This week we viewed a film on homeless life in Santa Monica. I have been to Santa Monica before and know it as one of the most expensive places to live. I did see several homeless people there during my visits, but did not understand how big of an issue it is in this city. In the film, one of the members of the homeless community tried running for city council. The city board had been making little to no efforts to help the homeless, including promising shelter but not being able to provide it and attempting to stop civilians from giving out free meals by the beach. When a group had settled down in a park or outside of a building, the police would come through and tell them to move somewhere else. These people were not given information on where they could stay or alternative solutions, so it was one big game of move-around that the police were playing with the homeless. The police would also cite someone they saw using a shopping cart to push around their things, or if they removed objects from a dumpster (which I do not understand since I thought trash was public domain). Receivers of a citation opted to wait until a warrant was put on them, since that would only mean one night in jail. It is sad to see these people getting in trouble with the law for things that are not a huge deal, such as taking things out of a trash can, when there are much bigger issues the police could be spending their time on. Lastly, a comment that bothered me came from a tourist riding her bicycle, talking about how she was staying at a 5 star hotel down the street, and close by were all these homeless people. She said she wished there was a better sight for tourists to see. 2 young males also mentioned how they did not want to “see” the homeless, as if it’s ok for it to exist, so long as it’s not in front of them. I believe this mindset is the roadblock to solutions.

Being homeless is a much more difficult situation to get out of than I previously thought. Often times, you hear someone dismiss a homeless person’s possible causes for their situation, and they proclaim it could be solved by “going out and getting a job”. What I have not heard discussed often is how many of these people actually do have jobs and how those jobs barely keep them off the streets or from going hungry. Society turns to the easy route of blaming others for their misfortunes before trying to fully understand the circumstances. Minimum wage is in fact impossible to live off of, and was proved through Barbara Ehrenreich’s book Nickel and Dimed, where she tested out a life of poverty. In this book, what I noticed most is that one minimum wage job is not enough to live, but sometimes getting two (or even three) jobs is impossible. When working at Wal-Mart, she had no control over her hours, and that lack of continuity in a schedule makes it next to impossible to hold a job elsewhere. Rent cannot be made on checks like that, and cohabitation was a main point in her article Too Poor to Make the News. Overcrowding was discussed, and how we do not have firm numbers regarding this issue because “no one likes to acknowledge it to census-takers, journalists, or anyone else who might be remotely connected to the authorities” (1). It does not get accurately reported because people do not want to risk getting evicted, being left with nowhere to go. What I realized this week is the less fortunate do not get the credit or reputation they deserve, since many of them are hard workers who give their all to try and make ends meet. The economy makes it so hard for low-wage workers to secure housing.

1.         Ehrenreich, Barbara. “Too Poor to Make the News.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 13 June 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14ehrenreich.html?_r=0.

2.         Ehrenreich, Barbara. Nickel and Dimed. Metropolitan, 2001.

I often question my role in social services and wonder if my wanting to do good and help others actually inhibits those disadvantaged from getting ahead. After reading The Positive Functions of Poverty, these questions reentered my mind but met resistance. Gans tells us that poverty has to exist, otherwise, no one would do the “dirty work” that needs to be completed. He also tells us that “poverty creates jobs for a number of occupations and professions which serve the poor…”. With thirteen other reasons, he playfully explains that poverty is necessary for our society.

The resistance that met these fifteen positive functions of poverty was one of curiosity. Am I profiting off of poverty by wanting to become a social worker? Does my love for tutoring the incarcerated boys that I see weekly make me intrinsically feel better about myself? My initial reactions were defensive and guilty, which only reminded me to check myself and question why I was feeling that way. After reflecting on my intentions of working in social services, I reminded myself that I agree with Gans, in a sense. People will always fall to the bottom of a hierarchy or social status, and there will always be people who come along to do the dirty work. As for the more fortunate, it is up to them to live their lives, so long as they are not intentionally benefitting from poverty. The worker who only does their job because it makes themselves feel better about their own self does not deserve their spot in social service. The worker who dedicates their life to helping others succeed while fully understanding the inequalities society does deserve their spot in social service. It all comes down to empathy and understanding.

