On Sept. 11th I posted about Brianna Karp and her "New Face of Homelessness." I received a lot of feedback about my opinions, both in person and in writing.
The one that caused me the most distress was this one, from Matt.
Reading this makes me very sad indeed.
She does not hold all the answers and neither do you or I but she is a deeply caring and courageous woman who wishes to help all those who are experiencing homelessness. I know this for a fact.
She should be both encouraged and supported by those who claim to have similar goals, not attacked for any shortcomings she may have.
"The vast majority of homeless individuals....want to work, and look for work"
Somehow you turned that into:
"And to intimate that only white, formerly middle class people are willing to work "and look for work," is offensive. It was an innocent mistake on her part, but offensive."
That is a massive leap for which I can see no grounds whatsoever. She 'intimated' nothing. Now THAT is offensive.
I choose to believe that your heart is in the right place too so instead of whining at her, how about getting behind her and helping her make the most of what I'm sure you will agree is a huge opportunity to do some real good?
Firstly, I would like to publicly apologize if I have come across as having all the answers. Because I know that I don't. I would like to apologize to Bri and to any of her friends and loved ones who think this was some sort of attack on her, because it wasn't meant to be. As I said in my post, I agree with the sentiment of her heart being in the right place. I would never hope that my words would take away from her courage or her caring or the fact that she is using her position to do positive things in the world.
The things I said were not meant to be malicious, but if they were interpreted that way then there is something wrong with the way I presented them. And so I will try again.
Bri never says that only white, formerly middle class people want to work or look for work. So it was unfair of me to say that in my post.
She does say that the overwhelming percentage of homeless people are drug free, have no mental illness and are formerly middle class. She reports that this vast majority of homeless people are the ones who would like to join the work force. I apologize for adding the qualifier of "white;" it was inspired by her sentiment that "most homeless people are like me and manage to blend in relatively well. " It was not, as I see now, entirely relevant to the point at hand. Nor was it helpful in my argument. My issue was and is with the line in the sand being drawn between "bums" and "non bums." I think the rest of my original post covers how I feel about that.
But I think Matt's real point was that the issue is moot anyway. The real point is that if I truly am an advocate for the homeless, as I claim to be, why am I wasting time finding fault with someone else who claims the same?
I think it's because over the past two years I have become very sensitive towards the marginalization of any of the people I work with. To draw a line between types of homeless people is hurtful because some concepts are not mutually exclusive, and it paints an unflattering picture of many homeless individuals.
Sometimes love can make us blind. I saw Brianna's piece as a threat to my patients getting public support and in my haste to defend them I neglected to acknowledge that Brianna was simply also looking to gain public support for a group of people in need.
My post did not successfully express any gratitude towards Ms. Karp, which I definitely owe to her along with my apology. My point in my post was not to whine at Brianna, but rather to expound on her idea; to say, yes, yes you're right! And you are beautiful. You are homeless and strong, and there are others like you. And you are speaking up for them. Becoming their voice where they had none before. Please, don't stop....but please also don't forget those who have a different story.
I applaud Brianna for the work she does, and for the positive example she sets for people in every walk of life. As I continue my own advocacy for human rights, I know that anyone working under the banner of ending human suffering is on the same side that I'm on.
I'm glad Matt posted because it made me continue to revisit my old ideas. I don't think we should ever stop what I see as a necessary and ongoing peaceful dialogue that can take place amongst us all regarding the nature of our work. This dialogue should empower us and inspire us to move forward.
So with all of this in mind, I reiterate these hopes:
That all people without homes, not just those who fall into certain socially acceptable criteria, will have access to the assistance they require to live the lives they dream of for themselves.
That all human beings will recognize themselves in the joys and sufferings of others and be moved to help those in need of aid.
And that all those working for peace, justice and love may be united over common goals instead of divided over differences in their work.
Thank you, Matt for reminding me of that last one.
Showing posts with label elle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elle. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
The New Face of Homelessness?
Liz. C recently sent me an article that ran on Jezebel.com entitled "Elle's "New face of Homelessness:" White and Formerly Middle Class. "
The article is a soft critique of 24 year old Brianna Karp's blog piece for Elle entitled "The New Face of Homelessness."
The more I read about Brianna, the more intrigued I became. I even found her blog, and other blog pieces about her.
Bri, apparently homeless after a string of temporary jobs and exhausting her savings to fix her car, was chosen to intern at Elle, and to write her own blog column. In her first go, she wanted to break down the typically negative stereotypes of homeless individuals.
She writes:
I believe it is very important to reverse the prevalent negative attitudes and common stereotypes of homelessness, such as its perceived definition. Its legal definition is “an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, or a person who resides in a shelter, welfare hotel, transitional program, or place not ordinarily used as regular sleeping accommodations, such as streets, cars, movie theatres, abandoned buildings, etc." It also includes children and youths "who are sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or similar reason".
Now, as many of you know, I am personally very committed to educating the public about homelessness in order to dispel Myths About the Homeless. There's nothing wrong with her piece so far.
But what happens next is where her good intentions go awry:
She goes on here (I added the bold for emphasis):
The vast majority of homeless individuals are not on drugs, do not have mental problems, want to work, and look for work. The "new face of homelessness" the last couple of years is the middle-class recession victim with a stable history, who would never have previously been pinpointed as a likely candidate for homelessness. The stereotypical "bum" is actually a very small fraction of the homeless population; the overwhelming percentage of homeless people are like me and manage to blend in relatively well.
The point she is trying to make is one I have pointed out to friends as well. On a bus or a train, at your job, you have no idea who may be homeless and "passing." Or there could be children who go to school with your children who go home to a car or a motel at the end of the day.
