Safe Spaces: To Expose or to Silence?

Education has always been regarded as a space that gives rise to knowledge, character and humanistic values. Schools and universities should be safe places for everyone to learn, grow and express opinions without fear. Yet behind that image, a recurring and difficult-to-resolve problem persists: all forms of sexual violence, particularly verbal harassment committed by certain individuals, whether educators or students. Verbal harassment is often considered a mild form of violence because it leaves no physical wounds. In fact, demeaning words, sexually charged comments, degrading jokes, insults about appearance or body, and verbal intimidation can leave lasting psychological harm for victims.

Many victims experience a loss of self-confidence, anxiety, difficulty concentrating while studying, and even trauma affecting their social and academic lives. This is not mere assumption. According to data published by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology through the 2025 National Survey of Students’ Life Experiences, sexual violence remains a problem found particularly in higher education settings.

In addition, the National Commission on Violence against Women consistently records that educational institutions remain one of the spaces where various forms of gender-based violence occur, including verbal harassment. These facts show that this is not an isolated case, but rather demonstrate that verbal harassment remains a persistent problem in educational environments.

This raises the question: why do such cases keep recurring?

One cause often in the spotlight is the tendency of some institutions to prioritise image over victim protection. When allegations of harassment emerge, the focus that should be directed at victim recovery shifts instead to concerns about reputational damage, declining public trust, and consequences for accreditation or institutional quality. As a result, handling processes often proceed slowly, lack transparency, or even stall without clarity. Yet safeguarding an institution’s good name should not be done at the expense of justice.

Delaying sanctions against perpetrators in order to maintain image creates the impression that victims’ safety can be sacrificed for institutional interests. In such conditions, victims must remain in the same environment as perpetrators, where they are still in an academic relationship involving them. This situation gradually erodes the sense of safety that victims should have.

Many victims ultimately choose silence, not because they regard the incidents as trivial, but because they are not confident that reporting will result in real protection and follow-up. Fear of social pressure, the possibility of being blamed, and concerns that the perpetrator will remain free to carry on as usual are reasons why many cases never reach the complaints desk. Prolonged handling processes make matters worse.

The longer decisions are postponed, the longer victims must live in anxiety. Victims are forced to carry on academic activities while continually encountering the source of their trauma. This can even hinder learning, affect mental health, and lead victims to withdraw from campus life altogether.

More worryingly, some people still hold misguided views of victims. It is not uncommon for assumptions to emerge that victims ‘meet certain criteria’, such as manner of dress, personality, or way of interacting. Yet harassment never selects its victims based on particular characteristics. Anyone can become a victim regardless of gender, age, background, academic achievement, or position within the educational environment. Views that blame or doubt victims become a major obstacle to creating a safe educational environment. When victims feel their experience will be questioned or belittled, the courage to report diminishes. As a result, perpetrators have greater opportunity to repeat their actions against others.

At this point, a question arises that deserves collective attention. For whom is the concept of a safe space in education actually built? Is a safe space truly intended for students, educators and all members of the campus community seeking justice? Or, without realising it, has the safe space instead been created for perpetrators who are retained in the name of protecting the institution’s reputation? These questions must be answered, because a safe space is not merely a slogan on a banner or in an academic handbook.

A safe space must be realised through the courage to make decisions that side with victim protection and the enforcement of rules. An institution does not lose integrity when it imposes firm sanctions on perpetrators proven to have committed violations. On the contrary, such firmness demonstrates that the institution is committed to justice, responsibility, and respect for every individual’s human rights.

In the long run, transparency and firmness will build public trust far more strongly than covering up problems. Society will ultimately judge that the institution has mechanisms that work and leaves no room for anyone to commit violence. The issue lies not in the number of perpetrators, but in the impact of letting them go unchecked.

One perpetrator retained without sanction can produce many victims, because they continue to have the opportunity to repeat their actions and feel their behaviour can be tolerated. Verbal harassment left unchecked also has the potential to escalate into non-verbal or physical sexual harassment. Therefore, breaking this chain of abuse requires more than rules — it must be realised through concrete action in the form of swift handling, victim protection, and firm and thorough enforcement of sanctions.

The world of education exists to enlighten human life, not to protect those who abuse power or relationships. When justice is defeated by image-saving interests, what is at stake is not only the institution’s good name, but also the sense of safety and trust of everyone within it. Perpetrators proven to have committed violations must not be defended on the grounds of status, position, achievements, or contributions to the institution.

It must be understood that the priority is fair enforcement of the rules so that the educational environment can once again fulfil its function as a safe, dignified space, free from individuals who do not respect human values. As long as institutional interests are placed above victim protection, verbal harassment will continue to find room to persist — and what keeps growing is not the number of perpetrators, but the number of victims who choose silence because they feel justice is no longer something they can hope for.