Knights of Awakening: Jedi Safe Spaces (Charles McBride)

Leah Starspectre wrote: I think that's the point of "Safe Spaces" if they're done properly. To help people be more aware of those around them and then act/react appropriately.

I disagree with the assertion that we shouldn't offend or challenge anyone, but I do think that generally speaking, the more privilege someone naturally has, the less aware they tend to be about the disadvantages that others have. And teaching people to have the recognition can only be good.

I think that the term "safe space" has gotten a bad reputation and it's dismissed before understanding the meaning behind it.

I tend to reject notions of privilege based on race and gender, which are the primary suspects of "privilege" as far as I've seen. Any privilege in the West, as far as I can tell, is based solely on income. And that is something unavoidable in a capitalistic society, in my opinion. Really I think this concept of privilege is irrelevant. Buddha was a prince. Surely privileged. This did not prevent him from discovering the four noble truths and the eightfold path.
Privilege seems to me to be just another one of the artificial concepts (like race) which only serve to separate us from each other. I say it should be rejected entirely, like all of those other concepts. Then again, I'm not much of a capitalist... and I'm one of those who is frankly sick of hearing about how privileged I am from people who have no idea what my life has been like.

Thank you, everybody, for offering your thoughts.

Charles is a friend of mine, and he asked for my opinion. After I gave it to him, I decided I would seek out some other perspectives. It seems like many people feel Charles is demonizing the idea of protecting and providing Safe Spaces. But, in reality, he is decrying the softening of Jedi training.

As explained in the video, trainings that used to be common were:
Search and Rescue.
Lightsaber Fighting.
Martial Arts and Self Defense.
etc.

Now, he says, there is more of an abundance of courses on providing Safe Spaces, making people feel accepted and comfortable. In his eyes, he feels these things should be inherent before somebody even begins to be a Jedi. These things are basic human aspects. Every brother should extend his hand to his sister. He mentions in the video that most of the things people use Safe Spaces for are just common sense (i.e. let somebody of a different ethnicity lead the discussion when it comes to their ethnicity, as per their privilege and right). He doesn't think that's a bad idea. He just doesn't think we should be wasting time on it at a Gathering because it isn't Jedi-specific training.

Now, I am not sure I necessarily agree with that part. While Jedi are certainly a specialized field, we also are not above the average human (no matter how much Charles would like to be a demi-god). In our discussion, we both agreed that what we are really after in this type of training is Emotional Intelligence and Empathy training. In addition, providing Jedi the resources to teach people how to tap into their real power (Teach a man to fish...).

In other words, instead of Jedi being a babysitter for victims, make them teachers of victims to become victims no more. That is his real goal with the radio broadcast. To inspire Jedi to stop being merely shields for the weak, but to actively show that action solves problems.

It's not necessarily a bad idea. To echo Cabur, there is a time for every type of action. Sometimes, we will need to merely be protectors. Other times, we will have to do something about it. And, other times still, we will need to talk it through. Every situation will have its own goal.

So, there is no need for the all-or-nothing attitude that comes from Charles in this video. There is, though, a point to be made. We cannot forget our roots, and in our evolution, we cannot become soft.

TheDude wrote: I tend to reject notions of privilege based on race and gender, which are the primary suspects of "privilege" as far as I've seen. Any privilege in the West, as far as I can tell, is based solely on income. And that is something unavoidable in a capitalistic society, in my opinion. Really I think this concept of privilege is irrelevant. Buddha was a prince. Surely privileged. This did not prevent him from discovering the four noble truths and the eightfold path.
Privilege seems to me to be just another one of the artificial concepts (like race) which only serve to separate us from each other. I say it should be rejected entirely, like all of those other concepts. Then again, I'm not much of a capitalist... and I'm one of those who is frankly sick of hearing about how privileged I am from people who have no idea what my life has been like.

Have you spoken to anyone in a "less privileged" position what they thought about it? Why are you so sick of it?

Privilege is innate, an undercurrent, and has nothing to do with how a life has actually gone. It's all based in preconceived notions about gender/race/sexuality/wealth that have developed in our culture and society. Do you doubt that ethnic minorities have it harder *in general*? Or transgender persons? Or women? That doesn't mean that they ALL have had terrible lives, only that they are subjected to prejudices that say, your average cis white man doesn't. Which does not mean that ALL straight white men live charmed lives.

