a) at which Uni: fully inclusive of Anglia Ruskin University.
b) regardless of 'rank' at a Uni.
c) regardless of whether a person is a student or an ex-student.
This acceptingness, and refuge from bullying carried out elsewhere on such grounds, has been part of the Sheila and her Dog Society for many years now and has been permanently adopted by all other Safer Spaces here. Sheila's Constitution has made explicit mention of this for many years now!
We'll eventually give a lot of reasons for the importance of this here. For now, we include three.
*** Reason 1) People who were bullied at university are often unwilling to go to 'conventional reunions'. As such, these remain involved with societies that were welcoming, tolerant and safe from the bullying. This option, howevern is only possible in those societies whose friendly tolerances extend to not discriminating against ex-members.
*** Reason 2) Far from all Survivors, Closeted people etc have the luxury of having any Allies who are also current students at the same uni.
So societies which bar such as family members, friends from school, ex-Cam people, ARU people from participation also quite often passively prevent Survivors or Closeted people at that same uni from participating by excluding their Allies, or placing their Allies in situations in which they can't be effective Allies.
E.g. in some societies, an Ex-Uni person raising an issue has consequently been bullied out of that Society by 'retracting permission to be part of the society'.
In some cases, the issue being raised was one that the Survivor was unwilling to continue to be part of the society if the issue wasn't raised.
In other cases, ageist or occupationist bullying of an Ally has caused such as Survivor or Closeted members of the university to also quit the society in protest.
Societies quite simply can't arbitrarily cut out large sections of the population and expect such as Survivors or Closeted people will be able to use their Socs. Discrimination on grounds of age and occupation would appear to affect most circles of Allies around a Survivor or Closeted person, because activities where part of the rota of Allies can't be used create undue strain. And of course some Allies are very dear to Survivors, say, so these Survivors won't go anywhere that any of their Allies isn't made welcome at.
So Safer Spaces that don't discriminate on grounds of age or occupation are very much valued by Survivors, Closeted people and our Allies.
*** Reason 3) Almost every last society in this city segregating Cambridge University and Anglia Ruskin University is highly unnecessary. In some places, it carries an unpleasant smell of elitism, whereas in some other places the members know of another such club in the same town but daren't go there due to the predilection to ignore, sneer at or exclude 'students from the other place'.
It is however an entirely reasonable opinion that there's absolutely no reason why people who enjoy the same kind of activity can't do that activity together.
We ourselves are having none of this 'people from the other Uni can be members if they ask for permission' (such 'permissions' have been known to be denied or retracted on petty, political or just plain nasty grounds).
And we're having none of this 'people from the other uni can participate but not be in committees'. People from one uni or the other are, quite simply, people, as are ex-uni members, grads, Mature Students etc, so any 'principles' or 'in practise not-done things' that treat such as second-class citizens are not welcome in these Safer Spaces.
Plenty of other societies could do with questioning the necessity of these normativities.
And of their societies having to contain a gatekeeper that is obliged to belong to a purportedly 'more trusted' 'class' of 'academic rank'. Perchance, more societies could do with only accepting to have committee posts that make no specific reference to any universities the applicants need to be at, still be at, or beat at with any kind of specification of academic rank.
Thank goodness for unofficial societies which don't have to comply with normative committee post specifications being things like "everyone must be a current student at 'the right' university, bar precisely one post which must be filled by a 'member of staff', without whom the society isn't entrusted with any 'official funding' whatsoever.
So, indeed, some societies entirely choose to be poor, or to be run solely from minor no-strings-attached sources of money that don't come with a dictat for 'how that society must run its own affairs'.