The concern about an individual’s freedom of speech is a subject that seems to be gaining prominence as far as the communication arena is concerned. Some people believe that any given people should be granted the opportunity to express themselves freely. In this context, therefore, public places have been seen as great platforms where people can express their identity without fear. Because of such belief, many people have expressed different opinions regarding the issue of public places acting as a platform where anyone can express himself or herself. Public spaces in this context are cinema halls, malls, show grounds, as well as the streets.
With some people having negative opinions to this assertion, others believe that such places are suitable for personal expression. For this reason, it is inevitable to question the applicability of the statement that public spaces are places where everyone is welcome and free to express their identity. Thus, this paper offers a critical analysis of this declaration in order to find whether it holds for public spaces in the United States of America.
Considering the case of December 1992, whereby a resident complained about the restrictions that were imposed on Mclavers Bath, one gets an insight into the take on public spaces. The Mclavers Bath had been set aside for women and children aged below 12 years from Sydney (Iveson 2003, p. 215). The complainant argued that the restriction on the Bath was a form of sexual discrimination. However, there were several reasons as to why the bath was not open for men. The primary reason for restricting men in the Mclavers Bath was that the inclusion of men in the Bath would lead to cases of sexual harassment (Iveson 2003, p. 215). Considering the complaint, one would see that it was called. However, when looked at the perspective of the several conditions that led to the exclusion, the complaint was not right. Alternatively, such complaints would have been aimed at getting inclusion into the public as opposed to acting in an attempt to raise issues of competency.
Public spaces are spots where anyone has the freedom to express their identity. Looking at the complaint lodged by a male resident in Sydney about the restrictions on Mclvers Bath, it is evident that the resident had a right to express his feelings. The fact that the ocean pool included women and children less than 12 years was a reflection of discrimination despite it being a public place. However, it is in such cases where ethics should play a significant role. Following the fact that humanity and equality concepts ought to apply in all cases touching on human beings, anybody in the capacity of the complainant was right to express their concern about the Bath.
According to Iveson (2003, pp. 215-228) it was a discriminatory act to restrict men from using Mclvers Bath. For this reason, there should have been an opportunity provided to men to make use of the place for their expression. Rodo-de-Zarate (2003, pp.1-22) notes that sexuality is the primary source of discomfort mostly cited in public spaces. However, a lot of research is required to establish whether sexual harassment can only come from men alone. As such, other issues such as lesbianism that can occur in public spaces without men’s effort. For this reason, the claim that the inclusion of men in the Mclvers Bath would lead to cases of sexual harassment is not valid.
Even though everyone is welcome to express their identity in public spaces, a number of people feel that such freedom is affected by fear. According to (Valentine 2007, pp. 1-19), the perception of fear plays a significant role in the actual determination of gendered experience of spaces that are set aside for the public. As such, women tend to have more fear of expression than men do, following a case of systematic violence. Such would have been the reason that led to restrictions on Mclevers Bath. Valentine (2007, pp.11-19) outlines that many people tend to ignore the intersection that exists between different people and other identities.
As such, when considering the factors that play largely in the use of public spaces for a particular group such as women, it is important to consider the role of the intersection. Age, gay men and lesbians, have a significant role in the general state of restriction and perceived fear. However, through intersectionality (2007, p.16) points out that one can theorize social identity as well as space. Through such attempts, it is possible to relate the identity and space to social justice.
From the above, it is evident that whatever behaviour a person adopts in a given place is determined by several factors. Such can include one’s urgency, possible constraint as well as whether the identity is looked at as performed, practice or social perspective. For this reason, it suffices that public spaces are places where anyone can express their identity. However, the mode of narration, performance, and urgency are key factors that determine one’s freedom of expression while in public spaces.
References List
Iveson, K 2003, ‘Justifying exclusion: The politics of public space and the dispute over access to McIvers ladies’ baths, Sydney’, Gender, Place & Culture, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 215-228. Web.
Rodo-de-Zarate, M. 2013, ‘Young lesbians negotiating public space: an intersectional approach through places’, Children’s Geographies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-22. Web.
Valentine, G 2015, ‘Theorizing and researching intersectionality: a challenge for feminist geography’, The Professional Geographer, vol. 59, no.1, pp. 10-21. Web.