We have Safe Spaces here on DU. They are called Groups.

[kwassa]

We also have public spaces on DU. They are called Forums.

For any group to want to have a safe space is not a limitation on freedom of speech, other than in a particular locale at a particular time, but does provide a space for those of like mind or interest to congregate and discuss what is important to them, without interference. This has value in building a community with similar beliefs and interests. It also has value in strengthening minority viewpoints where they can be drowned out by majority viewpoints.

There are plenty of other spaces to have complete freedom of speech about the same topics where all can be challenged. There is great value in both safe spaces and open spaces. Safe spaces are no threat to total freedom of speech, because of the prevalence of open spaces.

DU, on a Meta level, is a safe space. Republican viewpoints are not allowed here. It is not a totally open forum, and that is OK.

[longship]

1. Unfortunately, the Balkanization of DU is not a good thing.

These safe havens only promote more bad behavior. IMHO.

Again, the Balkanization of DU promotes the Balkanization of the party. Who in the fuck wants that no matter who one supports?

I find GD.P a disgusting and toxic waste dump.

[kwassa]

4. I don't think DU is Balkanized.

Many of the protected groups have very little activity, because apparently many who would belong to that demographic don't feel they need them. Those groups that do have relevance thrive.

Without groups, DU would become the tyranny of the majority viewpoints over minority viewpoints. This will only create homogenization of opinions by sheer numbers, and drive out diversity of viewpoint. There is a tendency for this to happen anyways, in my opinion.

As to GD-P, if it didn't exist, then that toxic waste dump would be here in GD.

[longship]

5. Please!

Hillary group. Bernie group. O'Malley group. All where it is like "Home on the Range", where never is heard a discouraging word, or one gets fucking banned from the group. No reasonable discussion allowed.

Meanwhile, in GD.P, there is no discussion whatsoever other than personal attacks against either the candidates or the poster. Chair throwing rather than discussion. I do not think I have ever seen such utterly despicable behavior here on DU before.

How could anybody reasonably call such a thing anything but Balkanization?

It will be the end of the Democratic Party if we continue such overtly childish antics. And make no mistake, DU has turned into pre-school.

[kwassa]

36. DU turns into pre-school every primary season.

I disagree with your analysis, by the way. People who participate in protected groups are the very same people who participate in the open forums, so there is no Balkanization, there are simply different ways of participating. At times, in the open, at times, in more protected areas.

[longship]

41. Walled off groups are, by definition, Balkanization.

I rest my case and stand by my post.

See my response #10.

[leveymg]

43. Worse than the Balkans, some groups are walled fortresses from which attacks are launched on others.

"Safe places?" - sanctuaries to organize hostile action against "the enemy." "Safe places?" - the only thing that is kept safe are bad ideas and destructive memes, protected from potential criticism during gestation.

The proliferation of "protected groups" have changed DU and makes it a more segregated, mutually hostile place.

[longship]

44. I agree with you wholeheartedly.

The current situation makes for division, not unification.

I am beginning to hate DU because of it.

Nevertheless, there are still enough rational people here that make it worthwhile. I try to ignore the mayhem and the chair throwing.

But it makes me very sad for our party.

[notadmblnd]

51. +100

[HuckleB]

26. Oh, it is more than Balkanized.

And not just along the lines of presidential candidates.

[LanternWaste]

7. If applied consistently within your context, you imply the Dewey decimal system is balkanized.

I fail to see how fully accessible groups, freely available for you to join in, whose priorities and interests may differ than yours, is 'balkanization'...

If applied consistently within your context, you imply the Dewey decimal system is balkanized.

[longship]

10. Huh?

Last edited Fri Nov 13, 2015, 02:29 PM - Edit history (1)

And cheesecake is Balkanized, too. But I diverge. (As do you.)

The candidate groups here are precisely Balkanization.

Balkanization, or Balkanisation, is a geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of a region or state into smaller regions or states that are often hostile or uncooperative with one another.

I think that fairly describes what is going on here.

