In Java, would you sacrifice type safety for a nicer programming interface

Question

When and why would you generally sacrifice typesafety for a nicer programming interface?

Let me give you an example: if you had the choice between two event aggregators, which one would you prefer and why?

Reflective Version:

SomeEvent.subscribe(instance, "nameOfAMethod"); //method called via reflection
SomeEvent.fire(arg1, arg2);  //the firing could actually even be statically typed

Statically typed version:

EventSystem.getEvent(SomeEvent.class).subscribe(new EventHandler<Payload>() {
   public void eventOccurred(Object sender, Payload payload) {
       //event handler code here
   }
});

EventSystem.getEvent(SomeEvent.class).fireEvent(payload);

Please note, that in Java, due to type erasure, you cannot implement a generic interface with different type parameters more than once and need to resort to anonymous or external classes for handlers.

Now the reflective event system has a nicer user interface, but you lose type safety. Which one would you prefer? Would you create empty event classes just for the sake of having a symbol, like Microsoft does it with PRISM in its event aggregator?