This episode argues for an engaged anthropological approach to public space, showing how it can powerfully uncover hidden systems of exclusion that often remain invisible through other methodologies. We delve into the concept of space as a critical theoretical construct, highlighting its profound role in shaping and reflecting diversity.

Relates to The Feminist Park Project: Provides a methodological and theoretical foundation for how the Feminist Park can continuously audit and improve its inclusivity, ensuring that no subtle systems of exclusion exist within its design or use.

Source for Podcast Episode:

• Book/Paper: "Public Space and Diversity"

• Author: Setha M. Low

• Intro/Outro Music: big-band-tv-show-logo-164230 Music by Anastasia Chubarova from Pixabay

0:00

So have you ever walked into a public park or maybe a city square and just felt, well, a little bit out of place?

Like, maybe it wasn't truly designed for you or, you know, for people like you, or even just for the way you naturally like to use a shared space.

Yeah, it's actually a pretty common feeling, I think.

0:17

And it really points to something deeper.

Doesn't it kind of disconnect in how we design and experience these places we're all supposed to share?

Exactly.

So today we're going to do a deep dive into this.

We're putting on our our sort of detective hats, I guess, to explore the really complex, often hidden dynamics of public spaces, right?

0:37

And the mission really is to figure out why some spaces feel so welcoming, so liberating, while others, well, they subtly or sometimes not so subtly, seem to push certain people away, hindering diversity and that feeling of belonging.

And our main guide for this investigation is a really fascinating, quite groundbreaking academic article.

0:56

It's called Public Space and Diversity, Distributive, Procedural and Interactional Justice for Parks by the urban anthropologist Seth the Low.

And our goal here isn't just to, you know, summarize her work.

We want to pull out the really vital, maybe even actionable insights from her research so you can understand why some of these spaces might feel unwelcoming or even unsafe, and what it genuinely means to design for, well, for liberation.

1:21

Yeah, this isn't just theory, is it?

It's about practical lessons, things you can maybe see in the spaces around you.

Exactly.

Practical lessons for creating places where everyone feels seen, feels safe, and crucially, feels they have a right to be there.

Lowe's research gives us this incredibly detailed map of the challenges, yes, but also the opportunities.

1:41

OK, let's unpack this then.

Let's jump right into Cephalo's central argument because it really, it really resonates.

She argues that public spaces aren't just, you know, patches of grass or paved squares.

They are, and I'm quoting her here loosely, vital arenas where differences, race, class, gender, age, sexuality, ethnicity, ability are experienced and negotiated.

2:01

And they're supposed to be a safe forum for political action, communication and democratic practice.

That's that's a really powerful idea.

These are meant to be the crucibles of urban democracy.

It's an incredibly hopeful vision, isn't it, where we come together, bridge differences, forge community.

2:16

But this is the core of her research.

Lowe argues that these very spaces, especially in the US and she focuses a lot on New York City, have gone through these huge, often really damaging transformations.

Transformation is driven by what exactly?

Largely, she points to what she calls neoliberal urban policies and this broader economic restructuring we've seen over the past few decades.

2:38

OK, Neoliberal urban policies.

That sounds like a bit of academic jargon for someone just, you know, going to the park.

What does that actually translate to on the ground?

Is it about money?

Yeah.

That's a great question, and it's key to understanding these shifts.

Basically, it represents a big change in how cities are run and funded.

2:55

So instead of relying mostly on public taxes and government agencies, cities increasingly turn to private money, private partnerships, private management for public things like parks.

OK, so private companies are conservancies managing parks instead of the city parks?

3:11

Department.

Exactly.

And that often means these spaces become more commercialized, maybe more heavily controlled, and ultimately less genuinely public in the sense of being open and accessible to absolutely everyone.

It brings market logic into what should be a shared resource.

3:26

Right alongside that you've got this broader economic restructuring thing, globalization, shifts in employment, which has created more precariousness for many people, leading to widening social inequality.

