What is “racialized space in architecture?”
The Free Press’ Ben Kawaller struggled to get a clear definition from Mayor John M. Erickson on the subject, which he and 81 other city officials and staff members received training on during a recent virtual session by the city’s Government Alliance on Race and Equity team.
View this post on Instagram
“There are actually several great books about it. When you look at architecture, building, or zoning codes, they all play into the same space in which we create an open and inviting environment for all communities,” Erickson answered.
“So, what would be a racialized or, if you like, a gendered space in architecture?”
“Well, a gendered space in architecture, when you look at how is stuff opened — like Metro stops, bus stops, and a lot of transportation hubs — a lot of things are more friendly to people of both genders or all genders. These are all questions that I think we’re looking at when we look at cities and how they’re built these days.”
“Well, OK, so how would a transportation hub like a train station be unfriendly to men or women?”
“I mean, don’t you already know the answer to that question? Do you think it’s safe for people to be in a space that doesn’t maybe have a shelter over it when it’s raining or there’s not enough adequate lighting, or when we look at spaces that aren’t inviting with a bench or ways in which women or people of all shapes and sizes can exist in those spaces?”
“Okay, but what does any of that have to do with race or gender?
“Well, I think when we’re looking at architecture, how are we looking at our spaces being different and new and inviting to everyone? I mean, you can build a building just to build a building–”
“But what’s an example of like a space that’s like not that, that is gendered or that is racialized?
“Well, I think the old existing zoning playbooks that Los Angeles has existed in for quite some time, this library itself, the PDC, you look at Melrose and what we’re doing, I think there are different ways in which we look at zoning codes differently here that are trying to be more open and inviting.”
“Okay, so what is racialized about the library or gendered about the library?”
“Well, it’s not anymore; it’s brand new, so I think this space is more inviting to the one that was just over there. Don’t you?”
So what is it?
The concept of “racialized space and architecture” explores the idea that racial biases and historical inequalities might influence the design and structuring of our environments, though these influences are not always clear-cut or universally accepted as fact. The concept suggests that decisions about where neighborhoods are located and how they are built can sometimes reflect deeper societal issues. For example, practices like redlining in the past were openly discriminatory, but the long-term effects, such as unequal access to resources, are subject to interpretation and debate today.
The way public spaces and infrastructure are designed might also suggest biases, though these are not always intentional or recognized by those involved in their creation. Some argue that features like the placement of barriers or the accessibility of public transportation can inadvertently favor one group over another. Additionally, the types of monuments erected in public spaces can imply a bias towards certain historical figures or events, potentially sidelining other important cultural narratives.
This isn’t the first time WeHo has held a training session on the topic. One was held last September at the cost of $9,000.
One has to wonder how it’s possible for a mayor to be so out of touch. It’s clear we need to make better choices at the ballot box, as his lack of articulation on any subject is quite telling. It’s almost as if we’re the ones who look foolish for electing him.
Well it’s nice to read that it was money well spent, since our dear Mayor was only able to “explain” it by lapsing into snotty teen mode: “I mean, don’t you already know the answer to that question?”
No, dear, we don’t, And clearly you don’t either. Ada Louise Huxtable he ain’t.
What a bunch of bullshit. I swear they’re going to turn me into a Republican with all this nonsense.
John Erickson is an idiot, pure and simple.
All public spaces should be available to everyone except John Erickson.
I’m guessing that since he nor anyone else can explain what a racialized or gendered space in architecture is, then it is not real. Just more made up stuff to keep people paid.
Typical nonsense spewing from unethical imbecile Erickson. We have a chance to vote him out–let’s not be buffoons and reelect him.
Of course you can’t expect a cisgendered privileged white male to have any insights into racialized architecture. But I am disappointed that Dr. Erickson with his degree in gender studies can’t even fake a good answer to the question about “gender spaced” architecture. It is too bad that our Mayor is enabling such lunacy. He is smarter than that.
Is he? Goes to show you anyone can get a degree. A piece of paper alone does not prove smarts…or common sense.
This topic might be of interest in a three minute conversation but what was the training on this supposed to accomplish other than giving the perpetually indignant something to hang their hats on?
Clearly, no one cares including John Erickson who sat there and didn’t listen to a word that was said. Even he doesn’t know why racialized space in architecture is a … thing!
To quote Lewis Black, …”this makes my teeth want to turn around in my head and EAT MY BRAIN”!!!!
Erickson always reminds me of Will Ferrell in Anchorman. Such a buffoon.
Come on now, is this paody?!? WeHo wokeness has jumped the shark. It’s embarrassing. But hey, at least he wore a pink jacket when being sworn in. That was very important to many in WeHo, I’m sure. Ugh. This guy/they/them is a 🤡 (and I don’t mean a respected clown like those in Slipknot, Circue du Solieil, or Ringling Brothers).