Designating people and not practices and ways of interacting as "safe" is a way to set people up for disappointment, pain, and exploitation. How many "good" or "safe" people have used that perception to abuse others in the past?

I'll add to this that it's important to find people you do feel safe with and can engage in these practices with, but safety is not an innate and immutable character trait and behaving like it is might hurt

This also makes safety something which can be negotiated and reestablished if its broken in small ways, something that can be repaired and can allow people to learn to engage with each other safely moving forward, granted that is a thing the participants are interested in and

The rupture in safety was not deliberate or malicious, which is super important

This doesn't mean that people owe anything to people who make them unsafe or who compromise safety at the table, please dont misinterpret that. Take what happened with Koebel recently, I absolutely would step away from that table and never come back, I don't want to try to

Practice safety with a person who would do what he did at the table