Immediately, words and phrases such as “safe space,” or “triggered,” and the cliched, “offended” arouse negative connotations of “precious snowflakes.” The common conception is that a safe space where a person can go for refuge from being disagreed with, being expected to have a decent debate, and have their opinions confirmed. Truthfully, I haven’t done much research on the concept of the “safe space.” I’ve somewhat imagined it as being similar to group counseling. An allocated area where people come to discuss their problems and privations in the world, and, judgment and disagreement is restricted. As well as Religious Studies, I’m a psychology major, albeit it a “baby” psychology major considering I’m only in my second and third psych classes, but we’ve briefly touched on group psychology in group psyche, and a primary goal is to emphasize people’s connections and empathy with other people, gaining a more self-aware, efficient perception and coping of their problems. The problem with group psychology, however, is the problem that the person doesn’t necessarily feel like they can say exactly what they’re thinking, and, they might share information that they don’t want to be spread. As far as I know, fellow attendees of a group psychology session aren’t legally required to adhere to the confidentiality that a single therapist is allowed. So, by my observations, this is where group psychology sessions become “safe spaces” where a particular identity is allowed, and people who may be opposed or judgmental aren’t allowed to disagree.

For example, if there was a general group psychology session where people discuss addiction. There are a plethora of addictions, alcohol, drugs, foods, sex, prescription medication, etc. There’s also the relatively prevalent addiction to pornography. The person coming to the meeting with an addiction to pornography might be apprehensive to share their addiction as well as be apprehensive to elaborate on the nature of their addiction. If he or she was to attend a group psychology session centered particularly on porn addiction, then they would be more likely to feel comfortable to share. And, of course, the characteristics that we consider to be normative, or, the classic, “cis white straight male,” bar some identities from being able to attend a safe space, as well as be discouraged from having their own safe spaces because their problems are perceived as insignificant compared their minority status. This is a perception I totally understand. People who are mostly normative sometimes receive bad connotations when they deal with problems, because they “don’t know what it’s like” to have the identities, ethnicities, and experiences such as gay, transgender, black or hispanic, female, rape victims, etc. I concur that it can be unfair and dehumanizing to suggest that a person who isn’t perceived as oppressed can’t have issues. I also concur that there could be a place where people who have an identity, ethnicity, or experiences that might receive bad reactions, such as queer, transgender, black, and rape victims, etc, could share their feelings and experiences without being judged. For example, let’s hypothesize that there was a safe space for people with suicidal tendencies, have attempted suicide, or are simply considering suicide, I don’t understand why it’s so taboo to consider having a place where they can share their feelings without being told, “you’re just a coward,” or, “you just want attention,” or, “Suck it up, buttercup.” Of course, my chief recommendation is that a person seek therapeutic and/or psychiatric help, but, sometimes, people don’t want to wait until their weekly or biweekly session to share their suicidal thoughts or are even frightened that they will go into a state where suicide seems like the only option. They want to at least be able to vocalize their frustrations with people who understand where they’re coming from.

So, my problem is not with safe spaces, and, I don’t think anyone’s is when they critically analyze it. Some people can’t see that certain places and identities, such as churches, Christianity, conservatism, are also safe spaces and identities where people can easily get offended or “triggered.” By the logic of people who use the terms “precious snowflakes,” I feel like these are under the same auspice. For example, in the U.S. pledge of allegiance, the phrase “under God” is used, and, it is noted that the phrase was added in the 1950’s in a response to communism. Some are offended by the use of the term because it implies the Judeo-Christian God, which is a position commonly associated with liberals. Others, though, are utterly offended by the prospect of removing the phrase from the U.S. pledge of allegiance. It also doesn’t require conservatism in one’s politics to be in opposition towards safe spaces and a refraining from offending people. Often, younger people who have little to no interest in politics mock the idea of safe spaces and the attempt at not offending anyone. So, let’s imagine two scenarios.

In the first scenario, we have a television show that makes an offensive joke about transgenders. It could be a joke that implies an actual vocalization of anti-transgender positions, or, it could simply be an off-color joke in which a term such as “faggot” or “trannie” is used, or the characters could simply be disgusted or a guest-starring character could be a transgender character and be at the expense of the episode’s jokes. Obviously, there would be an immense amount of backlash, with terms such as transphobic, bigoted, or ignorant being thrown at the television show. Many transgender people would be offended by the show, and thousands of anti-safe space and people who feel that freedom of speech is being assaulted would flock to mock safe spaces and the idea that people could be offended by a fictional television show. Now, let’s imagine a second scenario. Let’s just say a television show, we’ll use Family Guy, a television show that’s been recognized in the past for insulting Christianity, makes an off-color joke and mocks Jesus, himself. In the past, some might call for a ban on the show, which is an assault on freedom of speech in itself. In the present, the call for banning has become less significant, but there will be plenty of posts by Christians who don’t use the term, “offended,” but express a sense of anger or frustration at the mere existence of a joke in a show that they aren’t required to watch. Just like transgenders or otherwise liberals expressing anger or frustration about a show that they don’t have to watch. That argument could certainly made. And, then, within the confounds of a church, a preacher or speaker could express their grievances in a church that subscribes to a specific set of principles and a general collective of opinions. And, also, a transgender person who faces harassment over, let’s just say, an insult of transgender people by a prominent politician, could have a place where similar people have endured the same experiences. Not everyone seeks a public forum or to fight in the arena. Some people, conservative or liberal, Christian, Islamic, or Atheist, gay or straight, white or black, cisgendered or transgendered, seek a place of refuge.

Look. Thus far, the language I’ve employed and the analysis I’ve provided in this article has come from a place of scholarly writing, a technique I use frequently in these articles in order to convey a sense of intellectualism that you can decide I do or do not possess. I’m coming from a place of honesty, now, when I say that people are people who don’t want to be insulted, assaulted, or be made to feel like they’re welcome. Not everyone, from either side of the conservative/liberal circus in this country, are ready to fight the good fight. People who suffer from being harassed, being made to feel not welcome or less than for who they are, people who suffer from traumatic experiences, and people who suffer from mental illness. The common conception is that liberals cry too often and conservatives get too angry. Believe it or not, there are conservatives who leak tears because they feel that the traditions, principles, and the era of ancestors they cherished by blindly idealistic liberals. There are liberals who get angry because they feel that their time will never come, and that blindly nostalgic conservatives won’t allow a new era to come in. I understand the grievances with a safe space, a church for Baptists or a classroom for feminists, that simply allow people to voice their opinions without being disagreed with. That being said, what about a place of refuge? Where people can rest from a harsh world? Call me cliched. I just don’t think we should call it a safe space. The type of safe space I believe in has a different connotation.

A hideaway.