The Sylvan minority-only events debate considered the the following motion:
This house supports minority-only audience events.
The debate took place on Monday 1st July. Elaine Mclean proposed the motion and Hui Wang opposed it.
The proposition arguing that we should support minority-only events
The proposer began with a moment of silence – think as if you were a minority and wanted to go to an event, but couldn’t. Such as in Spain where you can’t understand the language. The term can have many connotations. Slave Play recently offered two black-identifying-only audience events, let’s discuss the implications. Other minorities could also do it – Jewish, Indian, LGBT or women only. These events are not inclusive. Black issues tend to be watered down. As a Black person, you code switch all the time. If I were a tall, white man with blonde hair I would have less agro. Minority only reflects the concept of differences. The privately educated are also a minority looked after by others – ‘marginalised parentally?’
A mixed audience limits what you say. For instance, I was hesitant to talk about Black issues. However, with George Floyd, you couldn’t sweep the issue aside. Multiracial couples face issues, we have structural racism. At LGBT events you can dress up more flamboyantly, though even there you have racism and disabilities. Can you imagine a disabled-only play? We need to have a separate event to discuss this. The concept of differences – give them their voice, heard by their own in a safe space.
The opposition against the minority-only events debate motion
The opposer agreed with the definition of minorities centred on a concept of difference. Women are a minority, in Sylvan for instance. Everyone needs to have a safe space. But in order to act, we need to involve everyone, and we need systemic changes. Protests – take it to the streets. Women-led venture funded businesses only represent 2% of the total in 2023. To get funded, you need a network, and venture capital firms (VCs) are male led. Women who succeeded had a strong network and male backers. I learned English with a range of UK immigrants, not just Chinese. Visually-impaired tennis championships include sound. There is no question that minorities need a safe environment, they share similar experiences.
Floor speeches from the audience of the minority-only events debate
Floor speakers attempted to define the subject more clearly, from a range of perspectives. Several raised the potential for segregation – we don’t want to create division but unity. In group versus out group mentality. Do regulations allow these events? We should allow minority-only events, but focus on integration. Private events fit very well with minority-only audiences, however, public ones could lead to segregation. If someone wants to take part, they should be allowed to. We don’t want the majority to dominate.
People are divided and tribal. If you want to have a hobby event, sure. However, would Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr think this is a good idea? The ‘I have a dream’ speech had black and white kids sitting together. Labels will tear us apart – we have the right wing on the rise in Europe. The establishment have lavish State dinners and don’t focus on inequality. Intellectual engagement with others allows us to reflect on ourselves as moral creatures. We argue and debate at the Sylvans regardless of race, sex, etc. Minority-only events, while comforting, prioritise differences. People of different ethnicities are all the same in their ideas.
I value the occasional opportunity to participate in a select audience group. Slave Play has reduced barriers to going to the theatre. There are occasions when the majority simply don’t get what is happening. Babies recognise racial differences, yet children grow out of this. Adults who cannot grow out of racism – a sign of trauma. I like minority spaces from earlier trauma, but does this extend the trauma? I don’t want to give time to wallow in trauma. We should never have tokenism, and need to bring people together. The word support in the motion means that not doing so would disallow these events.
The opposer’s rebuttal
In rebuttal, the opposer stated the overall view that we want inclusion and equal opportunities, supported in a safe space. Minority means representation within a certain environment, and how you feel about yourself. We’re not talking about banning events. Public versus private. The objective is to have a safe space to discuss personal matters, but a safe space even if you’re not a minority. Everyone can create events – the objective should be to create a more inclusive society and be on each others’ sides.
The proposer’s closing speech
In closing, the proposer pointed out that she focused on Black issues for five minutes only, and also discussed LGBT and disabled. Women do represent a minority in the business world. As a 60-year old Black woman, I get racism every day. Everyone agrees on the importance of safe spaces. Group therapy helps some with trauma. Sometimes you need to shape things with those who understand. This isn’t only about race. Gay only places – they feel more comfortable, surely, such as gay bars in the 1980s. We need to mix, and sometimes we need to be separate. This room is a cosmopolitan room, but not as many with dark skin.
Result: the minority-only events debate motion did not carry
In the final vote, the Sylvans concluded through the debate that we should not support minority-only events.
Please see summaries of earlier Sylvan debates here.