Safe?

An interesting email back-and-forth dialog has been occurring among Anderson School faculty regarding assurances to students of a "safe" place, following the election. I won't assign names, but will excerpt below. (Of course, the emails were sent to all faculty in the School with the knowledge that such things are hardly private. But I will still not provide names here.)

The spark was an email that said in part:

Hi all,

In light of the recent elections, (name) has made copies of "safe zone" and "safety pin" placards that you can take and post outside your office.  If you would like one, or both, of the placards, please feel free to stop by (office location)...

---

Another email:

Hi all,

A few faculty have asked me to describe these two placards.  Written on the safe zone placard is the following: “This space RESPECTS all aspects of people including race, ethnicity, gender expression, sexual orientation, socio-economic background, age, religion, and ability."  The safety pin placard simply has a picture of a safety pin.

The trend to wear a safety pin begin in the UK after the Brexit vote to reflect tolerance for all people.  It is now starting to be used in the U.S.

---

Another:

My question is "who would not want these?" I understand and agree with the sentiments expressed in this statement but I worry how an institutional endorsement would be perceived. For example, if my next door neighbor (name) displays this on her office door and I don't, does that mean that my office is NOT a safe space? Then by implication, I MUST also display this in my office or else I will be perceived as an intolerant bigot.

---

Another:

So might it not be better, as one colleague wrote to me, to have a big sign on the entrance of Anderson building staying this rather than have some faculty offices displaying this and others not. The messaging in the latter is worse, in my opinion. Alternatively, we should All agree that we should have these signs in all of the offices.

---

Another:

I think that a big sign would be great. However, I think only doing that isn’t enough because it is again unclear who supports this. Is this only [name] (or some random admin person) whereas everyone else doesn’t support? The big sign + little signs on our doors would be the most effective. 

I agree with you that everyone should do it. Indeed, after getting (name)’s email I suggested that it would have likely been easier for everyone if a staff person put these signs on everyone’s doors and those who wanted to opt out could do that by pulling the sign off their doors. If faculty are in support of that, I am sure that (name) could coordinate that. 

---

Another:

So might it not be better, as one colleague wrote to me, to have a big sign on the entrance of Anderson building staying this rather than have some faculty offices displaying this and others not. The messaging in the latter is worse, in my opinion. Alternatively, we should All agree that we should have these signs in all of the offices.

---

Another:

I support the sentiment behind this statement, but I do not support this implementation. Asking people to pull the signs off their doors, if they don't agree, is a terrible idea, in my opinion. 

---

Another:

...Not having the placard on your door definitely does not mean your office is not safe. If your office is safe, people can also figure that out through other cues.  Individuals automatically scan their environment for safety all the time - all types of safety (e.g. physical, social, psychological).  The placards help with giving people a shortcut by explicitly communicating safety - but it's definitely not the only way to communicate safety.  

As (name) so eloquently addresses in her email, there is research supporting the effectiveness of explicitly signaling support. Silence is often interpreted as non-support, even when the silence is not intended to be a signal for that.  These signals make a difference. 

(Name) had put up the placard before the election as a way to express their own support for the University’s goal of promoting, diversity, equity and inclusion.  We wanted to give others this opportunity.  But we respect each person’s choice... 

---

Another:

...So, we may all strongly believe that no one on our faculty would ever say they are against respecting these groups and that no one on our faculty would want to actively marginalize these groups. Indeed, we may feel that this is so obvious that we don’t need to put up signs or confront people who are in the minority when they vocalize statements that marginalize certain groups. However, what is really important here is that it is clear to us, but is not clear to students and colleagues who are members of these groups. Furthermore, many events in the news and many experiences in the last week will have undoubtedly raised concerns and increased the ambiguity. How can they know how each of us feel? So, these explicit statements and signs go a long way to making these beliefs explicit...

---

Another:

I notice that the safe zone placard does not include respect for all political parties and political views. 

I would like to order a “FREE SPEECH ZONE” placard for my office. The small print should explain that the office occupant cannot guarantee that visitors will not hear discussions of ideas which make them uncomfortable. In addition, the office holder does guarantee that statements made in this office will not be reported to administrative commissars or other forms of thought and speech police.

---

Another:

​I don't respect all aspects of people.

For example, many religions explicitly disavow homosexuality and equal rights for women.​ Many religious interpretations have explicitly lower-class status for Jews and Christians, Buddhists, etc.  The Koran has the death penalty for apostates, and they have common practice to give out the death penalties for gays. Do you respect them, too? Or do we want to limit our respect.

And, how should I not discriminate by ability?

Do we really have to respect these AND advertise that we respect them?

​And I second (name)'s point that many (not all) political views deserve more respect than we give them., including the ones just elected to be president of the USA, majority in the Senate, majority in the House, and soon majority on the Supreme Court---even though I don't share these views..​.

---
Another:

With all due respect, I am afraid we may be dividing the faculty, not uniting them. I hope I am wrong.
---

There was another stream related to a fall in ranking of the School by Bloomberg, one of the various entities that rate business schools:

...We should stop all other activities and focus on this [the ratings]. We shouldn't be doing anything else until this gets under control. We must be willing to try some actual fundamental changes how we go about admitting, educating, and placing our students. 

Instead, we develop strategic plans and debate whether we should put up "safe space" signs. That is truly re-arranging the deck chairs and not steering clear of the icebergs...

---