So it's really a fundamental shift in who owns, who manages and ultimately who gets to use and benefit from our shared spaces.

3:45

Precisely.

And what's really interesting here is Lowe's critique of just aiming for diversity.

She argues that defining a just city needs more than just like a surface level mix of people.

What does she mean by that?

Like diversity stats aren't enough.

4:01

Exactly.

It's not enough to just count heads.

We need a broader framework of justice.

We have to look deeper at how these spaces are actually created, how they're managed, and, critically, how different people experience them.

And she details six major transformations that have fundamentally altered public space, pushing us away from that Democratic ideal.

4:20

Six.

OK, let's get into those.

What's the first big shift she points to?

The first is an increased informal economy.

Basically, we're seeing more immigrants and what she calls ambulatory vendors using public spaces.

So like street food carts, people selling crafts, musicians that kind of.

4:37

Thing exactly that.

It reflects increased immigration, yes, but also the growth of this informal sector, often because formal job opportunities are lacking people finding ways to make a living in public.

OK.

So more diverse activity, maybe more vibrancy, but also potentially more tension I guess.

4:54

Essentially, yes, which leads into the second point, this kind of paradox.

She highlights greater heterogeneity in the city overall, but alongside increased social segregation in neighborhoods.

Wait, how does that work?

More diverse cities, but more segregated neighborhoods.

5:11

Yeah, it feels counterintuitive, right?

Cities are more ethnically, culturally diverse than ever due to global movement.

You hear more languages, see different traditions, but at the same time driven by housing costs, maybe discriminatory practices, sometimes even preferences.

Our actual neighborhoods are often becoming more homogeneous.

5:28

Rich here, poor there, this group here, that group there.

And why is that tension so important for public space specifically?

Because if our neighborhoods are segregated, public spaces become some of the only places left where different groups might actually bump into each other.

5:44

Interact.

But this is our Third Point.

Even with this diversity in the city, individuals often don't have an opportunity to interact face to face.

Why?

Not if they're in the same park, because.

As Low puts it, the economics and politics of housing like restrictive rental practices or the cost of home ownership and end up creating ghettos for the poor and secured communities for the wealthy.

6:06

This drastically cuts down on those spontaneous everyday chances for diverse interactions that public spaces should be fostering.

It undermines that potential for bridging differences.

Wow.

So we might live in the same city, but we're increasingly living in separate worlds, and even our public spaces might not be bridging that gap effectively.

6:25

That's.

The concern and this leads to the 4th transformation, escalating tensions between globalization and vernacularization.

OK.

Break that down.

Vernacularization.

Yeah.

Vernacularization is basically people bringing their local culture, their traditions, their ways of using space into the public landscape, making it their own.

6:44

At the same time, you have globalization bringing in, you know, international brands, standardized designs, global flows of money and people.

So it's like the local coffee shop versus the big global chain right next door in the same Plaza.

Exactly.

It creates friction.

Local identities push back against or try to coexist with these global pressures within the same physical space.

7:06

Makes sense?

What's #5 fifth?

Is the creation of what low terms the dual city?

This isn't just about rich and poor neighborhoods.

It's about deep social and economic gaps in access to opportunities, to goods, to services, right across the whole metro region.

7:22

Think about it.

You might have one park maybe in your corporate center gleaming with private funding, perfect lawns, fancy cafes, and just a few miles away, another park with broken swings, patchy grass maybe feels unsafe, right?

Lowe argues.

This isn't an accident.

It's a direct result of this dual city dynamic, where economic success in one area often exists alongside neglect in another.

7:43

And it gets literally etched onto our public landscapes.

It directly effects quality of life.

That's.

A really stark image and the 6th transformation.

I have a feeling I know what it might be.

Funding you.

Got it. 6th is the decline in public funding.

Cities and states just have less public money dedicated to operating and maintaining public spaces.

8:02

So what happens?

The spaces that thrive are also the ones with private subsidies from conservancies, wealthy donors, corporations.

