The Myth of Safe Spaces

Creating more barriers in dialogue than bridging gaps

Colleges and universities across America have encouraged open conversations through the creation of safe spaces and cultural clubs. In doing so, they have impeded the conversations that disagree with the ones actually taking place in those clubs. If you disagree with certain aspects of conversations, then you are deemed politically incorrect and incapable of rational thinking. For instance, if someone dismisses the idea of institutional racism or that of white privilege, they are ostracized. 

There is a whole new wave of students who try their best to be politically correct and refrain from speaking in fear of being ostracized for their views. The creation of safe spaces has spearheaded a culture of “groupthink,” making it even less likely for proper dialogue of opposing ideas, not political ideologies, to take place. 

In other words, safe spaces have become a platform for indoctrinating students with political ideologies rather than being a space for discussing ideas without prejudice. 

Before the well-intentioned idea of safe spaces was enforced, people said whatever they desired, which reflected the actual reality outside of campuses. In these situations, the minorities found it challenging to have conversations about their circumstances and find people who shared their same perspective. Safe spaces propelled those discussions into the mainstream platform, empowering minorities and fostering a sense of community among them. 

However, with their recent popularity, cultural clubs are shutting down conversations diametrically opposite to the ones they support. People in these clubs may argue that this is a good thing, but it only reiterates their biases for giving priority to conversations they deem crucial. For instance, if a club supports certain feminist ideals, they surround themselves with only the people who have a preexisting bias about feminism and believe everything the club preaches. 

It does not bring students having opposing views into those conversations and paints the opponent as an uncompassionate sexist. 

At Marist College, when I go to events held by cultural clubs like Marist International Student Club (MISA), Muslim Student Association (MSA) and Appreciating Races and Creating Opportunities (ARCO), I see the same people. The conversations encouraged in these clubs tend to be similar.

This repetition suggests that people in these clubs hear the same opinion about the victimization of their particular socio-economic group, the petty politics of the right and the sacred promise of the left politicians. 

The repetition has created an extreme echo chamber. If a person hears the ideology of a single member, they can guess the opinions of other members on contentious issues.

Most people coming to these events have the same view on controversial topics. I believe this is doing more harm than good, and not in any way encouraging dialogue. Dialogue should be an exchange of ideas and opinions. But an exchange cannot take place if students share the same views and opinions. 

Even if you learn new information during these events, the information provided only reiterates the biases you may have, instead of challenging them. Therefore, students will be more likely to conclude that their perspective of the world is the appropriate one. Problems can occur when these people come across views that oppose what they believe. They will have trouble understanding different points of view, which can lead to more fervent conflicts between people. 

My friend, a Marist student, who I will not name, was blocked by another student because he liked something on the Marist Republican Instagram page. He doesn’t even support the Republican party and liked the post only because his friend wanted him to. But the persons who blocked him was so appalled by my friend's actions that they didn’t want to hear any explanation. This incident illustrates the unwillingness to listen to opposite opinions. I believe the “groupthink” culture contributes to this. 

Nonetheless, people running these clubs will argue that their mission is to promote inclusivity and dialogues that further the interests of their groups.

Sabrina Adhikari, president of MISA, suggested that she tries her best to encourage people with opposing views to attend their events. She believes it is the stigma associated with these clubs that is stopping students from attending. She said, "The stigma related to cultural clubs being only for multicultural students is the reason that most students do not attend these events." 

"Since people from diverse backgrounds have an amazing story to share, most students from local communities do not believe their stories are worth sharing,” Sabrina continued.

I cannot say for sure whether it is the stigma associated with the club or the inhospitality of these clubs that play a vital role in students forming groups. However, I can attest that these safe spaces are creating more barriers in dialogue instead of bridging the existing gaps in our everyday conversations.