To have special needs is not limited to having a disability certificate. It may sound obvious, but special needs apply to anyone who faces certain obstacles in a space designed for able-bodied people and only for them. And the conditions can be, in some cases, something permanent, temporary, or just the result of a specific incompatibility between the individual and the context they are in. This includes anyone with a child in a stroller who needs ramps wherever they go. Any person, such as a child, who does not have the strength or dexterity to operate simple mechanisms. Any elderly person whose old age may simultaneously limit them sensory, motor, and cognitive. Any person, whether younger or older, who cannot use certain facilities or navigate certain spaces designed for a different height or weight. Any person who has recently had surgery and needs places to sit regularly. Any person from a disadvantaged environment or another culture who cannot decipher our conventional symbols or even read. Any person who cannot afford or does not have access to the internet to find information. Or any person who cannot use a gender-segregated space such as toilets or changing rooms without attracting unwanted attention.
I myself have been part of many of these categories in the past (and probably will be part of them again, or others, in the future), including the last one. For me, it represented an intermediate stage of being able to integrate with discomfort on one side and being able to integrate with comfort on the other. And while I was in this stage, I was perceived as a stranger or even an intruder in both parts. However, there are people who never manage to get past this stage, no matter how hard they try, or who do not want to be anywhere else other than in this stage of ambiguity. Or, people who, even without being in such a transition, do not conform to the expectations associated with their gender, either because of their physical nature or because of the way they choose to express themselves. I consider myself privileged because in my case, non-integration was temporary and brought mostly just embarrassment, felt both by me and by the other people around me. But for other people, non-integration brings harassment, violence, or forced exclusion from the space they want to be in. Everyone needs intimate spaces where they feel safe, and for some of us, these spaces need to be designed or used by others, taking into account our conditions. Alongside the other categories mentioned, however, our needs tend to be ignored or, in the current socio-political context, even pathologized, ridiculed, or demonized, sometimes with causes at least partially justifiable, unfortunately.
The Empathy Retreat represented a unique initiative to bring together, in an inclusive and equal forum, representatives from both those who have such special needs in space usage and those who participate in creating spaces for their use. I myself came in a double role, both as a representative of the diverse individuals who face difficulties with gendered spaces and as a specialist in the field of geography and socio-political sciences. Therefore, I can say that I am familiar with both sides of the spatial planning issue and understand the complexity of solving it in a way that satisfies everyone, from typical and atypical users to designers and builders, and to administrators and funders. In general, ensuring harmony in human space is based on the cooperation of the social and engineering aspects, and conflicts that arise are often the result of a lack of communication, understanding, or empathy between the aforementioned parties. And this event was an excellent opportunity and challenge for me and all the other participants to interact, exchange ideas, and solve problems together in an excellently designed context, due to its relaxed and friendly character, devoid of the frustrations of existing in unfriendly spaces on one hand and the pressures of projects to be solved with time and budget constraints on the other, factors that often create tensions. We all had the opportunity and challenge to step into each other’s roles to strengthen not only the understanding of the issues but also the empathy with those who face them daily. And I can confidently say that the result was a defining experience for all of us, in which many lessons were learned, and many opinions were changed, for which I am extremely grateful.
The perspective I gained, together with the people I had the chance to discuss in-depth with, is that this concept of gendered spaces is a compromise solution. More precisely, a compromise between people’s need for privacy, which requires the existence of personal spaces, and the limits of resources or space that restrict the possibility of an intimate space for each individual. It is also a compromise between long-term solutions through education and economic development of social problems that create the need for privacy and the current need for spaces in which to function to eventually reach this level of civilization where there is no need for privacy. Otherwise, it represents a compromise between the humanist ideal of trust and inclusion and the pragmatic needs of safety and profitability. The tensions, protests, and conflicts related to this issue that we see today are symptoms that our society is no longer satisfied with these compromises and is demanding a better solution. It is easy to be pessimistic in assuming that we will not achieve anything better, and I often was. But the inclusive dialogue conceived by AMAIS showed me how much can be done in just a few days with a small group of people and reminded me of the capacity for mutual affection and cooperation that people have. So, personally, I can only be optimistic now that we will create a world for all of us soon, where we all feel both safe and included, and I look forward to living in this world and contributing as much as I can to make it a reality.
