Homes, homeless and public spaces

The past few weeks we talked about public spaces, creating them, using them and their importance among other interesting concepts. Though, most importantly we talked about how they have become increasingly privatized and brought under control. Mitchel’s article “The end of public space” showed us that public space is a space for exclusion, especially when it comes to the homeless as they basically are marginalized, hidden or sent away to wherever we cannot see them. Mitchel particularly affirms that people who have the right to be in public space are in their majority people with power.

For that matter, I was glad that Taylor brought us this issue of homeless in conjunction with public space by explaining what occurs in Hawaii. I believe I have something similar to share with two Ted Talks I came across recently. I really thought they are worth sharing because they involve a few concepts we read at the beginning of the semester and recent concepts altogether, such as creating homes and giving them identity, the need for public spaces and issues of homelessness.

I highly recommend starting with Iwan Baan Ted Talk. Is absolutely interesting!

Source: http://www.ted.com/talks/iwan_baan_ingenious_homes_in_unexpected_places

A few things we can observe in this Ted Talk is how public spaces are absolutely important and how a determined group of people, community, society will create their own when these aren’t available. These same communities or groups of people will ensure that they are maintained as spaces that are public, for everyone to use. It also evidences issues of adaptation and how human beings adapt to their circumstances. I thought this idea was interesting when it comes to the idea of homeless and homelessness and why neither of these is seen as a problem for people that live the transient lifestyle. They have adapted to their lifestyle and what for many of us might seem as a deviant behavior, for them is ordinary. Finally, in this Ted Talk, we can see the concept of identity and normality and how it plays a significant role in the “home making” or in the aspirations of people within a specific society. This can be specifically seen in the example of Caracas and the Tower of David.

On the other hand, the second Ted Talk is in contrast to the first. I am sure many of you will recognize Amanda Burden; she collaborated in building the High Line in New York. I believe we have seen her already in a video presented in class. I really like her presentation because of how she emphasized the importance of public spaces. Something she says reminded me of Mitchel’s article again. Mitchel proposes that spaces should be representations of space and spaces for representation at the same time. In this Ted Talk Amanda Burden affirms “Public spaces should not be taken for granted. Public spaces always need vigilant champions, not only to claim them at the outset for public use, but to design them for people that use them, and then, to maintain them to ensure that they are for everyone, that they are not violated, invaded, abandoned or ignored”.

Source:http://www.ted.com/talks/amanda_burden_how_public_spaces_make_cities_work
She reinforces the idea that public spaces need some control. She does not specify what type of control exactly, but she sustains that they need to be maintained. I believe she refers to a passive control more than an active, but throughout her Ted Talk we can definitely recognize how these spaces are creating behaviors and citizens and how important public spaces are. She says public spaces have power, not because of who is using them, but because of how they make citizens feel within a city.

Fear of Crime Application

I discovered an interesting mobile app that relates to the in-class activity we did on geographies of fear. The Fear of Crime Application was designed to capture areas where fear of being victimized is experienced. The app is devised as a survey that collects data by sending pings at different times and locations throughout the day. The user is asked to rank his/her fear of being victimized at the specific location they are at when the ping is received. Users are also able to report fear of victimization without being prompted by a ping. For example, if a user happens to be travelling through an area where he/she feels unsafe, the user is able to record the incident through the mobile app.

Employing a survey based collection method on a mobile device allows GPS and time stamp data to be collection simultaneously with the fear of being victimized. This method makes it easy for researches to compare fear of victimization across time and space. Because the app also asks participants to respond to a few demographic questions upon download, researchers are able to compare fear of victimization with age and gender as well.  

Here is a link to the website:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/jdibrief/analysis/Mapping-fear-of-crime-dynamically-on-everyday-transport

"Homelessness" in Hawaii

http://www.civilbeat.com/topics/hawaii-homelessness/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/04/hawaii-one-way-flights-homeless_n_6101274.html
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/10/13/homeless-in-hawaiinewlegislation.html
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/11/03/3587685/hawaii-homeless-120-tickets/


Although we have finished our discussion of home and homelessness, this current event seems to tie that into our discussion of public space very well. In order to save time I will summarize the situation so you don't have to read all the articles I linked to above:

As you may know, Hawaii's economy is heavily based on tourism and people coming to see the beautiful scenery the islands have to offer. What you might not know is that Hawaii has a large homeless population. On Oahu there are more than 4,700 homeless and at least 2,200 on neighboring islands and most advocates believe that this number is under-reported. Although the homeless population is very large, a good portion of these people are homeless by choice.