Meanwhile, the parks and playgrounds in poor neighborhoods, they often face chronic neglect, creating.

This visible landscape of inequality?

8:18

Absolutely.

A clear division in access to basic quality of life amenities and you.

Can really see the tangible results of all these shifts, especially in a place like New York City, which Lo details so well.

It's not just abstract policy, it's right there in front of you, like parks and plazas being privatized, managed by corporations, Low mentions City Hall, Park, Herald Square.

8:39

Suddenly they're gated or have Do not enter signs right.

Or those almost comical rules like she describes seeing a sitting wall clearly designed for sitting with a sign right on it saying do not sit.

That's.

Absurd.

It completely denies the purpose of the space it.

Fundamentally redefines it, doesn't it?

8:55

From a public good to a controlled, private amenity.

Herald Square, closing at 6:00 PM.

That's another example she gives.

Why explicitly To keep teenagers out so.

It's not about safety in general, it's about excluding a specific group deemed undesirable by the managers.

9:11

Precisely.

It's social control through operating hours and then.

There's the surveillance aspect that's huge, too.

Union Square, she notes, has something like 265 cameras an.

Astonishing number for one park.

It creates this feeling of being constantly watched.

Yeah, and add to that the increased policing 0 tolerance arrests, especially post 911.

9:34

It creates this atmosphere, this civil militancy, as some scholars call it, that really prioritizes private interest and control over genuine public access and freedom.

It.

Fosters a sense of fear, or at least caution, rather than openness and democratic engagement.

And you also mentioned historic preservation sometimes playing a role.

9:51

How does that fit in well?

Sometimes preservation efforts, even with good intentions, can end up reinserting certain elite class values onto the landscape.

Maybe they restore a park to a very specific romanticized historical period, but in doing so they erase or ignore how diverse communities use the space now or what their needs are.

10:11

It can subtly push people out by prioritizing a certain aesthetic over current use.

OK.

So all these transformations, who is actually being impacted the most and how low must go into detail on this.

Oh.

Absolutely.

Her research is really powerful and showing the disproportionate impacts for racialized communities.

10:29

For example, people of color often just avoid squares that feel heavily policed or overly secured low sites.

Other researchers who noted a real absence of young men of color in these kinds of controlled spaces.

Think about the mental load of constantly feeling watched, of knowing your mere presence might be seen as suspicious.

10:45

Yeah.

That constant vigilance must be exhausting.

It is, and she specifically mentions individuals perceived as Middle Eastern or Arab experiencing real fear of police profiling of the cameras.

They report being stopped, questioned.

It makes them hesitant to even go there.

11:02

So.

It's not just feeling uncomfortable, it's active fear and avoidance, a chilling effect on their right to simply be in public.

Exactly.

It forces a kind of self exclusion.

Then you have socio economically marginalized individuals.

Lova found that low income people are very adept at reading the subtle cues in these privatized spaces cues.

11:21

Like what she.

Calls them environmental mnemonics, like little messages embedded in the design, long lists of rules posted everywhere, those benches with dividers so you can't lie down, Maybe overly ornate, fussy landscaping that just feels off, like it's not for everyday people.

So the design itself whispers, you don't belong here.

11:38

Precisely these cues make people feel uncomfortable, unwelcome, so they just avoid those places.

And for people experiencing homelessness, the impact is brutal and direct.

Gates locking them out at night, literally nowhere to go and.

What about young people?

You mentioned teens being excluded from Herald Square, yes?

11:56

Youth in general often avoid these highly controlled spaces, restrictive rules, the feeling of being watched.

It clashes with their need for informal gathering spots, places to just hang out, to be spontaneous.

These managed environments just don't allow for that vital unstructured social interaction.

12:13

And the immigrant vendors you mentioned earlier they face?

Huge difficulties too.

New regulations, increased policing, more surveillance, their livelihoods, which often adds so much vibrancy to public spaces, are directly threatened by these changes.

They get pushed out so.

