This discussion of Safe Zones previously lived on ["Talk:Gender and Sexuality Commission"].

Caution: Exiting Safe Zone, Entering Reality

By: Mason Harrison

There has been much to do about a certain “Mason” who videotaped a public function at UC Davis known as Generation Sex Week. Controversy surrounds this event due to the fact that “Mason” videotaped in an officially designated ASUCD Sex Toy Safe Zone, while allegedly posing as a liberal filmmaker. I am proud to say that I am the “Mason” who dared to cross that vague parameter no filmmaker has ever dared to cross. Although I have been the eye of the storm regarding the GASC filming incident, I have never been officially approached by any news media whatsoever or asked to give a public account of what happened. Allow me the pleasure of giving you a few unreported facts regarding this humorous sequence of events (no seriously, you would have laughed your head off).

Safe zones simply do not exist, ask your friendly family attorney.

When people say what I did was illegal, they do so on the basis that I violated a “safe zone”, although if you asked any lawyer if he could tell you what a safe zone was, he would have no idea what you were talking about. Allow me to offer one reason why the vast majority of US citizens and legal analysts have absolutely no clue what these mysterious “zones” are: the answer is that no such zones are recognized in Federal, State or City Law. This leaves a few nagging questions which must be asked: If safe zones do not exist in any written law, cannot be legally enforced and would not stand up in the court of law, then why on earth am I being accused of violating them? What are safe zones and who has this divine authority to create them? Since no such "safe zones" are defined in any law books, I can only draw an amateur’s conclusion that they were created by someone (possibly a student) for the convenience of enforcing certain behavioral codes not already implicit in our laws to sanctify the GASC sex toy extravaganza. The Sex Toy Workshops were made possible through student funds, and consequently open to the public; public events may be videotaped. If I make a speech in the center of the quad, I cannot make that quad a safe zone for my convenience because it is public property and by speaking I am making public statements. The same goes to the individuals who participated in public acts of soft-core porn in a lecture hall filled with roughly 200 fellow students. Unless those who participated were blind and deaf, they knew they were performing for the student body. I have some unfortunate news for those who rely on safe zones to exempt themselves from public scrutiny: when you enter a safe zone you exit reality.

Show me a progressive, I’ll show you a Libertarian and a Communist.

I never said I was liberal. That is a plain distortion of the facts, and I cannot allow it to continue. I said I was progressive. Funny how SOME people define the word progressive. The point of this was to allow me to get past the wall of GASC members at the door who explicitly stated before I crossed that taxpayer threshold that "no conservative filmmakers would be allowed to film the event". I got what I wanted on tape, tape I am glad to produce: their admission that ASUCD and GASC do not treat people of varying ideologies the same.


I have not released any of the videotape, nor do I intend to in a fashion that would embarrass any of its participants or make a mockery out of the event. My goal was simply to demonstrate the bias that goes by unrecognized by our own University, Bias against people with intellectual differences thus casting a shadowy cloud over its larger goals of upholding its own Principals of Community by which I proudly abide.

Something they don't have.

People are welcome to say and think what they please. I thank you for your time and consideration of this untold facet of the never-ending GASC saga. I have the blessed assurance that my opinion and record of the events is not based on faint recollections that have been shrouded and distorted by malcontent and fear of exposure. I have something they don't. Videotape.

I believe the legal argument is based on the fact that Jenn de la Vega presented the safezone agreement as a contract which everyone showed agreement to by staying. Hense, by doing anything against that agreement, you would be breaching a contract. Contracts are something you will find in state and/or federal law.

If staying in a room was a legaly binding agreement, you wouldn't have to sign a lease, you could just live in your apartment under a verbal agreement. BTW, I'm officially making UC Davis a "Mason" zone, so by attending the school you understand that I am absolutely right about all things :). Like I said, consult a real lawyer, not Jenn. —Mason

It's not about legalities in my mind as much as it is about being a mature, responsible, honest adult. It's not about some legalese as much as it is about being respectful and respectable. You knowingly deceived the people and violated a space that you may wish to arrogantly fend as non-existent but which you, as a responsible mature adult (and I assume you are) understand exists. You know the difference between right and wrong and good and bad. The complaint, in my understanding is that acts like this somewhat show a disregard on your part for these notions in favor of just doing some legal cakewalk. Adult bodies don't necessarily contain adult people. However, I don't know you ... I am not saying you are any of these. I am just trying to explain the complaint in terms that I am sure you are likely to already understand. -ChristopherMckenzie

Was is respectful and respectable of Jenn to tramp all over my first ammendment rights? If we all pay into Generation Sex Week, we should all have the right to see it. That Chris is respect. —Mason

Oh, how skillfull of you to change the subject and rebut nothing I said! There are lots of children at this University, I never said you were alone. -ChristopherMckenzie

I declare the City of Davis a Norton zone. That means by doing business in the city, you agree to accept Norton Dollars, as they are far more legitimate than Federal Reserve Notes.

