessary because the wider world can be hostile to ideas and behaviours that push against the social norm. These ideas and behaviours that are expressed in these communities are, almost by definition, actively pushing against the social norm and trying to advocate for new and better social norms.

The way that these ideas are attacked can either be direct or indirect in their nature but all of the attacks essentially boils down to unhelpful criticism of the core idea.

For example, if someone made a comment about LGBTQ+ rights and how they need to be advocated more in general society but then someone else comes along and questions whether or not there is any fundamental inequality between LGBTQ+ people and wider society they are implicitly stifling conversation through questioning the core premise of inequality which stops further conversation.

Criticism can be great and help expose weaknesses in initial ideas but at the same time, it also can end up stifling creativity and discussion when people don’t feel emotionally safe sharing their views with others in the community.

This is exactly why ideas can be fragile. Even great ideas and behaviours can end up being forgotten or abandoned because people excessively criticize them without actually developing them further.

This is why safe spaces are important to help nurture and build ideas/behaviours that otherwise would have a hard time gaining traction and help develop them so they become more resilient.

So how do we balance the need for critique and support in communities?

I think a good way of doing this would be to encourage constructive dissent - disagreeing in ways that help build on top of an idea instead of directly stifling it.

This is done by accepting the core premise from the person you are talking to and finding ways to make the idea/behaviour they presented better.

This is exactly why in improv it is important to have the attitude of “Yes, and” because otherwise the scene won’t go anywhere and will either be stuck or completely dissolve.

Takeaway:

We need more communities where ideas can be built on top of each other instead of just being beaten down.

  • Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    When I say “constructive dissent” I mean building on top of someone else ideas not just pointing out flaws in their ideas. I think that if someone suggested something that made the idea better people would be more than happy to take that and roll with it.

    • soyagi@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I understand the concept. I’m saying that this way of working creates echo chambers.

      • seitanic@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Imagine you’re trying to organize people to throw a party, and you have somebody come in who wants to argue that parties are evil because they distract people from glorifying God. Should you hear this person out and engage them in conversation? Or just block them?

        • soyagi@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is a very extreme example. I’m saying that more nuanced discussion and differences in views from within a community struggle in safe spaces.

      • Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What do you think would be a good way to make sure that they are less likely to become echo chambers or do you think this way of interacting is doomed to make them echo chambers?

        • soyagi@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think we need to either redefine safe spaces, change people’s expectations of them, or get rid of them entirely.

          • Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            What does a safe space mean to you and how would you redefine it? What expectations do you think people have of safe spaces and in what ways should they change?

            FYI: sorry for asking a lot of questions. I am trying to get a better sense of what you think could be done to improve these ideas.

    • Recant@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think this whole discourse regarding safe spaces is a good explanation of why safe spaces, in my opinion, aren’t needed and are flawed.

      People will normally flock to groups that provide confirmation bias. Why? Because most people don’t want to be told their idea isn’t good. So safe spaces are de facto already created by group think that already exists.

      Additionally, how would the initial comment questioning the need for safe spaces in this thread have been handled in a safe space? Would it automatically be moderated/deleted because it didn’t agree with the published safe space narrative? We have all had a respectful discourse regarding the validity of safe spaces which is great. If we didn’t have this people could not understand the opposing viewpoint or change their viewpoint.

      • Penguinblue@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My guess is that you are not part of an oppressed group? It is very easy for those used to privilege to criticise those from less privileged groups for wanting their own spaces because they have not experienced what it is like to be othered.

        The point is to be free from the oppression that they experience often on a daily basis, not to keep their ideas unchallenged.