I've heard over and over from people in these less privileged groups that all the want is to be acknowledged, for people to understand their struggles, to not keep propagating the prejudices. Is that unreasonable?

Leah Starspectre wrote: Have you spoken to anyone in a "less privileged" position what they thought about it? Why are you so sick of it?

Yes, and many of them think the privilege idea is BS. Many of them think it's legitimate. Either way, opinion has nothing to do with reality. I, as a diabetic of Jewish descent (Jews being historically the most discriminated against group) who suffers from clinical depression and generalized anxiety don't see any benefit of being white, being male, etc. An individual may be personally privileged, but I think this concept of privilege does nothing but oversimplify human interaction, and I see it as a very oversimplified way of looking at the world. Simply put, I think reality is much more complex than that. And being someone who has been judged as a privileged individual due to my skin color and gender on a regular basis, it simply becomes obnoxious to constantly hear how privileged I am automatically, when I don't see that to be the case at all. It's too simplistic and it depends on the same kind of generalization that we see in all racist and sexist speech. I'm personally sick of it.

Privilege is innate, an undercurrent, and has nothing to do with how a life has actually gone. It's all based in preconceived notions about gender/race/sexuality/wealth that have developed in our culture and society.

If the fundamental concept of "privilege" has nothing at all to do with actual life experience and speaks nothing about how actually privileged a person may or may not be in life, then what's its purpose?

Do you doubt that ethnic minorities have it harder *in general*? Or transgender persons? Or women?

I don't think women have it harder than men, no. I think there are differences in the way men and women are treated, and I think the argument can be easily made that either side is ultimately preferred or given an easier time in modern society.
As for ethnic minorities, I think they do generally have it harder. Not because they're a minority, but because ethnic minorities tend to have lower income. I've had plenty of black professors, Asian professors, Indian professors... they're doing okay. They're not suffering from any discrimination. It's income, not race or ethnicity.
Trans people are certainly discriminated against, but again I don't think it's got anything to do with a systematic issue. I think the mental illness of gender dysphoria is something which must be cured and looked deeply into scientifically so that we can have solutions for the issue that don't involve hormone cocktails and body mutilation. For that to happen, there can't be any such stigma as there currently is which fundamentally denies that gender dysphoria is a mental illness. The biggest issue facing trans people today is NOT systematic discrimination, it's the attitudes taken in an attempt to be accepting which prevent real scientific advancement which can solve the issue of gender dysphoria and make their lives better overall.
Again, I think "privilege" is an irresponsible oversimplification. There are reasons why ethnic minorities and trans people have it harder. Those have to do with the field of cognitive science, health-based psychology, and income-based social classes in my opinion, not privilege or systematic racism, sexism, etc.

That doesn't mean that they ALL have had terrible lives, only that they are subjected to prejudices that say, your average cis white man doesn't. Which does not mean that ALL straight white men live charmed lives.

This paves the way for the assumption that if you see a straight white cis male that you can safely assume they've experienced certain privileges. I deny that assertion. The straight white cis male is also subject to prejudices that other people are not subject to. For example, there is a current trend for white people to be self-hating and see themselves as oppressors and the descendents of evil conquerors. The term "white pride" is seen as hate speech, when in reality there's nothing at all wrong with being proud of your heritage. There are even some who claim it's impossible to be racist against white people or sexist against males. There's surely a ton of evidence to suggest that straight cis white males are discriminated against plenty. To say otherwise, in my opinion, does nothing but discredit these victims. And I don't support victim blaming or anything of the sort. Again, if the term doesn't actually refer to realized privilege, it's a fundamentally useless one in my opinion.

I've heard over and over from people in these less privileged groups that all the want is to be acknowledged, for people to understand their struggles, to not keep propagating the prejudices. Is that unreasonable?

