Identity Politics: the impasse, the debate, the thread.
- Thread starter danny la rouge
- Start date
emanymton
A cat politely sat on the flaming gardener.
The certification that shows just before the film starts gives a breakdown of why a film has been given the certificate it has. It will say if there are scences of sexual violence.
Red sparrow for example has the following
So there is a warning given for films.
purenarcotic
Conveniently Pocket Sized
Well I suppose refuge is a live example. An all women space, no men allowed, can’t tell anybody where you are etc.
Treacle Toes
Time
I missed this earlier, sorry ...it makes laugh a bit though Edie because if you haven't encountered SS how can you critique them?
Treacle Toes
Time
Yes a good example. Surely the need to keep vulnerable people safe is a prime and obvious example. We have laws and legislation and as a society believe in the premise safeguarding.
Safe spaces can be counselling sessions or peer support groups also. The boundaries are agreed for the good and safety of all.
Less formally I have experienced them in activist circles aimed at combating abuse and disruption.
Urban is one to a certain extent...it it not totally gloves off here..there are rules about what behaviour and treatment is acceptable.
Last edited:
Shechemite
Be the sun and all will see you
Films have warnings at the beginning I thought?
Someone being obnoxiously intrusive isn’t an issue of trigger warnings.
That isn’t what people mean when they talk about safe spaces surely?!
I know. Sorry
Maybe I’d be a big fan if I ever found out what they actually were and tried one!
Treacle Toes
Time
I know. Sorry
My worry is that you are only thinking about the worst examples or interpretations of this stuff.
Well I never had to go to a refuge thank fuck. (Well I did as a kid but not as an adult). But that is definitely not what my understanding of a safe space is in this discussion. I thought it meant safe in the sense that uncomfortable or challenging ideas wouldn’t be expressed. Not that you’re safe from being slapped about by your husband- of course refuges from actual violence should exist.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
There's a real problem with how trigger warnings are used now and the discussions that take place around them. When I first came across them probably 15-20 years ago now on usenet mailing lists or internet forums about depression, which included a lot of people with PTSD from sexual abuse and other traumas, trigger warnings were used sparingly for graphic descriptions/visualisations of rape, sexual abuse, extreme physical abuse, suicide, self harm and maybe some other things. I seem to remember they were also used on eating disorder mailing lists as well but I don't know exactly how.
Now the way is to trigger warning everything, even just a mention of rape or whatever gets a warning and for me this makes them pointless, as you can't make an informed choice to avoid things which are going to trigger your PTSD, it only allows you to avoid everything or nothing which isn't helpful.
As well as that, it sends out a message that avoidance is fine, that's it's a good thing to do and should be encouraged. Previously there was active discussion about how avoidance is bad but sometimes necessary, and how people with PTSD find it helpful to (a) ease into exposure to the trauma they experienced in terms of how graphic / detailed / exactly similar to their experience the thing is (hence only warnings for graphic stuff, the less graphic stuff is, the less need there should be for anyone to avoid it) and (b) be prepared that they are going to be exposed to something that may trigger a PTSD reaction, as this can help them to be able to control it.
But surely almost everyone has something traumatic and difficult in their lives. Suicide of a loved one, domestic violence, loss of a child, having been in a war, having a serious mental health problem, addiction, bereavement, being made homeless, being raped, being assaulted or a victim of crime, a car crash, being abused as a kid, serious illness. The list goes on.
It’s my understanding that it’s only really the most extreme of these, a horrendously violent rape, or being exposed to the horrors of war, that results in PTSD for some of those exposed. We’re not all walking round with PTSD cos we met some adversity. Shit things happen, but actually most people do deal with it. I don’t mean to seem heartless but do we really need to trigger warning stuff? Maybe we do. Anyway we’ve strayed away from the more interesting discussion about identity politics.
It’s my understanding that it’s only really the most extreme of these, a horrendously violent rape, or being exposed to the horrors of war, that results in PTSD for some of those exposed. We’re not all walking round with PTSD cos we met some adversity. Shit things happen, but actually most people do deal with it. I don’t mean to seem heartless but do we really need to trigger warning stuff? Maybe we do. Anyway we’ve strayed away from the more interesting discussion about identity politics.
Last edited:
FabricLiveBaby!
Live Baby Fabric!
This is what safe spaces should be and were originally. Spaces pertaining to groups with certain needs, set aside specifically for them.
Lately however some places have decided that institutions such as universities should also be "safe spaces". I remember specifically a group of Islamists trying to shut down a conversation by Mariam Namazie about atheism by claiming the university (Goldsmith's I believe) was a "safe space" and that her talk will be "triggering".
It's an utter bastardisation of what a safe space is and should be.
Safe from physical violence - yes. Safe from ideas- no.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
The place where I work is a Safe Space in every meaningful sense; a residential service for people with learning disabilities that not just anyone can enter. They are safe from abuse while they are there, and that's the point.
I think I don't believe Safe Spaces are or should be connected to identity, still less indentitypolitics, but on risk of harm. The concepts that link identitypolitics with safespaces in my mind, are eg SJW and snowflake ... and as already emphasised, this discussion is not improved by use of those kinds of terms.
