IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v20y2015i4p105-118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Safe Spaces’: Experiences of Feminist Women-Only Space

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Lewis
  • Elizabeth Sharp
  • Jenni Remnant
  • Rhiannon Redpath

Abstract

The gendered nature of safety has been explored empirically and theoretically as awareness has grown of the pervasive challenges to women's safety. Notions of ‘safe space’ are frequently invoked in wider feminist environments (particularly, recently, in relation to debates about trans people's access to women's spaces), but are relatively neglected in academia. Indeed, despite a body of scholarship which looks at questions of gender, safety and space, relatively little attention has been paid to exploring the meaning of ‘safety’ for women and, particularly, the meaning and experience of spaces they consider to be ‘safe.’ Drawing on focus group data with 30 women who attended a two-day, women-only feminist gathering in the UK, this paper analyses experiences of what they describe as ‘safe space’ to explore the significance and meaning of ‘safety’ in their lives. Using their accounts, we distinguish between safe from and safe to , demonstrating that once women are safe from harassment, abuse and misogyny, they feel safe to be cognitively, intellectually and emotionally expressive. We argue that this sense of being ‘safe to’ denotes fundamental aspects of civic engagement, personhood and freedom.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Lewis & Elizabeth Sharp & Jenni Remnant & Rhiannon Redpath, 2015. "‘Safe Spaces’: Experiences of Feminist Women-Only Space," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 20(4), pages 105-118, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:20:y:2015:i:4:p:105-118
    DOI: 10.5153/sro.3781
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5153/sro.3781
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5153/sro.3781?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karpowitz, Christopher F. & Mendelberg, Tali & Shaker, Lee, 2012. "Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(3), pages 533-547, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. O’Brien, Diana Z. & Rickne, Johanna, 2016. "Gender Quotas and Women's Political Leadership," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(1), pages 112-126, February.
    2. De Paola, Maria & Lombardo, Rosetta & Pupo, Valeria & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2021. "Do Women Shy Away from Public Speaking? A Field Experiment," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    3. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    4. Scott Radnitz, 2018. "Historical narratives and post-conflict reconciliation: An experiment in Azerbaijan," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(2), pages 154-174, March.
    5. Alicia R. Ingersoll & Christy Glass & Alison Cook & Kari Joseph Olsen, 2019. "Power, Status and Expectations: How Narcissism Manifests Among Women CEOs," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(4), pages 893-907, September.
    6. Fanni Bársony & György Lengyel & Éva Perpék, 2020. "Enclave deliberation and common-pool resources: an attempt to apply Civic Preference Forum on community gardening in Hungary," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 687-708, April.
    7. Marta Fraile, 2014. "Does deliberation contribute to decreasing the gender gap in knowledge?," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(3), pages 372-388, September.
    8. Schäfer, Andreas & Merkel, Wolfgang, 2020. "Emanzipation oder Reaktion: Wie konservativ ist die deliberative Demokratie? [Emancipation or Reaction: How Conservative is Deliberative Democracy?]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 449-472.
    9. Domínguez, José J., 2023. "Diversified committees in hiring processes: Lab evidence on group dynamics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Stephanie Sardelis & Joshua A Drew, 2016. "Not “Pulling up the Ladder”: Women Who Organize Conference Symposia Provide Greater Opportunities for Women to Speak at Conservation Conferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-20, July.
    11. Bodea, Cristina & Kerner, Andrew, 2022. "Fear of inflation and gender representation in central banking," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    12. Rui Nan & Yongjiao Yang, 2022. "Who Is Willing to Participate in Local Governance? Modernization of Shared Governance in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Francisco-Javier Herrero-Gutiérrez & Núria Simelio & Lara Carrascosa Puertas, 2021. "Women Mayors in Spain: An Analysis of Gender Differences in the Management and Quality of Information on Municipal Websites," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, April.
    14. Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl & Iyabo Obasanjo, 2019. "Do parliamentary gender quotas decrease gender inequality? The case of African countries," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 149-176, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:20:y:2015:i:4:p:105-118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.