It's perfectly reasonable to act with empathy for other individuals. But I think the term privilege is one which depends on oversimplification and unjust generalization. I don't think it actually refers to anything tangible or realistic. I think it's overall a bad term. I think income-based social classes are a terrible thing, and that once that's solved most of the things that people attribute to "privilege" or systematic discrimination will disappear.

Marginalized people have chosen to express their feelings of victimhood though the concept of privilege.

Rather than tell them "You're not victims", why not instead try to understand why they feel that way and help to empower them?

Now I plan on watching the video later tonight when I'm not on duty as I am atm, but I have to say on the topic of privilege as it has been discussed so far in this thread. In my opinion(see what I did there), privilege in terms of what one person has vs another is entirely subjective and really hard to put anything solid on or into. Simply because what one considers a privileged life in definition can and does change from one person to the next. Someone who has a house and family and friends and cars and a good job may be more privileged then someone working 3 jobs who has barely any of those things living out of a motorhome. However, to that person with the house and family, and bills, and car payments and education money and all that money that comes in from their great job that immediately goes out the door, and house repairs and everything that the person living in the motorhome, may feel that the other person is more privileged leading a more simplified life.

I would like to hope that we are not judging ever based on what we have vs another, or necessarily whether our up-bringing in our minds or even others minds was considered to be enough "effort" or "lack of effort" compared to another. There is no way to properly judge that fairly. I don't think anyone has the right to honestly. Especially myself. As I had pointed out in one of my videos, you can compare a person who the worst thing in their life to ever happen to them is a broken nail, to someone who just lost their house and cars to a repossession, and emotionally, physically, their feeling of loss and frustration and pain can actually be the same amount, at the time they are experiencing it, only because they haven't experienced anything worse or less. So is it fair to say someone hasn't felt the same level of emotion or frustration or visa versa as another simply because of the amount of any physical loss or gain?

When some say others are more privileged then others its purely because others may have gotten what they themselves wish they could have had or lived through, but may not have any idea what that person actually went through or what other things have happened or even will happen in their lives. It just seems foolish for anyone to really judge that.

Again that's all in my opinion only.

i do acknowledge that there is inequality but i am not receptive to the use of "_ privilege" as the tool for communicating that

if marginalized people want to talk about how they have been marginalized then lets talk about that

tell me how you have been marginalized; im willing to listen
if you want to talk about police brutality, lets talk about police brutality

if you want to talk about access to education, good, so do i, lets talk about access to quality education

im open to a conversation about slavery and how there are connections between the current realities and the historical oppression and discrimination of blacks

im open to a conversation about womens wages and about lgbt rights to marry or work or use the bathroom of their choosing

but dont tell me that i personally bear responsibility for something that is out of my control, or talk to me as if my life is "privileged" because im not YOU and your life is sooo much harder than everyone elses

the system will let me die in the streets too buddy, and i am not moved by pity parties or histrionics

if you have an issue, lets talk about YOUR ISSUE

but im not interested in your opinon of my privilege: in fact, youre goingto lose an ally here because once you take the focus off of the actual issues, im not with you any more, because now youve made me into a villain when i am not one

the irony of stereotyping a group of people in order to battle against social stereotypes is just one more tragic example of how utterly stupid and shallow american culture has become

everyone is privileged in some context, and i think the focus should be on increasing all of our privilege rather than complaining that some huge demographic has too much, especially a demographic as large and diverse as "white people" or even "white men"

safe spaces
taking basic human respect and sensationalizing it tothe point where we start demanding "safe space" seems silly and "special snowflaky" to me

i dont know exactly what a " safe space" would look like but i imagine there would be padding on the walls and some gentle, soothing music over a PA

i think that culture moves forward in a healthy way only when people are free to speak their minds openly

i can agree with rules of courtesy, and if you have an open wound, i dont want to put salt in it (just as i dont like salt put in mine) but thats a case by case basis that we establish as a consequence of open communication, not some general ruleof law where we all have to censor every thought that might potentially offend some theoretical victim somewhere

protecting the general custom of free speech is WAAAAYYY more useful and important to society than generally demanding "safe spaces" for people to be comfortable in

if youre an uncomfortable person, youre going to be uncomfortable wherever you go until YOU learn to deal with it