In September the city of Honolulu introduced three bills that made it a misdemeanor to sit or lie on sidewalks in the tourist district of Waikiki, it also outlawed public urination/defecation island-wide. Many believe this is unconstitutional due to the "law of the splintered paddle" that was introduced to the Hawaii state constitution in 1797 stating "Let every elderly person, woman and child lie by the roadside in safety."

Hawaii's Institute for Human Services (IHS) has developed a $1.3 million plan to fight homelessness, part of this plan includes outreach to connect homeless individuals with shelter, employment and medical services but the plan also includes flying at least 120 homeless people back to the continental U.S.

Those who rely on the tourism based economy feel strongly about removing the homeless from the area, a member of the local business community says “We want to make sure that homeless people understand we’re not going to let them take over Waikiki’s public spaces.” Honolulu Mayor Kirk Caldwell says, "It's time to declare a war on homelessness, we cannot let homelessness ruin our economy and take over our city."

This article was presented by my classmates in an Intercultural Communications class and it was discussed in the context of capitalism. After our discussions of home and homelessness and reading Mitchell's article I had a different perspective than many of my classmates. They were shocked by Hawaii's reaction and one individual said something like this would never/had never happened in America. However, I see striking similarities between this and the situation in Skid Row, Los Angeles (which my classmates did not know about). Some of them thought the proposed plan was a good idea. They cited that the homeless people need to be contributing to society if they are capable of working, they presumably would like a roof over their head, and that Hawaii's economy would not suffer.

I was personally upset by the plan that IHS proposed as well as the sit-lie law which makes it impossible to be homeless without breaking the law. Incarcerating homeless people, moving them away from tourist destinations, and giving them one-way tickets to the continental U.S. does not solve the problem. Furthermore, those homeless people who have chosen to live transient lifestyles certainly don't view their existence as a "problem" that needs fixing.

Individuals are being forced out of Honolulu's "public space" and being told that they don't have a right to be there while the visiting tourists are given priority. The public space is being sanitized of homeless people in order to maintain the ideal Hawaii that tourists envision. The Hawaii people envision does not consist of homeless people occupying the streets so the local governments will take every action necessary to keep the idea of Hawaii alive. It's unfortunate that when many people go on vacation they want to "experience another culture" and see what it's like, yet they remain in touristy areas where people perform in order to create their culture for visitors. Nobody wants to visit a Hawaii and spend money when the harsh reality is in their face and it isn't what they imagined.

This news solidified the end of public space for certain in my mind. The beaches and streets of Honolulu are in no way public space open to any and everyone. The local government, business owners and tourists have made it very clear who is supposed to be in the space and what type of actions and occupation are allowed in the space. Everyone is working to maintain the space in the way that tourists expect it to be; in a way that benefits privileged, wealthy tourists regardless of the fact that others are excluded from the public space. 

Hunter Hills manager suggests Flemington officials are anti-Latino; mayor calls it 'wild allegation'

This is an on-going problem that persists throughout my town. While my township and borough are considered to be a part of the vast New York Metro, the area I call home is not as diverse as the many other communities closer to NYC or Philadelphia. Due to the lack of diversity, the issue of white superiority and the discrimination of housing and space around town is clearly visible. The North side of my town is home to most of the diverse communities, along with a few other pockets. These apartment complexes are downtrodden and usually filled over capacity, which has brought on anger from the proprietors of the real estate, who are the ones that claim that the Borough and surrounding Township of Raritan are "anti-latino." This article is intriguing because it deals with an arrogant white community who suspects anyone "of different means or backgrounds" to be of danger; stemming back to a 2009 article in our local paper, "The Hunterdon County Democrat," of blatant discrimination and bashing of our latino community and their citizenship. Under The Fair Housing Act, the proprietors must lease an apartment without any discrimination of the person or persons. Yet the Mayor, who is actually not well-liked throughout the borough for various reasons, is demanding to deem the area "in need of redevelopment." In her mind, she believes redevelopment is to rid of what she feels is undesirable. However, with the newly implemented COAH or the New Jersey Council Of Affordable Housing, affordable housing is coming into different areas of my community, bringing on more obvious misunderstanding and discrimination. People believe that affordable housing will increase an already rising minority community. What they do not understand is that just because someone applies for affordable housing, does not mean they are dangerous, nor minority. The constant discrimination is a growing trend that persist as it is a growing trend across the nation, primarily in the largest metropolis of the United States

Article here:  http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2014/03/hunter_hills_manager_suggests.html
As well as: http://www.nj.gov/dca/services/lps/hss/