But to say that there is a "new face of homelessness," and in doing so to effectively brush aside individuals who were born poor, or mentally ill, or who are elderly, or immigrants (legal or otherwise), or victims of domestic or sexual abuse, or, yes even drug addicts or former convicts is absurd. And to intimate that only white, formerly middle class people are willing to work "and look for work," is offensive. It was an innocent mistake on her part, but offensive.
She seems to realize how her words may have come across so she adds "even those that do fit the negative stereotypes are no less deserving of help; if anything, they are far more in need of it than the majority."
But the damage has been done. She has created a dichotomy in which homeless people are either "bums:" people who fit the negative stereotypes; or part of the "new face" of homelessness: people who aren't stereotypical. Although she graciously admits that everyone is deserving of help, she continues to reinforce the stereotypes by playing to them at all.
But if you get to know the homeless you'll know that even those who resemble "the homeless" the way we see homeless people mercilessly and consistently portrayed in media, aren't necessarily people who "fit" the negative stereotypes. Not every elderly white man with a beard is an alcoholic. Not every young hispanic pan handler with tattoos is an ex gang member. You can't tell anyone's story just by looking at them.
Every single person without a home is first and foremost a human. Whether they were formerly middle class or not. Although Bri makes it clear that she isn't like "the stereotypical bum," she actually is. And so am I. And so are you. Because we are all human. We think, and feel. We hope and want. And we have setbacks, some more major than others.
Brianna means well, but ends up shooting herself in the foot with the "us" and "them" talk.
Hortense at Jezebel.com writes, "her heart is clearly in a good place, and hopefully her column will reflect more than just the magazine's slightly off-putting attempt to attach a "new face" to a sad and ongoing issue."
Megan Sweas of U.S Catholic, is even more gracious and commented directly to Brianna on her blog: "I'm glad you are introducing us all to the "new face of homelessness," but I hope you also address the issues faced by those who have long been homeless, especially the criminalization of homelessness that you mentioned."
I agree completely, and I will be watching with interest to see what she puts out there next.
The article is a soft critique of 24 year old Brianna Karp's blog piece for Elle entitled "The New Face of Homelessness."
The more I read about Brianna, the more intrigued I became. I even found her blog, and other blog pieces about her.
Bri, apparently homeless after a string of temporary jobs and exhausting her savings to fix her car, was chosen to intern at Elle, and to write her own blog column. In her first go, she wanted to break down the typically negative stereotypes of homeless individuals.
She writes:
I believe it is very important to reverse the prevalent negative attitudes and common stereotypes of homelessness, such as its perceived definition. Its legal definition is “an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, or a person who resides in a shelter, welfare hotel, transitional program, or place not ordinarily used as regular sleeping accommodations, such as streets, cars, movie theatres, abandoned buildings, etc." It also includes children and youths "who are sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or similar reason".
Now, as many of you know, I am personally very committed to educating the public about homelessness in order to dispel Myths About the Homeless. There's nothing wrong with her piece so far.
But what happens next is where her good intentions go awry:
She goes on here (I added the bold for emphasis):
The vast majority of homeless individuals are not on drugs, do not have mental problems, want to work, and look for work. The "new face of homelessness" the last couple of years is the middle-class recession victim with a stable history, who would never have previously been pinpointed as a likely candidate for homelessness. The stereotypical "bum" is actually a very small fraction of the homeless population; the overwhelming percentage of homeless people are like me and manage to blend in relatively well.
The point she is trying to make is one I have pointed out to friends as well. On a bus or a train, at your job, you have no idea who may be homeless and "passing." Or there could be children who go to school with your children who go home to a car or a motel at the end of the day.
But to say that there is a "new face of homelessness," and in doing so to effectively brush aside individuals who were born poor, or mentally ill, or who are elderly, or immigrants (legal or otherwise), or victims of domestic or sexual abuse, or, yes even drug addicts or former convicts is absurd. And to intimate that only white, formerly middle class people are willing to work "and look for work," is offensive. It was an innocent mistake on her part, but offensive.
She seems to realize how her words may have come across so she adds "even those that do fit the negative stereotypes are no less deserving of help; if anything, they are far more in need of it than the majority."
But the damage has been done. She has created a dichotomy in which homeless people are either "bums:" people who fit the negative stereotypes; or part of the "new face" of homelessness: people who aren't stereotypical. Although she graciously admits that everyone is deserving of help, she continues to reinforce the stereotypes by playing to them at all.
But if you get to know the homeless you'll know that even those who resemble "the homeless" the way we see homeless people mercilessly and consistently portrayed in media, aren't necessarily people who "fit" the negative stereotypes. Not every elderly white man with a beard is an alcoholic. Not every young hispanic pan handler with tattoos is an ex gang member. You can't tell anyone's story just by looking at them.
Every single person without a home is first and foremost a human. Whether they were formerly middle class or not. Although Bri makes it clear that she isn't like "the stereotypical bum," she actually is. And so am I. And so are you. Because we are all human. We think, and feel. We hope and want. And we have setbacks, some more major than others.
Brianna means well, but ends up shooting herself in the foot with the "us" and "them" talk.
Hortense at Jezebel.com writes, "her heart is clearly in a good place, and hopefully her column will reflect more than just the magazine's slightly off-putting attempt to attach a "new face" to a sad and ongoing issue."
Megan Sweas of U.S Catholic, is even more gracious and commented directly to Brianna on her blog: "I'm glad you are introducing us all to the "new face of homelessness," but I hope you also address the issues faced by those who have long been homeless, especially the criminalization of homelessness that you mentioned."
I agree completely, and I will be watching with interest to see what she puts out there next.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)