OB1Shinobi wrote: i do acknowledge that there is inequality but i am not receptive to the use of "_ privilege" as te tool for communicating that

if marginalized people want to talk about how they have been marginalized then lets talk about that

tell me how you have been marginalized; im willing to listen
if you want to talk about police brutality, lets talk about police brutality

if you want to talk about access to education, good, so do i
lets talk about it

im open to a conversation about slavery and the connections between the current realities and the historical oppression and discrimination

im open to a conversation about womens wages and about lgbt rights to marry or work or use the bathroom of their choosing

but dont tell me that i personally bear responsibility for something that is out of my control or talk to me as if my life is "privileged" because im not YOU and your life is sooo much harder than everyone elses

the system will let me die in the streets too buddy, and i am not moved by pity parties or histrionics

if you have an issue, lets talk about YOUR ISSUE

im not interested in your opinon of my privilege

nearly everyone is privileged in some context, definitely in america

the irony of stereotyping a group of people in order to battle against social stereotypes is just one more tragic example of how utterly stupid and shallow american culture has become

taking basic human respect and sensationalizing it tothe point where we proclaim "safe space" seems silly and "special snowflaky" to me

i dont know exactly what a " safe space" would look like but i imagine there would be padding on the walls and some gentle, soothing music over a PA

i think that culture moves forward in a healthy way only when people are free to speak their minds openly

i can agree with rules of courtesy, and if you have an open wound, i dont want to put salt in it (just as i dont like salt put in mine) but thats a case by case basis that we establish as a consequence of open communication, not some general ruleof law where we all have to censor every thought that might potentially offend some theoretical victim somewhere

protecting the general custom free speech is WAAAAYYY more useful and important to society than generally demanding "safe spaces" for people to be comfortable in

if youre an uncomfortable person, youre going to be uncomfortable wherever you go until YOU learn to deal with it

Everyone should hear this...

OB1Shinobi wrote: i do acknowledge that there is inequality but i am not receptive to the use of "_ privilege" as te tool for communicating that

if marginalized people want to talk about how they have been marginalized then lets talk about that

tell me how you have been marginalized; im willing to listen
if you want to talk about police brutality, lets talk about police brutality

if you want to talk about access to education, good, so do i
lets talk about it

im open to a conversation about slavery and the connections between the current realities and the historical oppression and discrimination

im open to a conversation about womens wages and about lgbt rights to marry or work or use the bathroom of their choosing

but dont tell me that i personally bear responsibility for something that is out of my control or talk to me as if my life is "privileged" because im not YOU and your life is sooo much harder than everyone elses

the system will let me die in the streets too buddy, and i am not moved by pity parties or histrionics

if you have an issue, lets talk about YOUR ISSUE

but im not interested in your opinon of my privilege: in fact, youre goingto lose an ally here because once you take the focus off of the actual issues, im not with you any more

youve made me into a villain when i am not one

the irony of stereotyping a group of people in order to battle against social stereotypes is just one more tragic example of how utterly stupid and shallow american culture has become

everyone is privileged in some context
especially americans

safe spaces
taking basic human respect and sensationalizing it tothe point where we proclaim "safe space" seems silly and "special snowflaky" to me

i dont know exactly what a " safe space" would look like but i imagine there would be padding on the walls and some gentle, soothing music over a PA

i think that culture moves forward in a healthy way only when people are free to speak their minds openly

i can agree with rules of courtesy, and if you have an open wound, i dont want to put salt in it (just as i dont like salt put in mine) but thats a case by case basis that we establish as a consequence of open communication, not some general ruleof law where we all have to censor every thought that might potentially offend some theoretical victim somewhere

protecting the general custom free speech is WAAAAYYY more useful and important to society than generally demanding "safe spaces" for people to be comfortable in

if youre an uncomfortable person, youre going to be uncomfortable wherever you go until YOU learn to deal with it

YES THIS.

But I'll add: They've created their terminology and we need to learn to live it, because it's not going away any time soon Part of understanding is learning to speak their language.

Connor L. wrote: Listen and think.

Is this the right direction for Jedi to go?