12:28

These aren't abstract trends.

They have deeply personal, often painful consequences for specific groups of people.

Absolutely, and Lowe points out this isn't just AUS thing.

She gives an example from her earlier work in Costa Rica.

In San Jose, the main square parquet central was redesigned.

12:45

How so?

Well.

They put in these small curved benches, really uncomfortable, impossible to sleep on, and they cut down most of the big shade trees that people like shoeshine workers and pensioners used to gather under.

Wow, so subtle design choices.

Basically engineered exclusion.

Exactly.

They made the space functionally unusable or undesirable for the lower class users they wanted to exclude without needing explicit keep out signs.

13:09

It's a global pattern.

Design is a tool of social control.

It's.

Chilling how seemingly neutral design decisions can carry such weight.

So faced with all these problems, what does Lowe propose?

You said just aiming for diversity isn't enough for her, right?

She argues we need a more comprehensive approach grounded in three specific dimensions of justice.

13:30

She says these are essential to address the multiple kinds of perceived injustice.

OK.

Three kinds of justice.

What's the first one?

The first.

Is distributive justice.

This draws on thinkers like John Rawls and others.

It's basically about the fair sharing of society's resources, benefits, burdens.

In terms of public space, it means ensuring that everyone has equal availability and access to parks, plazas and the resources within them.

13:53

So.

Does every neighborhood have a decent park?

Are the facilities distributed fairly?

That's.

The core question, and Lowe argues pretty clearly that New York City fails this test.

Poorer neighborhoods often lack adequate public space, or the spaces they have are neglected or privatized and expensive.

14:10

Wealthier areas, they often have plenty of great options.

It's a fundamental inequality in the distribution of this vital public good.

It's.

Not just about having parks in the city, but about whether your neighborhood has good accessible space that actually meets local needs.

Precisely.

14:26

But crucially, Lowe says even if we achieved perfect distributive justice, it still wouldn't be enough for a truly just city.

OK.

So what else is needed that brings?

Us to the second type, procedural justice.

This one is all about the fairness of the process, how decisions get made, how negotiations happen.

14:44

The key idea here is that how someone is treated during decision making is just as important, sometimes even more important, than the final outcome.

So.

It's about having a voice, being consulted, being treated with respect during the planning.

Exactly.

If decisions that affect your community are made about you, but without you, without any input or information, it breeds resentment and a feeling of injustice, even if the outcome itself seems OK on paper.

15:10

Process matters.

Does she give an example?

A really powerful one from Brooklyn's Prospect Park.

There's this wetland area that the original designer Olmsted had intended.

It had degraded, and the park admin got funding to restore it ecologically.

Now the park sits between two very different neighborhoods, Crown Heights, largely African American and Caribbean American, and Park Slope, mostly white professionals and some Hispanic residents.

15:36

OK.

Different communities, potentially different relationships with the park.

Right.

So when the restoration started, they put up snow fences around the wetland, blocking access for everyone.

Now, for Park Slope residents, many involved in the Prospect Park Conservancy, this wasn't a big deal.

15:51

They knew about the project, they've been consulted.

But for.

The Crown Heights residents when.

Lowe interviewed them.

They perceived those fences very differently.

They saw them as a way for park managers to keep black people out of what they saw as the white part of the park.

This intense feeling of injustice wasn't about the outcome.

16:08

Everyone was kept out so distributively.

It was equal.

It was about the complete lack of procedural fairness.

They hadn't been consulted, informed, involved in the process like their wealthier neighbors.

Wow.

So the process itself generated feelings of racism and exclusion.

16:24

That's huge.

It really drives home that point process is substance.

It's about respect, recognition, involvement.

You can't just impose things on communities.

Absolutely.

OK.

So we have distributive and procedural justice.

What's the third the. 3rd is interactional justice.

This focuses on the quality of the actual person to person interactions that happened in a specific place.

16:43

Are people treated with truthfulness, respect, propriety?

Are they subject to discrimination, harassment, insults, rude behavior?