[cwydro]

11. Comparing DU groups to the Dewey Decimal system?

Omg.

[Fumesucker]

2. Conservative viewpoints are common on DU...

I was told recently right here in GD that there are no poor people on the internet.

[romanic]

3. A "safe space" on an online forum

is different from a "safe space" on a college campus or anywhere else in the real world. You can make a TOS for a forum where spaces are made for those who want to discuss without disagreeing viewpoints and not worry about infringing on free speech.

But in the real world, you can't just create a space out of nowhere, censor and silence those who don't agree with what the people in said space say or think. Nor can you sanitize reality to appease those who can't handle it. Face it, there's no such thing as a "safe space" in real life.

[The2ndWheel]

6. The internet bleeds into real life more and more

It's taken some physical stores away. Books, libraries, you don't really need them.

We humans shape the world around us as we see fit. There's an entire generation of people that have grown up with nothing but the internet, and the filtering that's available on/in it.

Up until the point where we're getting our internet connection directly into our brains, I can see this safe space thing taking off. When we are just wi-fied in or whatever all the time, we'll probably be able to mute people we see. Or not even see them, since it'll all be virtual by that time.

[romanic]

15. I didn't think of that.

Scary enough, what you said seems to be happening right now.

[snooper2]

17. So, subject at hand is College Campus are DANGEROUS! Um, why would you go there for a "Safe Space"

[Prism]

8. Your version of safe space is actually an Orwellian inversion of the concept

Safe spaces are supposed to be places where people can speak without fear of retribution or censorship. On colleges specifically, they were intended as First Amendment zones where a student couldn't get in trouble from professors for their ideas and speech.

They were noble concepts meant to encourage academic inquiry and freedom.

Now, they are zones of ideological fanaticism, sheltering participants from disagreement or challenge with apparent attempts at enforcing that uniformity through verbal and sometimes physical aggression.

Notice yesterday's video of a safe space where people could speak their truth. When an asian woman immigrant said something some of these SJWs didn't like, they went after her.

Safe space, huh? More like "Safe space for me, not for thee. You have to agree with me in this place."

This is so far afield from our concepts of what makes for a healthy, intellectual society, it's appalling.

This isn't liberalism. It's, quite frankly, getting fascistic. But I'm somewhat enjoying watching all these would-be Robespierres eat each other. Who next will get the guillotine? The university administrations that unleashed these Frankensteins are now getting a taste as it turns on them.

This is vastly entertaining. I guess some professors are too busy writing papers about Twilight and 50 Shades of Gray instead of cracking a history book.

[tritsofme]

12. This could be its own OP. Great post.

This hostility to free speech and the desire to ban rather than confront is very scary.

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. + 10^6

[Throd]

14. My same thoughts more eloquently stated. Thank you!

On DU we excoriate the right wingers who listen to nothing but Hannity and Limbaugh as weak minded and afraid of challenging views.

[romanic]

16. Hot damn.

Could not have said it better myself.

[ismnotwasm]

18. SJW?

Holy shit.

[Prism]

24. Fortunately, you just illustrated the difference

A social justice activist would be deeply concerned a woman of color was being bullied and booed for speaking her truth.

A social justice warrior would find some bit of nothing that miffs them and make that the issue, ignoring the far more salient and important problems at hand.

Woman of color being bullied? Unworthy of comment. A term used towards the people doing the bullying? How dare you!

C'mon. Don't make it so easy.

[ismnotwasm]

34. No, my shock was seeing a term coined by MRA's used in this context

On the other hand, I suppose my reaction was out of proportion to my expectations.

[opiate69]

45. Except, of course....

It wasn't coined by MRAs. But, do continue to prove Prism's point.

[Prism]

53. It wasn't coined by the MRA's

It's been used on the general internet for years. Again, there's the dynamic at work. Did you address any points in my post?

No, no you did not.

What did you do? You threw out a boogieman "MRAs!" to justify your reprioritizing the problematic situation based on your sensibilities rather than address the much, much bigger problem of a woman of color being bullied.