Jedi in the fiction for example don't even have to be human so... I tend to agree. Division creates division. If you don't want to be racist, don't see colour when you look at someone. If you don't want people to define you by your race, then don't identify and define yourself in those terms. Certainly I think Jedi is an opportunity to avoid that sort of stuff.

But a safe space can be a functional set of rules, to shape the progress of activity and limit particular types of other activity which might be counter-productive to the intention. Shape the activity not the membership, unless it's private of course, then the participants need to be defined by their relationship to that privacy.

But come on, its not kind to us folks over 40 to be going calling yourself ancient at only 30 something... sheeesh

The video was utter crock shit.
Division creates an us vs them mentality. The idea of this video is that people of his group don't have to accomodate people who disagree with them. Ultimately, we don't have to respect safe spaces, but I personally do.
My views on safe spaces are rather set at this point, after working in assisted living with a small platoon of cranky vets. They joked about their fears and prejudices (old people tend to be super racist, and one of them was Japanese). They're the exact opposite of the stereotypical safe space advocate who tend to decry privelege and expect their lives to be red carpeted.
Personally, I do try to respect and accomodate others. "As far as it is up to you, live at peace with everyone" is my mantra here. If I know someone has a legitimate condition or negative experience with something, I'll try to avoid it. If someone is just being sensitive, I ignore it and let them change. The original concept of safe space really is just common courtesy, but SJW divas go beyond that to extents everyone else thinks laughable.
I treat everyone equally. Marx said "from each according to ability, to each according to need." I apply that to my expectations, if someone grew up in a traphouse, I don't expect a Oxford tinged academic and give them certain leniency. Personally, I don't think people are entitled to anything beyond their personal freedom. I hold myself to a higher standard than everyone else since, like a good Pokemon trainer, I want to be the very best.

Adder wrote:

Connor L. wrote: Listen and think.

Is this the right direction for Jedi to go?

Jedi in the fiction for example don't even have to be human so... I tend to agree. Division creates division. If you don't want to be racist, don't see colour when you look at someone.

Except, that this is equally "racist".

Alethea Thompson wrote:

Adder wrote:

Connor L. wrote: Listen and think.

Is this the right direction for Jedi to go?

Jedi in the fiction for example don't even have to be human so... I tend to agree. Division creates division. If you don't want to be racist, don't see colour when you look at someone.

Except, that this is equally "racist".

Can you clarify that? I define racism as discrimination based on race. Not looking at someones skin colour as a means to reduce the likeleehood of being racist doesn't seem to fit that description to me.

So I scanned over the thread. Understanding the kind of thread a question of this kind produces I expect it will progress faster than I for one can keep up with it anyway, so you'll forgive me if I didn't read everything everybody says. I also suspect that what I am about to address is not much of a center of discussion so far.

Here is the thing about those gatherings and workshops: Sure, they're fun, interesting, sometimes educational to some, the list goes on. What's a typical turn up rate in Jedi gatherings? 100? 300? I'll be generous and give it a thousand. Say a third of that at any given time is engaged in one of ten workshops. That's about an average of 30 people per workshop. I'd expect more something on the order of a dozen when there is only three workshops at a time, but as stated before, we're being generous here - make it 30.
Compare that to an internet audience. Is there any time of the day when TOTJO has a two-digit concurrent visitor count? What about its Facebook site? I see some 650ish people talking about that page right now. And that's just one site! Make a remotely popular article and you'll have not 30 people listening but more like 30 000!
Technology brings us together faster and in greater numbers than any real life congregation could hope to. There are threads on this forum with more views than the count of all Jedi gathering attendees in history combined. The worst thing that can happen to those gatherings is that either they lose the breath of life, to the extent that they had any in the first place, or that a workshop or a lack thereof might "poison" fewer minds than there are fingers on my hand. Call me a millennial hipster, but I don't feel like either is much of a loss, all things considered. The mental battles we fight here have far greater impact on the community as a whole.
And there is another argument from internet in here, too. Consider for a comparison what the worst thing is that could happen to an online community? Well, since everybody is free to create their own place, either to have a safe space of their own, or to escape that very notion, really, the worst thing that can happen to a community is a split, where one part shifts to a place of free discourse while the other fades out into irrelevance.
The information age moved us past the times when we could subdue dissenters and get away with it. Everything that tries to reintroduce that, succeeds only on laughably insignificant scopes. It is no doubt sad that it does at all, but it is also inevitable. It is however not dangerous and to me neither worrysome.

