That's a pretty one-sided view of safe spaces. I don't think "safe spaces" are meant to be so radically exclusionary, though it's obvious why they can end up th

That's a pretty one-sided view of safe spaces. I don't think "safe spaces" are meant to be so radically exclusionary, though it's obvious why they can end up that way. It's to give people an opportunity to talk about the impact of a thing without needing to prove that thing exists in the first place. It's like climate scientists not inviting deniers to their conference: they want to focus on the implications of climate change, not debate the existence of climate change itself. I think there are plenty of reasonable safe spaces that accomplish the thing they were meant to do without resorting to blanket exclusions. The answer to one extreme is usually not the other.