Activist vs. Warrior.

[Goblinmonger]

20. So there shouldn't be a space where people of color can talk?

Or atheists? Or a specific religion? People in those groups want to be able to talk without those with privilege coming in and telling them how silly they are being or that they just don't get it. How the hell is that Orwellian? And some people want to talk about Sanders without someone coming in to say that Hillary has already been crowned. Why is that bad? If you want to mix it up about the primaries, go to GDP. If you just want to talk about the person you like, go to that place.

And your last line smacks of Republican talking points about the world of academics.

[Prism]

27. Not in a public space

in an academic environment that is specifically there for the exchange of ideas and speech.

No. And they certainly shouldn't have the power to ban journalists from that public space in the name of safety.

Wanna rent a rec room somewhere? Go nuts. Don't want to be challenged in the public square? No. Not in a free democracy. Not now, not ever.

Why is it, in democratic societies, the people always wailing about safety are immediately the first people we should be suspicious of? Whether it's the right-wing with their Patriot Acts or the left-wing with their desire for compulsive ideological uniformity. It's such a scary go to concept for authoritarians. "We're reducing freedoms for safety!" Liberals should be a billion fucking times smarter than this. It's like we didn't watch this shit with Republicans from 2001-2008.

As for Republican talking point, that is actually in the news. The professor who threatened a journalist (of color, I might add)? That was what her work was based on. Hilariously ridiculous and unworthy pop culture projects.

[Goblinmonger]

35. DU and an academic environment are completely different.

If it is a public university, it needs to be public and about exploring concepts. Private universities can do as they please. Bob Jones University makes me sick, but I don't think they need to be forced to accept an atheist and discuss concepts that go against their philosophy in their classes.

Who made you the judge of what is worthy for academic study. My Master's thesis was on a television cartoon. Is that ridiculous? It was specifically about whether students learn environmental information from said cartoon and focused on Information Process Theory, but I'm sure it would be more fodder for your claims of what an academic should focus on and what they should not.

[Prism]

40. Yeah, I'm not sure what your argument is

Right now, in the news, the problem with "safe spaces" in these demonstrations is that they're being thrown down in the public square (and in places specifically built for the exchange of ideas). That's the complaint.

No one cares if a group has a meeting somewhere. Free association and all that.

It's when the public square is commandeered as a zone for one ideology that the problem arises.

We seem to agree on this.

As for that professor. Read her entire CV. It reads like right-wing parody of what they think left-leaning professors are like. I actually thought it was a right-wing parody until I read a news article about it. Her work is ridiculous and ridicule-worthy.

[kwassa]

48. There can be private spaces within a public space.

There can be private spaces within an academic space, that can be created as subsets.

And in this case, entirely temporary. At Mizzou, this space was created at the camping area for the protestors, where their tents are and where they temporarily live.

and I don't think that impinges on the overall freedom of speech in the university.

[RobinA]

28. Speaking Only

for myself and as an atheist, I can't think of anything less interesting than being surrounded by a bunch of other atheists. What fun is that? Similarly, I have never had any interest in all female groups. Homogeneous groups...kinda zzzzzzzzz.

Anyway, people who want to find a place to talk among themselves should probably find a private place. Internet = non private. Incidentally, private clubs have been more or less run out of town or opened up to all. By liberals. Ask former members of men's clubs. They just wanted to sit around and talk about their similar interests, but nooooooo. Do I see a petard hoisting in there somewhere?

[Goblinmonger]

32. If it's not your jam, then that's fine.

So discussion groups on the internet are like men's clubs? You do know you are on a private club right now, yes? People that are not progressives are shown the door. And if you want to know how often that happens, join MIRT. It's a crazy game of whack-a-mole trying to get rid of them.

[RobinA]

23. I Wish I Could Be

entertained. As a liberal, I fear the backlash that is sure to come. This nonsense will strengthen the real racists and prove a recruiting tool. The Second Civil War - started by Halloween costumes and a frat party.

[HuckleB]

29. +1,000,000 ... 000

Nicely put.