It's about the quality of your immediate experience with others in that space.

Are the users staff police So?

Feeling safe and respected in your encounters there.

17:00

Exactly.

And Lo gives some really stark examples of failures here.

Union Square, New York.

Again, she knows how young men of color or people perceived as Middle Eastern or Arab are frequently followed by police, spoken to rudely, questioned inappropriately just.

17:17

For being there.

Just for being there, it creates this hostile, intimidating environment that makes them avoid the place entirely.

Imagine trying to relax in a park while constantly feeling like a suspect.

Yeah, awful and.

Similarly, she mentions teenagers in malls or markets being followed by security guards questioned about whether they're actually going to buy anything.

17:37

It just makes them not want to be there, even if it's one of the few places they can gather.

It's a constant feeling of unwelcome, OK.

This is really laying out the problems clearly.

But here's where it gets really interesting.

Right?

Because Low doesn't just diagnose, she offers a way forward based on deep ethnographic work.

17:55

Absolutely.

She really champions that ethnographic approach like William H White did back in the day.

Actually going into spaces, observing, talking to people, understanding how they really use and feel about these places.

And based on that field work, she and her public Space Research group developed 6 crucial lessons learned for actually fostering cultural diversity in parks.

18:16

These are practical takeaways, OK?

Let's hear them.

What's the first lesson first?

Representation matters.

If people don't see themselves, their histories, their cultures represented in a park or historic site, or worse, if their histories have been actively erased, they simply won't use it.

It's not just symbolic, it's a fundamental barrier.

18:34

The example she uses is Independence National Historic Park in Philly.

Many African Americans don't visit, partly because black institutions were literally torn down to create the park and that history isn't acknowledged or commemorated so.

That erasure sends a powerful message.

This history and therefore maybe you don't belong here.

18:53

Exactly.

If you're invisible in the narrative, you feel excluded from the space itself.

Second lesson, access is beyond transportation meaning.

It's not just about whether a bus stops nearby.

Right.

It's also about economic access and cultural patterns of use.

19:10

She gives that vivid example of poor African American families living just 400 yards from the Ellis Island Museum in Jersey City.

They really wanted to go, but the $10 ferry cost per person was just too much for the large extended family groups they tend to socialize in a family of five or ten, that's $50.00 or $100 just to get across the water, even if the museum itself is free.

19:33

Wow, that's a huge derriere.

A $10 ticket becomes impossible for a whole family outing.

It makes the place totally inaccessible no matter how close it is physically it.

Really highlights those hidden economic barriers.

Third lesson Provide safe, spatially adequate territories.

Territories within the park.

19:49

What does that mean it?

Means that to maintain diversity, you often need to provide enough space and designated areas for different groups and activities within the larger park.

Create zones where specific communities can feel comfortable doing their thing while also allowing for mixing.

Prospect Park, despite its procedural justice issues we discussed, is cited as somewhat successful here.

20:11

It's large enough to accommodate different needs.

Fields for soccer, picnic spots, quiet grows for couples, even semi secluded areas used by Muslim mothers wanting privacy.

And then there's a main loop Rd. where everyone, walkers, runners, cyclists can mingle.

This mix of designated niches and shared spaces helps maintain diversity, so.

20:29

It's about allowing for separation when needed or desired, but also facilitating positive interaction in shared zones.

A tricky balance, very.

Tricky 4th lesson accommodate diverse values.

Park managers need to understand and actually value the different ways various social classes and ethnic groups use and perceive public spaces.

20:51

Not everyone wants the same thing from a park, right some love perfect flower beds, others want space for loud family barbecues.

Others want quiet nature spots.

Acknowledging these different values is key to making decisions that support everyone.

It's.

About designing for the people who actually use the park in all their diversity, not some imaginary ideal user.

21:09

Exactly. 5th lesson Historic preservation should go beyond scenic restoration.

Lowe argues that just responding the physical look of a park to some past era isn't enough.