I think I don't believe Safe Spaces are or should be connected to identity, still less indentitypolitics, but on risk of harm. The concepts that link identitypolitics with safespaces in my mind, are eg SJW and snowflake ... and as already emphasised, this discussion is not improved by use of those kinds of terms.
Looby
Well-Known Member
It does sound quite heartless if I’m honest! I found your comment about people growing up earlier offensive and I was quite shocked tbh because I wouldn’t have expected that from you.
I work with traumatised clients all the time who have been through the types of horrific experiences you describe but PTSD can happen to anyone. I also know someone who had PTSD after a car accident who needed intensive treatment (EMDR) before she could get back in a car. I know rape survivors with PTSD who would be deeply traumatised to see a rape scene on screen or hear a description of rape.
It’s not a sign of weakness or a lack of ability to ‘deal with it’ if you have difficulty processing trauma.
elbows
Well-Known Member
My examples may not have been very good, that I will accept, but I felt I had to use some scenarios where I was present rather than ones that that are just theoretical to me.
Anyway I have to stop now because I had a migraine with aura at 2pm and only just got out of bed. And no, the migraine was not triggered by this thread (pun intended), I had some early warning signs yesterday so I was not surprised I had one today.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
It seems to me self-evident that some places should be safe: women's refuges, care settings, therapy settings. That's never been in question. The issue comes when people have tried to cause that perfectly sensible and important principle to somehow blur into other areas, like university debates, where the "safety" is not from violence, but from debate! They're hoping that a faulty analogy will lead to these situations being seen as equivalent, or even the same thing. They aren't. I've even seen what merely amounted to disagreement over issues described as "violence". This sort of attempted mission-creep of "safe spaces" has also been used by interest groups, like Christian churches, to say they should be exempt from criticism. They should not. They definitely should not.
Here’s a good overview of how it plays out in the wild:
For your safety and security… | We are Plan C
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I think one thing with the internet is that it's hard to establish how prevalent some things are, especially things that get people very riled up (maybe it was before actually but I'm thinking internet debates now.) I've worked in a university for quite a few years now and in that time I've heard precisely zero references to safe spaces or trigger warnings. I don't doubt there are issues around them and can see the potential for chilling debate but honestly I find it hard to accept it's all over the place and hard to escape.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I've just checked with mrs LR that I can tell this story, because it's hers.
A few months ago she was invited to a feminist book group by the daughter of a friend. The rest of the women were in their twenties. Mrs LR was interested to see how young feminists thought these days.
She came back rolling her eyes and proclaiming they were mad as hatters. "They were lovely, but they kept on about it being a 'safe space'. I laughed and said 'it's fucking Bridge of Allan, not downtown Allepo!' But they were serious!"
She also explained how she'd disagreed with some comments one of the young women had made. "They asked if I was offended and all started prostrating themselves before me and asking forgiveness for offending me, and enquiring if I was 'triggered'. I told them not to be daft, we'd just disagreed about something." She then asked what 'triggered' meant, and laughed when she found out.
I know the story well because she tells it at parties now. There's more, but that's the flavour.
The point she'd make if she was telling you this is there's a world of difference between being respectful of others and that kind of carry on. Which she calls 'mental', despite her knowing that I would feel unsafe by that language.
A few months ago she was invited to a feminist book group by the daughter of a friend. The rest of the women were in their twenties. Mrs LR was interested to see how young feminists thought these days.
She came back rolling her eyes and proclaiming they were mad as hatters. "They were lovely, but they kept on about it being a 'safe space'. I laughed and said 'it's fucking Bridge of Allan, not downtown Allepo!' But they were serious!"
She also explained how she'd disagreed with some comments one of the young women had made. "They asked if I was offended and all started prostrating themselves before me and asking forgiveness for offending me, and enquiring if I was 'triggered'. I told them not to be daft, we'd just disagreed about something." She then asked what 'triggered' meant, and laughed when she found out.
I know the story well because she tells it at parties now. There's more, but that's the flavour.
The point she'd make if she was telling you this is there's a world of difference between being respectful of others and that kind of carry on. Which she calls 'mental', despite her knowing that I would feel unsafe by that language.
From reading about half of that (sorry it got quite boring after a bit) it seems that safe spaces don’t refer to women’s refuges or care homes for kids with learning disabilities. But to left wing political groups.
And feminist book groups
From reading about half of that (sorry it got quite boring after a bit) it seems that safe spaces don’t refer to women’s refuges or care homes for kids with learning disabilities. But to left wing political groups.
And feminist book groups
Bingo!
Actually, I think some of this comes from a pseudo therapy culture which assumes that therapy is supportive rather than challenging, that conflict should be avoided. Help generally now seems to be called 'support'. You're great. No offence here.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Yeah, I meant actually safe. Not "free from appropriate challenges".
But I know what you mean.
Treacle Toes
Time
Personally I see it as being more about not seeing everything that feels therapeutic as therapy.
There are different ways to help/support people and for different reasons. The 'challenge' or the challenging part is often the least talked about part of any of it. We create safe/trusting/confidential relationships/spaces in which the 'challenge' takes place, or can.
Shechemite
Be the sun and all will see you
The absurdity is even greater - therapy IS a place where people’s ideas are challenged - even if this generates discomfort. It’s kind of the point of therapy for the safety not to extend to being ‘safe’ from difficult ideas and difficult feelings.
Similar threads
