ignorance
Homeless Held Hostage by Catholic Church in D.C. Fight for Gay Marriage
Published November 12, 2009 @ 08:19AM PT
The Catholic Church is holding the vulnerable citizens hostage in a battle over gay marriage in Washington D.C. If gay couples are allowed to marry in our nation's capitol, the Catholic Diocese of D.C. will cut off social services to the city's homeless. This cruel ultimatum calls into question the Church's motives for serving the poor in the first place. In the Church's eyes, are the poorest among us people? Or simply pawns for advancing a cruel, intolerable political agenda?
D.C.'s same sex marriage is slated for a vote next month. If passed, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. They would simply have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against GLTB individuals. According to the Post, the Church is fearful that a new marriage law would force the Church to "extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, among other things." Thus, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.
Mike Jones, over at Change.org's Gay Rights blog, dispels the Church's claims even further, pointing out that a change in same sex marriage laws would not require the Church to be secular.
It's easy to get caught up in the he-said, she-said, spin, fear-spreading myths. But the bigger question here is this: how many people will be impacted if the Catholic Diocese of DC follows through with this threat? According to the Post, roughly one-third of the city's homeless population currently receive services from Catholic Charities, the Church's charity arm. That's about 68,000 people who will be cut off from shelters, medical services, food programs.
Based on the cold, remorseless, matter-of-fact statements issued by the Catholic Diocese of DC, this decision to pit social services and gay marriage one another is being made without batting an eye. The church seems to have no problem leaving vulnerable men, women, and children out in the cold simply to make a point. While providing social services is often considered a benevolent activity, holding those reliant on these services hostage to advance a political agenda is an obscene abuse of power.
Why must the poor pay for the church's intolerance?
Image: Gawnesco
Homeless Web Trends That Need to Stop
Published November 05, 2009 @ 04:00PM PT
The marginalization of people has perpetuated society and nestled its way onto the web. Twitter, blogs, and YouTube can be an excellent forum for confronting issues of poverty and homelessness. But they can also breed bad ideas, stereotypes, trends that hinder our progress towards combatting homelessness in America.
Here are three ugly web trends that need to stop.
1. "Homeless" as a derogatory term on Twitter
Search "homeless" on Twitter. I just did, and here's what I found (yes, I'm calling this person out): "@hannahhhp yep i definitely look homeless today."
Ignorant, right? This disparaging use of homeless is all over the Twittersphere, right next the the tweets of nonprofits holding coat drives or recruiting volunteers for Thanksgiving dinners.
"Homeless" (or #homeless) does not mean stupid or unkempt or drunk or any other kind of stereotype. If you're capable of jumping on the Twitter train, you can enlighten yourself about the causes of homelessness - including socio-economic disparity, mental health, poverty, PTSD, joblessness. If you're going to tweet about homelessness, try and help someone out instead of perpetuating ignorance.
2. "Funny Homeless Signs" Humor
This series of funny panhandler signs is constantly popping up on blogs and email chains. If features such classics as, "Ninjas killed my family; need money for ninja lessons," and "Why lie? I want a beer." One blog that featured these signs even began with this line: "We need more homeless people like this... lol."
Yes, homeless people are people. When you lost your home, you don't lost your personality. Why is it so surprising that people without a home can be witty, smart, and resourceful?
But more importantly - why do we get such a kick out of others' misfortune?
3. "Bum Fight" Videos on YouTube
Is the web be fueling the rise in violence against homeless people? Brutal, violent acts against the homeless have increased exponentially in the past decade, to the point that national advocacy groups are calling for homeless hate crime protection.
But here's the disturbing part: as violence against the homeless has increased, so have online videos featuring violent acts against the homeless. In July, nearly 86,000 degrading videos of homeless people were posted on YouTube, 15,000 more than a year earlier. And since "Bum Fights" began gaining popularity on the web in 2001, over 6.8 million videos have been sold.
The people featured in these films need to be helped, not humiliated. This is another trend that needs to stop.
In Stores Now: "Derelict" Homeless-Inspired Fashion
Published October 01, 2009 @ 09:07AM PT
Shoppers aren't the only ones trying to mimick the latest trends from the pages of fashion magazines. The high-end department store Barneys New York has jumped on the "homeless as high fashion" bandwagon by featuring homeless manikin displays - complete with park benches, trash cans, and newspaper blankets.
Mimicking the homeless to sell expensive clothes? Not cool, Barneys.
This display comes after a homeless-inspired photo spread was featured in the pages of an international fashion mag and the portrait of a homeless man was snapped by the Sartorialist himself. Many considered these initial statements to be edgy, thoughtful even. It was about the juxtapositions of designer clothing on homeless people (or the image of a homeless person on a fashion blog). With the help of my thoughtful readers, I put my outrage aside and opted to try and take advantage of the teachable moment this homelessness/fashion crossover provided.
But this just crosses the line.
Apparently, I'm not alone in my sentiments. Several fashion bloggers, including OMG blog (who broke the story) and the Ethical Style blog found the display to be in poor taste. Homeless advocates are also shaking their heads. According to Joel John Roberts over at LA's Homelessness Blog, the fashion world's obsession with all-things homeless is insulting to those who are struggling to get by on the streets.
I couldn't agree more. The timing is tasteless and the message - whatever it is - is insulting to those who are hurting the most.
Sure, it's Barneys this season... but will these tasteless displays wind up in JC Penny next year?
American Girl's Latest Doll is Homeless
Published September 25, 2009 @ 10:24AM PT
Across the web, people are up in arms over the latest creation from American Girl: a doll named Gwen Thompson who happens to be homeless.
Does the thought of a homeless American Girl doll gives you pause? Then maybe you need a reality check. Family and youth homelessness might just be the defining issue of our time.