You also need to consider restoring the facilities and, importantly, the social programs that actually drew people there.

21:26

She mentioned Central Park restoring Olmsted's design beautifully, but maybe without the community programs he also envisioned, or the Prospect Park boathouse being restored but with no boats or food concessions anymore.

So just restoring the shell without the life inside can feel empty or even exclusionary, right?

21:43

It can come across as elite, focusing on aesthetics over the actual social life and activities that make a park vibrant for diverse communities.

A beautiful, historically accurate park that nobody uses for social connection isn't really serving its purpose from a justice standpoint.

21:59

It.

Becomes like an outdoor museum piece.

Pretty.

Much And finally, the 6th lesson is about the power of symbolic communication.

Fostering cultural meaning through symbols, music, art.

This really strengthens people's sense of place, attachment and encourages diversity.

22:15

It's about deliberately making the space feel meaningful to different groups.

The example she gives is Pelham Bay Park in the Bronx.

Simply playing salsa music on summer Saturday nights help encourage Latino immigrants and residents to come enjoy the space, feel represented and really claim it as their own such.

22:33

A simple thing, but clearly powerful in creating that sense of belonging hugely.

Powerful.

It's about sending those welcoming environmental mnemonics, OK?

Now let's really apply these lenses, the justice framework, the lessons learned directly to the case studies.

Low presence, because this is where you see it all play out, right?

22:50

The theory Meeting the pavement.

Absolutely.

Let's start with that migrant and racial justice perspective.

Looking again at Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia, the core issue, as we touched on, was the erasure of African American history, their institutions torn down, presence unmarked.

23:08

But it also excluded newer immigrant groups, Vietnamese Americans, Hispanic Americans.

Their stories weren't integrated either, so.

The parts narrative itself was exclusionary even without overt signs.

Precisely Low found African Americans were deeply concerned about this lack of cultural representation.

23:26

Feeling invisible, Asian Americans and Hispanic Americans wanted their stories woven into the national narrative presented there.

Many groups felt excluded simply because of this lack of representation.

Plus things like signs only being in English.

They ended up seeing the park is basically white and for tourists, not for them the local communities so.

23:45

That lack of representation directly impacted their sense of belonging and connection to the place.

Profoundly, Lowe concludes, cultural representation in urban space is material evidence of its history and local politics of exclusion.

What gets remembered and shown matters immensely.

24:02

And what about?

Jacob Rees Park through this lens.

You mentioned the demographics, mostly recent poor immigrants from Central and South America, right?

And here Lowe identifies clear distributive injustice.

The parks layout designed by Robert Moses back in the 30s was all about the beach, but the new immigrant users highly valued picnicking, large family gatherings, things needing shade, tables, grills, amenities the park just didn't have enough of, especially in the areas they tended to use so the.

24:31

Resources weren't distributed according to need exactly.

She found an unequal distribution of space where the wider or heterosexual beach areas had the lifeguards, bathrooms, concessions, while other areas lack these basic things, a very clear spatial inequality and.

24:46

The procedural injustice there, How are they excluded from the process?

Significantly, these immigrant users basically had no way to participate in park planning or management.

A huge barrier was language.

Park staff often didn't speak Spanish, the main language of their biggest user group.

So.

25:01

Their needs were just invisible, largely.

Yes, needs for specific programs like swimming lessons or safety education.

Tailored activities.

They were overlooked because there was no effective communication or outreach.

Decisions were made for them, not with them and.

Then the really disturbing part, the interactional injustice, the direct experiences of hostility, yes.

25:21

Sadly, Low documented actual physical violence and verbal abuse of people of color who tried to use a specific Bay Bay 14, which had been territorialized by some white local men.

That creates immediate, terrifying barriers.

It's not subtle.

It's direct aggression, making parts of a supposedly public park feel dangerous for certain people based on their race.

25:42

Switching lenses, What about the class and socioeconomic perspective?

How did that play out well?

