Defining Community Safety and Security
This post is part of our Community Safety and Security series, focused on sharing the approaches and tools TCU uses to create our community spaces, including the Global Gathering. Rather than reinventing the wheel, this series highlights the people, ideas, and frameworks that have influenced our work and shaped how we think about community safety and security. TCU is known for its code of conduct and its trauma-informed COC implementation process, as well as our equity and security tools, protocols, and approaches that center the most impacted by surveillance and censorship.
The following blog post draws on lessons from Standpoint Theory, as well as the experience of bicultural/multicultural people.
No matter where you are in the world, if more than three people are in a room, there will always be three opinions, even if they seem the same. People’s unique experiences inevitably shape the way they perceive and understand the world. Yet language, despite being our primary means of communicating those experiences, has inherent limitations. It can rarely capture the full complexity of what we think, feel, and experience, reducing interactions to something much more one dimensional.
Take, for example, being at breakfast with two people, one of whom grew up in a multigenerational family-run bakery. The waiter brings a basket of bread, and both agree that the bread is exceptional. On the surface, their opinions may seem the same, but in reality, they are quite different. While the first person may simply enjoy the taste, the second may be appreciating the intense labor, the quality of the ingredients, and the technique required to create the bread.
When we begin to unpack their opinions, we realize that their perspectives on bread are fundamentally different. The only way we could discover this difference would be by asking questions or by having them share more about their experiences. Yet, in most everyday interactions, the conversation would likely move on after the simple observation, “The bread is good.” Even when two people may share the same opinion on the surface, it may be very different in its depth. This distinction is incredibly important when we begin to consider what constitutes community safety and security.
Reaching a Consensus on What Constitutes Community Safety And Security
As a result of the limitation of language, and our inability to account for every experience in the world, reaching a consensus on anything requires deep thought, human interaction, and the ability to listen. This is particularly true for something as important as safety and security, basic human needs that influence how we navigate the world.
Most people will agree with the idea that a community space should be safe and secure. However, what that actually means to people, what they are trying to convey to you through those words may be something you actually do not understand.
The real question, then, is: how do we reach a consensus? It may seem impossible, especially to those who think in binary or rigid ways, where the idea of an abundance of thought and perspective may seem foreign. Yet, its possible, and requires us to listen, ask questions, and create spaces where multiple perspectives and experience are not just held, but seen as a super power.
🚫 Step One: Do Not Make Assumptions
In the English language, there is a rather brusque but honest phrase: “Making assumptions makes an ass of you and me.” Its message is simple, encouraging us to seek information and investigate, before jumping to conclusions or making character judgements based on our limited experiences. Your interpretation of who someone is reflects YOUR inner world, not who they really are. This also means your interpretations of their needs and wants could also be inaccurate. This gets even more complicated if your community includes folks that are constantly asked to code switch by society, meaning the version you are seeing may be a small percentage of their holistic self.
💎 Step Two: Recognize the Inherent Value of Each Perspective
Each opinion and perspective has inherent value, bringing with it different types of information that can contribute to the holistic wellbeing of the whole. Take for example, a plane. People from below, on land, can give you different information about it than say people inside the plane, or better yet, a person in another plane flying above it. Combined, having all three sources of information give you a more holistic view of the plane.
👂Step Three: Special Emphasis in Listening to the “Outsiders”
Standpoint theory situates marginalized groups as “outsiders within,” and reminds us that their perspectives are incredibly valuable and allow us to gain a more holistic understanding through their perspectives. In a community space, “outsiders” are those not well represented or who face significant equity and inclusion barriers to access a space. Their positioning gives them specialized knowledge - similar to someone looking at a fishbowl from outside versus being a fish in the bowl itself. Additionally, marginalized groups usually face the most acute forms of security and safety risks, making them point-of-reference experts in both topics. Also, as the curb-cut effect reminds us - a term coined by Angela Blackwell - when we design for the most vulnerable, everyone’s needs are met. To better understand this concept and how to design from this point of view, we highly encourage you read De|Center’s Design from the Margins methodology. We will be doing a blog post on them soon.
🛡️Step Four: Pay for Safety and Security Expertise
Most people believe that safety and security is common sense, and usually fail to budget for it. However, both are specialized areas of expertise that take years to foment To assume that they are common sense is a false narrative, particularly in rights-based work ecosystems where security and safety issues continue to evolve. (For those that don’t have the buget, in a follow up post we will focus on cultivating community safety and security in low resourced environments , so stay tuned).
💖 Step Five: Understand Who You are Serving And Why
Safety and security starts with a good understanding of who you are actually serving. You cannot be everything for everyone - this approach creates ambiguity, inconsistencies, and more risk. By having clarity of who is your audience, you can better identify what risks matter and which don’t. You can also set appropriate trust and access boundaries, and say “no” more often both to people and work that may consume your time but fail to contribute to your mission. (We will discuss how to handle the inherent tension between security, inclusion and communty health in a later post).
This is important for several reasons, especially when you are working in an ecosystem that has limited resourced. Safety and security requires time and resource commitments from all staff - the lack of time directly impacts your ability to follow established security and safety protocols.
Additionally, in our experience, a more cultivated and targeted audience is generally more willing to respect and follow the safety and security measures you establish. When we first introduced our Code of Conduct, for example, we found that our targeted audience was generally more receptive to upholding and following it, whereas others were less inclined to do so and, in some cases, actively sought to undermine its effectiveness.
So Wait….What is Community Safety and Security?
Ultimately, this is a question that must be answered by the people you serve, your community. While certain similarities exist between the needs of communities, ultimately how you define safety and security will reflect the experience, needs, and contexts of your community. We will share best practices in how to listen in a followup post. In the meantime, we encourage you to reflect on many of the points in this post, keeping in mind that before we fix the outside, we must fix ourselves. Listening and removing biases is easier said than done.
In coming weeks we will be sharing some tips on how to listen and improve communication with your community around these two areas. In the meantime, if you have any questions about this post or the series itself, feel free to reach out to team@digitalrights.community.