I have more to say about safe spaces. In part four of this series, I was talking about how creepers are endlessly excused as just being socially awkward–if they are a white cishetguy. That’s not what I want to talk about today, though. I want to focus more on what a safe space would actually look like. Not in the context of being free of creepers, but more in general of forums/groups being more welcoming of people from diverse (read, minority) backgrounds.
Side note: There is a difference between being against something and being pro something else. What I mean is it’s one thing to say that you are against sexism, for example, but a different thing to say you’re pro-feminism. The first is good, of course, but the second is better.
It’s hard to describe the difference, but I’ll try.
Most people are not going to say they are pro-treating people differently based on race, gender, sexual identity–well, on the last one, I’m less sure about that, but we’ll let it slide for now. Even people who are explicitly sexist, racist, homophobic, etc., will rationalize why they’re saying what they said. It’s not because they’re racist, but because Asian people really are sly, for example. And it’s really hard to deconstruct statements like that without giving a twenty-minute lecture about history, stereotypes, biases, and so forth.
I’ve seen spaces claim that they are against racism, sexism, homophobia, etc., but then don’t actually do anything about it when casual isms are tossed around in the chats. (I’m talking about online spaces for now.) It’s not enough to claim you’re against isms. I mean, that’s the absolute base level for the rules of engagement.
The problem is that you can’t just state it without actually enforcing it. And you can’t enforce it if you don’t have actual rules past the statement above. That’s one of the problems I see with communities that aren’t focused on minorities. They mean well (truly), and their hearts are in the right place (I mean it!), but they don’t really put much thought into what it means to be inclusive.
Side note to the side note: This is what I meant by being for something versus being against something. Saying you’re anti-isms is great, but it’s the first step. Unfortunately, so many groups treat it as the last or only step. They post signs or tags in chat that they are against isms.
In 2026, that should go without saying. I mean, granted, we have a president who is about as close to being openly pro-racism, pro-sexism, and pro-queerphobic as one can be without actually saying the literal words. And we have so many anti-LGBTQ+ folks being passed, especially ones against queer folks.
Now I’m actually depressing myself once again by thinking about the state of the (ha) United States of America. It just still astounds me that minorities are losing their civil rights left and, er, right these days. I have mourned that I had more rights when I was in my twenties than my niblings do now.
In addition, the amount of masking/biting my tongue that I do when I’m in a “normie” space is depressingly high. It’s to be expected as there is an unspoken expectation of the norms of any group, with the emphasize on unspoken.
I’ve found that the more ‘normal’ a group is, the more I have to smooth off my rough edges, temper what I’m going to say, and swallow about 3/4ths of what I actually think. I’m not naive. I know that to be in any group, there’s some tempering to be done. It’s how societies work, and it would be utter chaos if everyone acted without any filters. My struggle is finding a group where I don’t need to mask/filter quite so much without it being TOO chaotic. Because, yes, one of the issues with minority groups is how geek society fallacy can quickly set in.
You need some rules and guidelines. It’s just difficult to know where to draw that line because you don’t want to be too strict, either.
Here’s the problem with any group–and I mean any. The unspoken norm is, by definition, unspoken. So you can only really figure it out by being in the group if there are no explicit policies. Even when the policies are explicit, though, they are hard to parse.
In addition, when the actual norms of the group differ from the spoken/written policies, it’s wise to pay more attention to the former than the latter. In other words, actions speak louder than words. So, it doesn’t matter what a group says/writes about itself if their actions don’t live up to their lofty goals.
Here’s the thing. It’s not even on purpose. That’s the hardest thing to wrap my mind around. It’s actually harder to deal with people who are invested in thinking of themselves as unbiased/nondiscriminatory than those who just blatantly say they hate ______ (minority group). I used to have this argument with people about how it’s…not refreshing…not a relief exactly, but something close to relief when the attitude matches the words and actions.
Up here in MN, most people are smart enough not to voice actual discriminatory words (at least in the Twin Cities). That doesn’t mean there isn’t bias and prejudice, of course, but peolpe will at least be pleasant to my face. Where I live, it’s an extremely progressive neighborhood, so it’s not fake (for the most part). Yet, if I go ten minutes in any direction, it’s a much different situation.
This past winter, we were besieged by our own federal government. I know memories are short, but we haven’t forgotten. My brother and I discussed whether we should carry our passports with us when we were outside our houses. He was pro; I was against. Both sides had merit, but we should not have had to discuss that in the first place. I’m still stunned that this was even a thing.
I mention this because it scarred me, and I was just tangential to where the action really happened. But knowing that when I stepped outside my house, I was a target simply for existing while Asian was sobering. As I said, if I stayed in my immediate neighborhood, I was relatively safe. But that’s not comforting. At all.
I have never been a positive person, really. I have been an exceedingly negative one, a somewhat negative one, and a carefully neutral one. I wouldn’t have called myself a pessimist, but I was definitely cynical. And practical, really. Then, after my medical crisis, I was actually quite positive for a year or so. That faded in time, and now, I’m feeling more negative than I ever have in my life.
About me? Yeah, but it’s more about the country in which I reside. I have never had any illusions about how my country viewed me and my kind (in many different ways), but now it’s been really stripped bare. Emboldened by this president, the all kinds of ists have let their grotesque flags fly, and I am not hear for it.
More tomorrow.