Back at Independence Park, that fairy example is a perfect illustration.

Poor African Americans living nearby, unable to afford the $10 per person ferry for their families.

It shows vividly how economic barriers restrict access even to free public sites.

26:01

It's not about desire, it's pure affordability, right?

That $10 fare becomes a wall and.

At Jacob Ray's Park, while it served a mix of incomes, the newest visitors, the immigrants, were the poorest.

Their specific needs, picnic areas, shade grills, culturally relevant programs weren't met by the existing infrastructure or the limited budget.

26:20

It starkly highlights how class intersects with park design and resource allocation.

The space just wasn't equipped to serve its most financially vulnerable users, which perpetuates exclusion.

Now let's think about.

The queer theory perspective Jacob Rees Park seems particularly relevant here.

26:36

Hugely relevant, Low explicitly mentions that visitors to Bay one historically a known gathering spot for the LGBTQIA plus community, Prixie gay men had less flexibility of movement because of issues around gay identity, tolerance and safety less.

Flexibility, meaning they felt confined or less safe moving around.

26:54

Potentially yes.

And critically, she notes that Bay One often lacked A lifeguard even when other, less busy areas were staffed.

That's a direct safety risk disproportionately affecting queer users of that space.

It shows a failure to consider safety needs beyond the assumed heterosexual norm.

27:12

That's a major oversight, or worse.

And she also points to conflicts between the gay beach users and families over appropriate behavior and dress.

This signals clashes over who gets to define what's normal or acceptable in public space.

It challenges heteronormative assumptions about public behavior and visibility it.

27:30

Raises that question, whose comfort and whose norms get prioritized?

Exactly, and looking through a feminist and gender perspective, While maybe not Lowe's primary focus in this article, there are important insights.

Her question under international justice?

What about women interacting with men directly points to gendered safety concerns which are pervasive for women and gender diverse folks in public spaces.

27:51

Right the.

Constant low level or high level anxiety many women feel.

Absolutely, and the example from Prospect Park, those semi secluded areas for Muslim mothers and children who like to stay away from men, shows how thoughtful design can address specific gendered needs for comfort, privacy or cultural reasons.

28:10

It acknowledges that A1 size fits all approach doesn't work for everyone's safety and comfort and.

The conflicts at race park over dress and behavior that.

Also relates to gender.

It touches on the policing of bodies and behaviors in public, which often disproportionately targets women and LGBTQIA plus people who don't conform to rigid gender or sexual norms.

28:31

Whose display is acceptable?

Whose isn't?

OK.

And finally, the ableism and disability justice perspective you mentioned, Lowe acknowledges ability differences at the start, but the case studies didn't offer specifics.

That's right.

The specific ethnographic details in this text for Independence Park and Reese Park didn't focus on accessibility issues or exclusion based on disability.

28:51

But, and this is really crucial for us thinking about designing better spaces like the feminist park, just because it wasn't detailed here doesn't make it any less vital.

Designing for universal accessibility ramps, clear paths, tactile paving, sensory considerations, inclusive play equipment, accessible restrooms.

29:07

That's not an add on.

It's fundamental to distributive, procedural and interactional justice.

Ensuring people with disabilities feel welcomed, safe and can fully participate is non negotiable for a truly liberated space.

So pulling all this together, what does Lowe's incredibly detailed research really mean for the Feminist Park?

29:26

How does it directly inform what we're trying to envision and create?

I mean, it's almost like Lowe's work provides the foundational why and how for something like the feminist park, her framework, her findings, they're not just academic, they feel like a blueprint, A.

Blueprint for why it's needed and how it should be designed exactly.

29:44

Take distributive justice.

A feminist park has to be designed from the outset to ensure truly equitable distribution of space and resources for everyone across all identities.

Gender, race, class, sexuality, ability.

That means consciously thinking about varied needs, quiet zones, active areas, spaces for large families, performance spots and making sure amenities, safe, clean, accessible restrooms, water, diverse seating are equally available everywhere in the park, not just in one prime spot.