I thought we'd seen it all. Homelessness dubbed tres chic on the cover of Italian Vogue, faux cardboard duvet covers, and even homeless video game characters in Sim City. But this most recent controversy of culture mimicking reality takes the cake. American Girl has introduced their latest "sociological accurate" doll, Gwen Thompson. For a whopping $95, little girls can take home a doll who - according to her biography - is homeless.
(Talk about the ultimate irony. But I digress...)
American Girl dolls have long been popular among many children and parents alike for their idyllic portrayals of girls from segments of American life and history. According to Parent Dish, the Mattel-owned company is "well-known for its tasteful, well-researched dolls." Yet, the biography crafted for American Girl's latest creation (found in the history book that comes with each doll) has folks across the web seething. It goes something like this: After Gwen's father walked out of the family, her mother lost her job. Fall came and went, and by the winter, they had no choice but to start living in the family car.
So there you have it. A homeless American Girl Doll.
I'll admit - my initial reaction was disgust. Befuddlement, even. But the more I thought about it, the more my opinion changed. And it seems I wasn't the only one initially over-thinking the meaning of this toy; Andrea Peysner at the New York Post was especially perturbed:
It seems obscene that a company that prides itself on teaching impressionable children about history and grooming -- you can have your doll's hair done for $20! -- should engage in political preaching. What message is being sent with Gwen?
For starters, men are bad. Fathers abandon women without cause. She's also telling me that women are helpless. And that children in this great country, where dolls sell for nearly 100 bucks a pop, are allowed to sleep in motor vehicles. But mothers don't lose custody over this injustice. Because, you see, they are victims, too.
In response, American Girl corporate issued this statement: "Our singular goal with these stories is to help girls find their inner star by becoming kind, compassionate, and loving people who make a positive and meaningful difference in the world around them."
(Did that really just say "inner star?")
The only thing obscene about this American Girl controversy is that it takes a plastic doll and her fictional biography to have everyone up in arms. Yet, the real stories of homeless children crowding shelters and schools are accepted without an ounce of outrage. This American Girl doll's story is not unrealistic at all. In fact, it's a lot more common than we'd like to think.
Earlier this year, the National Center on Family Homelessness found that 1 in 50 children in America will experience homelessness. Roughly a quarter of all children in this country live with a single parent. Unemployment in the U.S. is nearly in the double-digits. Schools are struggling to maintain a sense of stability for kids dealing with very adult problems. Research has found that children who are homeless are more likely to drop out of school, get sick, and become homeless as adults.
Don't get me wrong - I certainly not coming to the defense of an overpriced doll company. And I'm not trying to paint an overly gloomy picture of the state of family and youth homelessness in America. I'm being real.
Perhaps American Girls may be picking up on something that the rest of society is missing. If these dolls are considered accurate, well-researched portrayal of American culture, then maybe we need to stop overreacting about how offensive, distasteful, and obscene they are, and start opening our eyes.
Family and youth homelessness could very well be the defining issue of our time.
Image from New York Post.
Why the Peanut Butter Plan is Naïve and Irresponsible
Published September 15, 2009 @ 01:57PM PT
I came across the Peanut Butter Plan, which encourages people to make peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and go find some homeless people to give them to.
A lot of people will and are already gathering around this simple idea and handing out sandwiches. Their Facebook group has almost 2,000 members and growing, while not an accurate depiction of volunteer involvement, it isn't nothing.
The first thing that occurred to me was how irresponsible and naïve this was; the second was how popular it could become.
It's irresponsible because putting vulnerable people (I'm not talking about the homeless yet, but I'll get to that) without adequate training or supervision in front of homeless people is irresponsible and dangerous.
I read the other day a midwife who took in a homeless teenager was murdered by the boy and he was recently sentenced to life imprisonment. But it doesn't take a tale like that to know it's irresponsible if you have spent any kind of time working with homeless people. And that's no kind of insult to homeless people, they will tell you themselves how dangerous it is on the streets.
People involved in the Peanut Butter Plan say they learned that they need a ‘buddy system' as a layer of safety, but still are encouraging people to take initiative and go out by themselves. What did I say -- naïve and irresponsible.
The list of dangers to untrained volunteers who aren't properly supervised really does just go on and on. You can imagine this idea being brought to a Girl Scout group; straight off you'd hope the adult leaders would identify the dangers and put in place measures to ensure the girl's safety during this activity (not that I would support minors participating). That's properly supervised, when people identify the dangers and put measures in place to protect them. Adults with generous hearts that aren't properly supervised or trained volunteering on the streets are as vulnerable as girl scouts.
I'm sure there are people participating who know they didn't come down in the last shower. Sorry, that's not enough. I'm sure there are people involved who can handle themselves. Sorry, that's not enough and likely to cause more problems. (Right: Image from PeanutButterPlan.org)
Now look on the flip side -- the homeless are also vulnerable. Established service providers adhere to regulations about food preparation standards; in many jurisdictions they also do criminal history checks or at least some level of training and screening of volunteers.
The Social Worker's Master Key
Published September 06, 2009 @ 10:57AM PT
Initially I was bewildered why homeless people have so much trouble accessing support at one service or the other, but when I call on their behalf with the ‘I'm a Social Worker' attached to my call... all of a sudden doors open, respect for the client's situation is shown and reasonable minds tend to prevail.
Fair enough I place some pretty confronting questions in the foreground like ‘Why is this a problem?' or ‘How can we move forward and look after this person?' etc... and in the background they get ‘I'm a Social Worker' and ‘This is an important person who is a client of mine.'
I'm not talking about putting unreasonable pressure on service providers. Usually the back story emerges and the barriers to entry are explained. Staff room type discussions where two professionals get together on a problem to solve it... where possible.