Urban Night-Life Space: Masculinity & Heteronormativity Landscape

The topics that we discussed in class in this last two weeks (Urban structure & design, Using public space) remind me an article that I read few weeks ago about pleasure and leisure in the nocturnal city (Hubbard, 2012). I think it is interesting to share it here and maybe some of us have read this article as well. Hubbard (2012) stresses the importance of the city center as the principal focus of urban night-life in which is associated with bright lights, so-called the nocturnal city. The production of light represents a “comprehensive claim to power” (p. 121), which means the ownership and control of a city by the authorities/governments and entrepreneurs. The entrepreneurs are keen to take advantage to provide attractions to people, by build and open hotels, restaurants, cafes, bars, night clubs, theaters, cinemas, and so on. Therefore, Hubbard (2012) examines the illumination of the city goes conjointly with the invention of enormous number of new leisure opportunities and spaces that eventually providing attractions of night-life. Paris, for instance, well-known as La Ville Lumière or the City of Light, provides number of technological and cultural innovations (e.g. payement café, cinema, revue bar) which are tied into rituals of night-walking, windows shopping, and consumption. Or in Berlin and New York where electric lightings implicate in the making of a variety new leisure spaces and produced an ‘aesthetic of astonishment’ where the pedestrians literally intoxicated and controlled of seeing and being seen.

Through the provision of lights in the streets and leisure spaces in the city, people are keen to have a night-walking, that associated with the emergence of a new urban ‘type’ – the flâneur. The flâneur literally means ‘walk around.’ It has a real historical context where wealthy member of the bourgeois class wandered in the city in search of distraction. Despite of the history and literal meaning of the flâneur, feminist scholars point out that the flâneur refers to a “subjective gaze that was profoundly male” (Hubbard, 2012, p. 124). In addition, Wolff (1985) states that “the non-existence of the flâneuse (feminine form of flâneur in French), as another urban type, symbolizes women’s restricted participation in public spaces as well as the gender bias in some of the classical literature on modern cities” (Hubbard, 2012, p. 125). Therefore, it depicts that men have freedom to wander the city at night and the flâneur becomes a manifestation of male privilege. In addition, the idea that the modern city provides a sexual opportunities for men where they could pursue different pleasures in different leisure spaces show that the night-life spaces perform a strong masculinity and are constituted for heterosexual people. Meah et al. (2008) argue that "spaces of evening leisure, where young women and men were allowed to mix freely, were particularly important for naturalizing the ideologies, identities, and practices through which people entered heterosexual relationship" (Hubbard, 2012, p. 130). The city at night itself could thus take on the appearance of a marriage market. There are lots of cinemas, malls, art centers, restaurants, bars, cafes, night clubs that are designed and play role as spaces in order to catch the eye of potential date, dating, and the performance of coupledom. Certainly, urban night-life spaces are constituted for the masculine landscape where men and their power govern the spaces and apply the heteronormativity.

In the modern cities, the visibility of women in night-life spaces has increased. An increasing number of young, single, and waged women begin to experience rhythms of time and labour which have much in common with working men, and lead them to expect similar access to spaces of leisure. Yet, the search of leisure do not lead them to the traditional haunts of working men – pubs and clubs – but rather an emergent range of commercialized recreational – dance halls, theaters, cinemas, tea shops, department stores and restaurants – which appear to offer more respectable pleasure. Even though the increasing number of women’s engagement in night-life spaces indicates the emancipation of women to be in public life at night, women are still disadvantaged and do not have their freedom. Hubbard (2012) argues that the anxiety about the presence of women within the expressive commercial cultures of night-life given the persistence of the cult of domesticity and the promotion of chastity and decorum as feminine traits. This anxiety affirms the idea that women do not belong to the night-life city and remains a persistent myth that even make women to be more controlled by masculine roles and place constraints on women’s participation in the night-time city. In addition, the myth makes women feel anxiety and fear that lead women to be extra careful when working or walking back home at night, women are even advised to dress properly to avoid unwanted attention from men and to prevent sexual harassment and violence. It is even worse where there is lack of lights. Women could have a feeling of vulnerability because they need to limit their access to and control of spaces at night-time, i.e. women feel unsafe walking after dark, they should change the routes taken or search for accompany to walk with, walking in group, carrying a personal attack alarm, avoiding interactions with strangers, take taxi rather than on foot, and know how to do self-defense. Women need to modify their habits or behaviors, even the way of dressing in order to avoid troubles with men. In this regard, it is highly important to adopt gender mainstreaming in urban planning. Women-Work-City project in Vienna, Austria as explained by Foran (2013) is a great example how the urban planners design the city to make life easier and safer for women.

References

Foran, C. (2013, September 16). How to design a city for women. The Atlantic Cities.

Hubbard, P. (2012). On the town: Pleasure and leisure in the nocturnal city. In Cities and sexualities (pp. 119-147). New York: Routledge.