30:15

Real equity and resources and.

Procedural justice, The process itself.

This seems like a huge take away from Lowe's work.

Massive The process of creating and managing A feminist park needs to be radically inclusive learning from those failures of Prospect Park and Reese park is not enough to decide for communities it.

30:30

Has to be with them, yes?

Proactive ongoing consultation, breaking down language barriers, ensuring marginalized voices genuinely shaped the design, the management, the programming, real Co creation, transparent communication, feedback loops that actually lead to change and.

Interactional justice creating that feeling of safety and respect and interactions.

30:49

That has to be baked into the design, creating environments where women, non binary folks, people of color, LGBTQIA plus individuals feel genuinely safe from harassment, from profiling, from those subtle exclusionary cues.

It's not just about security.

Maybe it's about sight lines, lighting, clear wayfinding, but also fostering positive encounters.

31:08

Maybe drawing inspiration from Reese Parks unexpected success.

Those diverse niches alongside shared spaces can sometimes foster tolerance and integration.

Despite the challenges designing for positive voluntary interaction, it.

Really feels like the systemic exclusions and fears that low documents just under score.

31:26

How necessary a feminist park is.

It's not just a nice idea, it's a direct response to very real, documented injustices in the spaces we have now.

Absolutely.

It validates the need profoundly.

And those six lessons learned, she offers.

They give us such concrete guidance like.

31:41

Representation.

A feminist park has to actively celebrate and make visible the histories and contributions of marginalized groups fighting that erasure.

Low identified, yes.

And a holistic access thinking beyond just getting there.

Tackling the economic and cultural barriers to free events.

31:57

Culturally relevant and programming then.

The intentional territories designing those safe spaces within the park for specific needs, alongside common areas for positive mixing and.

Moving beyond aesthetics, prioritizing social life, programming, dynamic activities over just looking pretty or historically perfect.

32:15

It needs to be a LivingSocial hub and.

Finally, harnessing that symbolic power, using art, music, cultural events to build that deep sense of belonging and ownership for everyone.

Sending those welcoming messages.

Exactly.

Infusing the space with meaning for all its diverse communities.

32:31

But we.

Also have to be realistic, right?

A feminist park would face the same challenges.

Lowe identifies.

The pressure of new Liberal policies towards privatization, the threat of surveillance and over policing, the potential for preservation, efforts to exclude definitely.

These aren't small hurdles, they're real world political and economic forces.

32:50

A truly liberating park needs to be aware of these pressures and have strategies to resist them, to stay true to its mission of inclusion and justice.

It's an ongoing struggle.

Well.

As a shortcut to being well informed, we really hope this deep dive into Seth the Lowe's work has given you, our listeners, a lot to think about regarding the public spaces in your own lives.

33:10

Maybe take a moment next time you're in a park or square to just observe.

How does it feel?

Who is there?

Who isn't?

What messages might the design itself be sending?

Yeah.

Definitely and maybe think about it through Lowe's framework.

How would you score your local park on distributive justices space and our resources shared fairly.

33:27

What about procedural justice where local communities involved in its design or changes and interactional justice.

How do people seem to treat each other?

Do you feel safe and respected there can.

You start to read those environmental mnemonics Lowe talked about.

The subtle cues in the benches, the rules, the landscaping, the surveillance.

33:44

What are they telling you about who this spaces really for and.

Here's a thought experiment.

If you were designing a public space from scratch, aiming for liberation and inclusion, which of Lowe's lessons would you prioritize?

How would you actually put them into practice to make sure all communities felt represented, respected, truly safe?

34:04

It leaves us with a final provocative thought, perhaps.

What if the real measure of a city's health, it's justice, isn't just its skyline or its economy, but how safe, how seen, and how truly free its most marginalized citizens feel when they step into its shared public spaces?

34:21

Something to keep pondering, keep looking closely at the spaces around you, keep asking questions you.

Might just start seeing your city in a completely new light.