Ah, well, rednecks. What can you do ?? ..... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Silas Mercury wrote: Ah, well, rednecks. What can you do ?? ..... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

...you rang?

To start, I resent the idea that because something was done a certain way at a certain time in the past that that is inherently better which I feel is implied by McBride's commentary. At the same time, I also believe that just because a way of doings things is old or because something is old doesn't make it bad.

But McBride's commentary doesn't even make an attempt to understand why such a workshop would be considered as necessary and it seems more than a little suspect that as a white man he's proclaiming that there were no problems in the past. Furthermore, because he doesn't understand he has a misconception that a "safe space" is about feelings, about catering to special interests, about division. That's bollocks, a complete and utter reductive conception spoken out of ignorance. But I suppose none of that stuff would be important to someone whose society caters to his every whim, whose history is affirmed in textbooks, whose identity is never questioned, whose safety is not threatened because of who he is as a white man, etc. If his idea of division means that we don't all want to be become white men, or to behave as a white man behaves (even in his "best self" form) then I suppose I would say that there is some division.

About midway through the commentary, McBride says this is a waste of time. He recommends that instead there should be self-defense courses so that people could be physically and mentally prepared to defend themselves and they wouldn't need safe spaces. This is kinda ridiculous if you stop and think for a moment. Is punching my way out of every problem really how I can best represent my Jedi path? Last I checked, people didn't respond well when I took a scorched earth approach to handling aggressive people here at the Temple. People wanted me to talk things out, to educate, and to build empathy. That's what a goddamn safe space is for. I'm not asking anyone to protect my feelings. My feelings get hurt when it rains on days I wanted to spend outside, there's nothing anyone can do about the rain and I am not asking you to fix that.

McBride is yet another whiny member of the old guard who refuses to accept change, refuses to understand anything beyond what he already understands, and thinks the Jedi have lost their way because they no longer cater to his personal view of what Jedi should be. And you know what? I'd love to have some practical workshops like CPR, first aid, search and rescue, survival training, and all that stuff. I really would. I love that stuff because some of it might help and other aspects of it are just fun to know. I live in an urban environment so teaching me to survive in the wilderness isn't exactly speaking to my needs, but I'm not going to gripe and moan about it because I could probably still learn something from it.

I can't take McBride seriously. His opinions are his and he's entitled to them, but they carry no weight with me.

I believe the idea people "should be" something before they can become Jedi is inherently flawed, as is the implied "if I don't need it then no-one should need it", or worse "if I don't want it no-one can have it" egotism. It's very unbecoming of someone who is evidently standing on the platform of being a "seasoned Jedi". One would hope a little compassion would have seeped in over the years he's been practicing; seems like he's still got a long way to go. That's OK.

If you're very secure in yourself, confident enough (which may not be very confident) and ready for it, a self defence course makes a lot of sense. If you're not, but you believe in the Force and the Jedi project, probably not. Better to secure the foundation, sort out the plumbing and fit the lighting than start with the turrets.

Getting a lot of this "old Jedi were better Jedi" vibe Jamie describes. That's an attitude I have yet to see evidence of, once, in three years. This rant, deemed so worthy it's been recorded and shared for posterity, is another example of the scale tipping the other way.

To Charles: look deeper.

Silas Mercury wrote: Ah, well, rednecks. What can you do ?? ..... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

If this were a redneck problem it probably wouldn't be a problem or at least it wouldn't be as a big of problem. While there may be problems of ignorance and foolishness among working class whites, it's a little more than reductive to simply write off ignorance as a redneck problem.

Jamie Stick wrote:

Silas Mercury wrote: Ah, well, rednecks. What can you do ?? ..... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

If this were a redneck problem it probably wouldn't be a problem or at least it wouldn't be as a big of problem. While there may be problems of ignorance and foolishness among working class whites, it's a little more than reductive to simply write off ignorance as a redneck problem.

I'm not so willing to write off the "what can you do?" part, either.