The University of Chicago recently sent a letter to its freshman class abolishing safe spaces and trigger warnings in favor of academic inquiry and advancement. This letter might have been well-intentioned, but it misses the mark by forgetting about marginalized groups such as minorities, sexual assault survivors and the LGBTQ community. If a college does not allow for spaces for these and other groups when needed, then academic institutions may run the risk of further marginalizing these groups while also diluting the college experience for the rest of the student body.
The need for safe spaces has evolved as the college landscape has developed over the last half century. In this time, colleges increasingly accepted larger numbers of minorities and women. More recently, as a result of the gay rights movement, the stigma around being LGBTQ has slowly been lifted and nowadays—in many parts of the country—it appears safer to announce one’s sexuality. Across America’s college campuses, communities have been created, and have served numerous purposes. These include: a place where the students feel free of criticisms, where they don’t have to explain and/or defend their identity to others, where they don’t have to fear being ostracized and where they can safely decompress and exchange their experiences. These safe spaces are similar to release valves as they allow the students to sound off if they need to. Thus safe spaces don’t inhibit academic curiosity, but rather enhance it by allowing students to recharge before they rejoin the larger student population.
There are stories that are best left on the shelf and don’t need to be aired out for all to see. These stories can revolve around traumatic events related to a family’s acceptance of sexual identity, family violence, the struggles of impoverished communities, sexual assaults and harassment. These stories often are painful for the storyteller and often their scars run deep—I would know. To not give the students with these stories space to meet others with similar stories may increase their vulnerability and marginalization. As an example, one in four women and one in six men will experience sexual assault in college. Communities of sexual assault survivors absolutely deserve a safe space to meet. Without it, they may struggle—alone—to find ways to move forward with their lives.
It is also important to remember the goal of a college, which is to help foster an environment where intellectualism does not only exist but also flourishes. To properly create this environment, a "one size fits all" policy may run counter to spurring a rich, healthy environment in that different groups of students have different needs. As an example, colleges don’t have different athletes using the same locker room, for feasibility and logistical reasons. This strain of logic can be applied to the many different minority and LGBTQ groups on college campuses. By giving these groups a space on campuses to meet, they are granted the same opportunity to gather. This is similar to the way various science and literature clubs are set up, with the exception that these groups are not shaped up by interests but rather by shared experience. If these experiences aren’t allowed a space to thrive, then the story of the college campus runs the risk of becoming stunted.
College is a place where students with diverse experiences and backgrounds come together and knit a quilt from thousands of different colors of thread. Yet the University of Chicago has decided to remove some threads and tatter the quilt. In doing so, they are limiting the college experience for both the general student body and the students who aren’t allowed safe spaces. They say, "College is supposed to be the best four years of your life," but not if the college administrators’ decisions make you feel like you don’t belong.