Stephen Colbert on Homelessness and Public Space

This is mainly a follow up to Maria’s post on the restrictions of the homeless in Fort Lauderdale. Below is a video from the Colbert Report on Comedy Central where he addresses the issue. Just watching this clip is very interesting in comparison to our readings. Stephen Colbert brings up a lot of the issues that came out of Mitchell’s article “The End of Public Space?: People’s Park, Definitions of the Public, and Democracy” (1995). In one part of the video Colbert brings up the issue of the public/private divide that Mitchell discusses. To paraphrase, Colbert says that the homeless should enjoy their meals in the privacy of wherever they live. This speaks to what Mitchell discusses in that homeless people make the private public. Without their own private space, they are forced into the public and this is unacceptable to the dominant group in power.  The clip goes on to show parts on news reports. One report that is show discusses how the mayor of Fort Lauderdale is “looking out for everyone” but then specifies this by saying taxpayers and tourists. This is defining the public as a specific acceptable group of people just as Mitchell describes. The mayor is again in the video, this time perpetuating stereotypes of the homeless as dirty and a danger to public health. Because of this, I agree with what Maria said in that the law may be short lived. To criminalize what many see as a kind act is ridiculous and this type of discrimination will only lead to more lawsuits against Fort Lauderdale.

Marginalization by the Marginalized?

            One particular part of the documentary on Columbus zoning issues stuck out to me. When discussing the presence of LGBT members moving into the traditionally black near-east side community, one African-American man commented on his reservations toward gay people moving into the neighborhood. Though he recognized that it was “wrong” in theory to discriminate against a group of people (as a discriminated African American, himself), he admitted that he was not comfortable with the idea of “public homosexaulity”--in his community or otherwise.

            To me, this raises an interesting question surrounding potential homophobia in many African-American communities. In this sense, a marginalized space (e.g. a primarily black, inner-city neighborhood) may simultaneously function as a space of marginalization and also a space that marginalizes other groups (e.g. homosexual individuals). The near-east side African Americans who were fighting for equitable housing rights, yet also opposed immersion from the gay community, reflect this conflicting dichotomy.

Why may this marginalization by the marginalized exist? Institutional factors may clearly be in play. Says Rob Smith (via the NPR article, “Crunching The Numbers On Blacks' Views On Gays”), "The hyper-masculine ideals forced upon young black boys combine with the homophobia of the black church to create a perfect storm of shame and secrecy" (Demby). This begs the question of  dominant, white ideology’s influence on African-American homophobia. For instance, dominant law and media framing has long posited inner-city, young African-American men as criminals, a title that may often be embraced by the community. This embrace could, in turn, foster homophobic attitudes. In this sense, dominant ideology and dominant groups may subjugate marginalized groups and influence the latter group’s masculine-driven prejudices in the process.

On the whole, I just wanted to comment on the notion of dualistic levels of marginalization that can exist in certain spaces. Often, I feel like spaces are viewed in highly binary (e.g. oppressed or dominant) terms without much consideration given to the potential dynamism of ideology by groups that can exist in said spaces.

Demby, Gene. "Crunching The Numbers On Blacks' Views On Gays." NPR. NPR, 02 May

2013. Web. 05 Nov. 2014.

Recent example of today’s discussion - Fort Lauderdale restrictions on activity in public space

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/04/justice/florida-feeding-homeless-charges/index.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/11/05/fort-lauderdale-arrest-for-feeding-homeless/18525049/?csp=fbfanpage

I think this serves as a great example of what we discussed in class today concerning Mitchell’s article. I think it’s pretty crazy how the law is ‘slightly’ sneaky about the exclusion of homeless people from public space. By banning “public food sharing,” it can’t be considered an outright ‘no homeless allowed’ mandate, but by restriction on the activity in the space, it’s made clear who isn’t desired in that space.  This story does support Mitchell’s main argument from his article that public space is increasingly a space of control and exclusion. The implementation of this law makes this explicit. This case is an example of “representations of space” since there is a clear appropriate and inappropriate activity for this space which also indicates that there is a ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ public for this space. The simple presence of the law regulating the activity in public space demonstrates that the space is increasingly becoming more “planned” and restricted than it was before.

On the other hand, this law doesn’t seem very sustainable considering the people facing legal consequences are charity workers and community servants. I have to admit, the first thing I felt when I read this was sympathy for the 90-year old man (which is probably also the only reason why this story is in popular media). The law was just passed last week and it’s already making national news. The arrested are already threatening a lawsuit. This potential lawsuit is an excellent catalyst for a discussion on the topic of public space and what’s appropriate within.  It would be interesting to follow up on if this story continues to stay in the news.

I have questions concerning the space where this activity took place and if feeding of the public was already occurring here. One article says ‘a park’ and the other says it occurred in front of the courthouse as a protest. Either could be spaces where homeless already exist. There could be something here but neither article really lets on.