[Bonx]

37. That's some good posting

[NaturalHigh]

38. ^^^^^+1^^^^^

[kwassa]

42. No. you are wrong, and wildly over the top, IMHO.

Calling them zones of ideological fanaticism is only your own personal projection on to the situation. A safe space is not an open discussion forum, that's all. You want everything to be open to you at all times and in all places. That is not necessary to maintaining a world of free speech.

There is nothing fanatical anywhere in this. There is disagreement, however.

By maintaining a safe space for the participants in that space, the free discussion can happen elsewhere. You apparently missed that part of my OP.

[tabasco]

47. Thank you so much for your wise words. n/t

[beevul]

49. Precisely.

I was blocked from one such 'safe space' for a post I made in one of them. It was an accident, and I had no intention of even posting in that group in the first place. The post was was deleted in less than 2 minutes, was posted in the middle of the night, and it had 1 view when I deleted it IIRC. Nobody even read that post, and I wasn't blocked for the content of it, I was blocked because I have the unmitigated gall to be pro-gun.

A safe space created under the guise of being a 'shield', ceases to be seen as a shield, when used very obviously and deliberately as a sword.

[Eleanors38]

9. "Safe place?" The Gungeon group? BWAHAHA!

Safe to go there and get a hate-fix against Democratic gun-owners. Or just blow it out in GD forum whenever the urge moves you.

[DustyJoe]

19. safe spaces

The way it appears from the outside, groups clustering running off people that don't look and think like them is nothing but ages old self segregation. I thought the decades old fight to stop segregation was over long ago, now its just self imposed. So who then actually 'won' the de-segregation war of the 60's ?

[Goblinmonger]

21. Most of the safe havens on DU are about protecting from those of privilege.

[romanic]

25. Everyone has some type of privilege.

If it's not white privilege, it's male privilege, or heterosexual privilege, or able-body privilege, or American privilege, etc.

There's nothing wrong with having a group of like-minded people with the same interests or beliefs; it's when these groups proclaim themselves to be "safe" and authoritarian against other people is where the problem lies.

[Goblinmonger]

30. For the most part, of course they do.

I host the Atheists & Agnostics group. Whenever I hear someone that is religious say what you are saying about that group, it just smacks of having one's privilege hurt. Why is it "authoritarian" to not be able to go and push your privilege in a certain area on a group that doesn't have that same privilege?

[Act_of_Reparation]

46. Yes, everyone is privileged in some way.

But so fucking what? I'm privileged as a cisgendered heterosexual caucasian male; that doesn't mean I need a bunch of theists godsplaining to me in the atheists and agnostics group, or a bunch of neurotypical armchair psychologists kicking it back in the Mental Health Support group. Heaven forbid we have a little space to ourselves.

[Blue_In_AK]

55. My safe-haven group is the Photo Group

It's a bunch of wild-eyed fanatics in there. The rest of you dare not enter.

[FlatBaroque]

22. That's exactly how I imagine DWS

would define it as well. As Prism said beautifully above, Orwellian.

[bluedigger]

31. You've never been to the Sports Group, have you?

[earthside]

33. Censorship groups are destructive of the broader DU community.

I've been here for a long time ... and I think the creation of these 'safe places' groups are a contributor to the incivility and intolerance that seems to be increasing here.

It is one thing to create a community of discussion for Democrats/liberals/progressives like the broader DU; it is another thing to allow factionalizing, segregating, exclusivity by permitting and encouraging therein groups that censor and exile those with diverse points of view.

[demigoddess]

39. there is a difference between safe spaces and

you HAVE to agree with me in every single detail.

[pintobean]

50. DU isn't a public university campus

It's a privately owned web site.

[Android3.14]

52. You say that, but...

Too often those "safe spaces" become little cliquish, almost fascist, enclaves where a select few determine which specific attitudes a person must possess for admittance to the club.

[demigoddess]

54. that goes on all over DU

it is getting so you can't even have an opinion without being yelled at and insulted for that opinion.