3 ms·

I was annoyed by georgeorwell's self-righteous tone as well. Pejorative or not, the homelessness in San Francisco is a substantial social and economic problem t

I was annoyed by georgeorwell's self-righteous tone as well. Pejorative or not, the homelessness in San Francisco is a substantial social and economic problem that does require something different than what we have right now, and whitewashing the language certainly isn't going to help matters. That said, you're also completely out to lunch. > "Especially when these people have all the resources in the world to get out of their situation. They can? Have you been homeless, or worked with the homeless? What do you think is a sufficient upside to convince someone to be hated by everyone around them, be addicted to all kinds of dangerous chemicals, shit on the streets, and sleep in their own filth? Do you also realize that the majority of the homeless population suffers from severe mental illnesses - severe enough to make them effectively non-functioning? Do you know the proportion of the homeless population who are veterans suffering from PTSD? So you have a group of people who are, predominantly, suffering from a wide variety of mental illnesses that prevent them from functioning in life, and they have "all the resources in the world" to get out of it. Right. That's like chaining someone up, giving them a nail file, and asserting that they have all the tools to get out of it. Hell, even if we institutionalized most of these people the bulk of them won't ever "get out of it". There are two distinct classes of the homeless - the situationally homeless, and the chronically homeless. Most liberal-minded people like to believe that all homeless are capable of being returned to "normal", where in fact a large portion of them will never escape their mental illnesses enough to be functional members of mainstream society, even with the best of help. > "Often they have better apartments than the people they are begging money from." Citation needed on this. There are, of course, some people out there scamming a quick buck by taking advantage of the homelessness situation. Did you watch that one NBC expose on that one woman in Queens, NY, and extrapolate this to all homeless?

georgeorwell 14y ago
For what it's worth, I am annoyed by my own self-righteous tone. I didn't respond with maturity. I've admitted as much elsewhere if you read the thread. Thank you for clarifying many of the issues here. I don't agree that challenging negative language and asserting neutral language is "whitewashing". I believe that it helps matters relative to the negative language. If you wouldn't use language to somebody's face, it's still abusive to use it behind their back, because it doesn't encourage kindness towards them. Would you call a homeless person with a crack addiction that you knew by name a crackhead to his face? If I take a moment to imagine going outside and doing this, it makes me want to cry. Whitewashing is what I associate with taking something bad and making it look good by changing the language. I don't want to do that. But then there's even the more generic argument for not talking badly about people behind their backs: if person A says something mean to person B about person C behind their back, it actually hurts A because person B will start operating on the basis that when their back is turned, person A will talk about them in a similarly bad way to persons D, E, and F. By the way, this page says 1/3 of the homeless population has severe mental illness (not just schizophrenia): http://www.schizophrenia.com/szfacts.htm http://www.schizophrenia.com/szfacts.htm I don't think that page includes simple alcoholism and drug addiction, which are legitimately disabling physical and mental illnesses on their own. After that, I'm not sure there are any homeless that are unaccounted for. None of them are there because they are "lazy bums".
jquery 14y ago
> They can? Have you been homeless, or worked with the homeless? What do you think is a sufficient upside to convince someone to be hated by everyone around them, be addicted to all kinds of dangerous chemicals, shit on the streets, and sleep in their own filth? Heroin. Crack. Severe mental illness. I didn't say even all the resources in the world could help them, just that they were available. Except for the one resource we refuse to offer--involuntary institutionalization. But we don't and we won't. Maybe because of old movies like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Maybe because we think they are exercising their civil rights by sleeping in their own filth and shouting at passerby. > Citation needed on this. I lived in a building downtown where many of these panhandlers lived. During the day they would hang out on the sidewalk and beg for money. In the evening they would go back to their $3000/mo market-rate apartment and do drugs and prostitution.
- georgeorwell 14y ago
  > Except for the one resource we refuse to offer--involuntary institutionalization. But we don't and we won't. There is a revolving door between mental institutions, prisons, and the street. Talk to some schizophrenic people if you doubt me. Nevertheless, I do believe mandatory but free drug rehab and work placement programs could help people, since I believe drug addiction is a mental and physical illness. Then addicts might be able to work for a living instead of beg for a living. > In the evening they would go back to their $3000/mo market-rate apartment and do drugs and prostitution. I suspect a pimp might be involved in paying for a $3K apartment if the people in it are "doing drugs and prostitution".

georgeorwell 14y ago

For what it's worth, I am annoyed by my own self-righteous tone. I didn't respond with maturity. I've admitted as much elsewhere if you read the thread. Thank you for clarifying many of the issues here. I don't agree that challenging negative language and asserting neutral language is "whitewashing". I believe that it helps matters relative to the negative language. If you wouldn't use language to somebody's face, it's still abusive to use it behind their back, because it doesn't encourage kindness towards them. Would you call a homeless person with a crack addiction that you knew by name a crackhead to his face? If I take a moment to imagine going outside and doing this, it makes me want to cry. Whitewashing is what I associate with taking something bad and making it look good by changing the language. I don't want to do that. But then there's even the more generic argument for not talking badly about people behind their backs: if person A says something mean to person B about person C behind their back, it actually hurts A because person B will start operating on the basis that when their back is turned, person A will talk about them in a similarly bad way to persons D, E, and F. By the way, this page says 1/3 of the homeless population has severe mental illness (not just schizophrenia): http://www.schizophrenia.com/szfacts.htm http://www.schizophrenia.com/szfacts.htm I don't think that page includes simple alcoholism and drug addiction, which are legitimately disabling physical and mental illnesses on their own. After that, I'm not sure there are any homeless that are unaccounted for. None of them are there because they are "lazy bums".

jquery 14y ago

> They can? Have you been homeless, or worked with the homeless? What do you think is a sufficient upside to convince someone to be hated by everyone around them, be addicted to all kinds of dangerous chemicals, shit on the streets, and sleep in their own filth? Heroin. Crack. Severe mental illness. I didn't say even all the resources in the world could help them, just that they were available. Except for the one resource we refuse to offer--involuntary institutionalization. But we don't and we won't. Maybe because of old movies like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Maybe because we think they are exercising their civil rights by sleeping in their own filth and shouting at passerby. > Citation needed on this. I lived in a building downtown where many of these panhandlers lived. During the day they would hang out on the sidewalk and beg for money. In the evening they would go back to their $3000/mo market-rate apartment and do drugs and prostitution.

georgeorwell 14y ago
> Except for the one resource we refuse to offer--involuntary institutionalization. But we don't and we won't. There is a revolving door between mental institutions, prisons, and the street. Talk to some schizophrenic people if you doubt me. Nevertheless, I do believe mandatory but free drug rehab and work placement programs could help people, since I believe drug addiction is a mental and physical illness. Then addicts might be able to work for a living instead of beg for a living. > In the evening they would go back to their $3000/mo market-rate apartment and do drugs and prostitution. I suspect a pimp might be involved in paying for a $3K apartment if the people in it are "doing drugs and prostitution".