See my point? —Masion

What is clearly being ignored is that Jenn de la Vega was an authority figure at the meeting. She was in charge and you attended knowing that she was in charge because she is the chair of the commission putting on the event. When you attend a class you know that the professor is in charge and you understand that if the professor asks you to not say racist or homophobic things then you are not allowed to, regardless of freedom of speech, because the professor is creating a "safe zone" in his or her classroom. Mason, it seems to me that you have a problem with authority figures which makes me wonder why you are still on the dark side; you should come join us liberals. I understand the anger about tuition dollars going to things that you do not support. You should talk to a lot of the people in Students For Justice in Palestine. I think you would have a lot in common with them because they feel like their tuition dollars are participating in the occupation of Palestine. I don't like my tax money going to fund inappropriate wars. I don't like my tuition dollars going to fund the move to Divison-1 sports or the Aggie Pack Firetruck. But there is an agreement when you enter into a public organization like UC Davis, and that is that certain things will be funded that you disagree with. I complain about what I disagree with but I accept that people have the right to do these things. I applaud your act of rebellion and your desire to change the political spectrum. I do disagree with you and think that your disdain for the "Sex Toys Workshop" may be fueled by a discomfort with the empowerment of female sexuality because it may be an affront on your "status-quo sex life." But keep on rebelling and I'll invite you once again to have a heart and join us liberals in our fight against the oppressors of the world. -RobRoy

I really appreciate the invitation, however I'm not as radical as you might think. I wasn't doing anything to rebel against Jenn or the commission; assuming that there was no copyrighted intelectual property in need of protecting I was perfectly within my right to tape. It was GASC who decided they didn't like the laws we all live with in this world and in an open act of rebelion forced me to leave the tax-funded event. You can spin it any way you want, but you have to ask yourself, who was changing the rules for their own selfish needs: myself or GASC? Haha, as for your comment about my alleged "distain" for female sexual empowerment, I think it's wonderful that we live in a free society where women are allowed to be sexually empowered, unlike pre-war Afghanistan and Iraq. I think in America, as long as you aren't hurting anyone else you should be aloowed to live the life of your choosing. I don't think however that taxpayers and students should fund promoting one's ideology. I raised 10,000 dollars for the last event I put on that promoted my republican ideas, I didn't make students fund it. Thanks for the thoughtful post. —Masion

The fact is that Mason had permission to tape, but that Jenn de la Vega regretted afterward once she began to suspect that Mason was a conservative. That's when the complaint about safe zones started — that Aggie article. — KenBloom

Dear sirs, Mason certainly had permission to tape specific commissioners for interviews, but not the panelists of the sexuality forum, nor the students at the open mic. I declined from any interviews because I was running the said events. I never said anything about anyone being "conservative" one way or another. I even said that I was willing to work with you all to change our programs! I'm serious. Even if my commissioners disagree with me, I am willing to bend and to work with all students because ASUCD is supposed to represent the opinions of ALL STUDENTS. Sir, the "safe zone" agreements were not intended to be legally binding, but a respectful and ethical agreement between persons participating. You did not have to stay if you didn't like it. I'm sorry that you don't like our programs, but the fact of the matter is that our public planning meetings were announced in the Aggie and no one gave us input about taking out any programs. Students are deciding the fate of our programs, not me. Our commissioners are not paid and our programs aren't not limited to just Generation Sex Week. We've made moves to accomodate the sentiments against our workshops, we've toned it down. I simply cannot take disrespectful paper evaluations seriously if there are no suggestions for positive change. If you'd like to speak with me, I have office hours in the senate office on Tuesdays or you may address this at the Senate meeting next Thursday at 5:30pm. —JenndelaVega

Huh...I found this page under the "lame horse" section. Im new to all of this. New to the issue, and new to the whole wiki web stuff. Im just a curious ex-local and ex- student. Thats right a townie that jumped the tracks and then left town.

I figured I would try my hand at changing a page. Not to be useless though.... It seems to me that a student organization put on some presentation and some one named "Mason" video taped it. What was he doing there? Why was he taping the presentation? To illustrate a point? Why was he asked or told to leave? What is the central issue here? Is it money not so well spent? Freedom vs law? All in all, it seems to me that there are multiple arguments being used that don't all make ends with one another. I have seen many people that are passionate about issues try any angle in an argument to support a point, even though the angles don't always have much to do about the main issues. I think that "JenndelaVega" is too busy(literally) to deal with one guy with a video camera, and I think that Mason is missguided in his efforts to support an issue. I don't think you are wrong Mr. Mason, I just don't think that how you are going about proving a point is the most usefull way to go about it. Any how, there is a blinking message below...."your edit lock on exiting safe zone entering reality has expired" I don't know exactly what that means yet. Good luck to all on all sides of this strange issue! -Neil

This may or may not be an ambiguation page — someone hoped you might feel more or less ambiguated.