Safe spaces with Dr. Keyanah Nurse

One of our research assistants, Dr. Keyanah Nurse, has joined us this week to talk about safe spaces! Keyanah is a historian and writer who is passionate about Black history, feminism, and 19th century Latin American racial politics.

When delving into the history of safe spaces as a term, Keyanah shares that “safe spaces have always been about centering marginalized voices and strategizing around how to end oppression.” The term was first introduced in the 1960s and 1970s, used mainly for movement-building and social justice/advocacy efforts. It was used both on and off college campuses, but there are several integral movements that began on university campuses, such as the Black Power and antiwar movements.

“Safe space” became coupled with advocacy work overall; these spaces were the literal locations for organizing and planning. Additionally, they were spaces where people could be themselves and have their identities respected. Through the 20th and 21st centuries, the term has been used for different social justice movements, including:

• Civil rights.

• HIV/AIDS activism.

• Anti-apartheid movements.

• Prison abolition.

• Occupy Wall Street.

“The use of safe spaces was an integral part of the movement-building process, and created opportunities for intersectional communication and cross-issue dialogue.”

- Safe Spaces and Brave Spaces, historical overview, by Diana Ali

Debates around safe spaces

Some have criticized the concept of safe spaces, arguing that the term creates a false binary between safe spaces and freedom of expression (as in, safe spaces supposedly suppress freedom of speech).

For students with marginalized identities, there is no truly safe space, and in “Safe Spaces and Brave Spaces” by Diana Ali, published in 2017 in the NASPA Policy and Practice series, the author suggests we create BRAVE spaces instead. The framework for BRAVE spaces consists of:

1. “Controversy with civility,” where varying opinions are accepted.

2. “Owning intentions and impacts,” in which students acknowledge and discuss instances where a dialogue has affected the emotional wellbeing of another person.

3. “Challenge by choice,” where students have an option to step in and out of challenging conversations.

4. “Respect,” where students show respect for one another’s basic personhood.

5. “No attacks,” where students agree not to intentionally inflict harm on one another.

Interpersonal relationships and BRAVE spaces

When applying the BRAVE framework to interpersonal relationships, we have to consider the possibility that when not unpacked carefully, some of the suggestions could potentially cause more emotional harm than folks want:

• Controversy with civility:

  • Civility can be weaponized as a form of dismissing, minimizing, or gaslighting valid reactions.

  • It’s important to be able to express emotions in a healthy way.

• Challenge by choice:

  • Opens up space for withdrawing from conflict and repair, which can trigger feelings of abandonment in others. 

  • Important to be able to healthily receive others’ emotions; “holding space” for difficult conversations. 

• Respect:

  • If the term “respect” is functioning as a synonym for mere tolerance, then marginalized students/people may not feel safe enough.

  • We must recognize there is no universal “personhood;” some folks are still denied full and basic personhood.

• No attacks:

  • The absence of intent to harm is critical, but we must also recognize impact of words and actions.

Instead of asking “How can we create a safe space?” we should consider the question “How do we create safe and/or brave spaces for our partners?” or “How do we mitigate risk enough to create opportunity for connection and vulnerability? How do we do that in a way that’s attuned to the cultural and historical realities of power and oppression?”

Actionable takeaways for redressing harm and fostering safety

1. Practicing nonviolent communication all the time, but especially in moments of conflict, noting the three modes of NVC:

   • Self-empathy.

   • Receiving empathetically.

   • Expressing honestly.

2. Embracing accountability and impact.

   • Being an active participant in the repair process if you’ve caused harm rather than allowing your own guilt or shame to prevent you from doing that reparative work

   • Being honest and up front about the extent to which you may need time to process that shame or guilt (with others and not with those who experienced the harm)

3. Practicing “critical humility:”

   • Embracing the possibility that you may, in fact, be wildly wrong or ill-informed about something yet remaining open to that and moving in the direction towards learning

4. Intentional rituals that soothe your brain and allow it to perceive the space(s) of your relationships as “safe.”