I recently came across an article where it provides an insight into how 200 people were paid to be decoy homeless people during New York City’s annual census of unsheltered homeless people. The decoys were responsible for testing the accuracy of a survey done by volunteers who are sometimes uneasy about approaching homeless people or who are unable to spot them.  The count conducted determines annual federal grants and the city uses the percentage of decoys not found as a margin of error.  This program is known as the “shadow count” and the people who sign up aren’t necessarily doing it for the $85 but see it as a form of civic duty.  In the past year, the number of homelessness in the street increased by 40% but advocates for the homeless feel like the population is higher.  This annual survey does not count for the squatters who may be off the street but aren’t necessarily in a shelter or a home.  The decoys themselves went through a training at Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College.  The decoys were told that they must work in pairs and stand or sit at least 10 to 15 feet apart on a street, train, or subway platform.  The volunteers could not be faulted for being unable to find the decoys. The decoys, also, could not draw attention to themselves with signs or signals.  On average about 90% of the decoys are found most within two hours.  What the decoys found during this count was that there were racial and societal issues.  Racially, a few of the white volunteers appeared afraid to approach the homeless and blamed racism.  Societally, the decoys blamed partner’s outfits for volunteers passing them by and not realizing that they were homeless.  This article was unclear to me in the sense of what they were trying to get across.  Personally, I could not tell if they were doing this to point out that people truly don’t know who exactly is homeless or to increase federal grant money given to the homeless people. 

Citation: Stewart , Nikita. “Why New York Hires 200 People to Pretend They’re Homeless.” January 19, 2018. Accessed January 20, 2018 . https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/19/nyregion/new-york-city-hope-homeless-count-decoys.html.

I’ve been thinking about saviorism and its significance in this course and the work we will be doing in our volunteer organizations. In our work we will no doubt meet “saviors,” people who are fetishizing altruism. Often, the underlying current of the savior complex is the presumption that one is saving people from themselves. It is a statement of power, of privilege, and in service work many people validate their privilege through emotional experience. When one “helps” others, when one claims to provide empowerment, one effectively disempowers. More to the point, when people fail to acknowledge the inherent power dynamics in service work, those who benefit from NGO work are no longer framed as being able to help themselves. Framing may be the most important aspect of this discussion. Community activism is a good thing. These organizations are providing needed service to an unsupported and marginalized population. But just because people are doing good work does not mean that they have not succumbed to a savior complex. The world does not exist to simply satisfy the sentiment of people in positions of power. The problems of the world cannot be solved simply with enthusiasm. But in saviorism the homeless population becomes a subject, an emotional outlet, an object that exercises guilt and a states social position. When people frame themselves as a “savior” they enter into a process of objectification. The problem of homelessness exists because of a system, a system to which we are all to an extent complicit in, and because saviorism is framed a benevolent and well intentioned we don’t critically challenge the ways in which the function of saviorism in perpetuating systems of oppression.

Throughout these past two weeks in class we have already learned and discussed so much that it makes me eager to see what the rest of the semester has in store for us. I have volunteered with the homeless on numerous accounts, but I am interested to learn more about them through this class and our internships. This week in class we focused on a book titled, “Nickel and Dimed” By: Barbara Ehrenreich. I read this book my freshman year for my “Introduction to Sociology” class, but it was nice to reread it with a new perspective and focus. Whenever someone reads something for a second or third time their will always be new things to discover that weren’t noticed the first time. While reading, one of the biggest things that stuck out to me was the unreliable job posts ads. I understood the company’s side saying it is “their insurance policy” in case someone gets hurt or is fired then they always have an applicant to fall back on. However, this is not fair to the people who are genuinely trying to find a job and earn a living. It is also not right for employers to use this to scare their employees by reminding them how easily replaceable they are. There are many shocking stories of different work environments in this book, but this scam grabbed my attention the most. I think it caught my attention the most because I had never heard of company’s doing this prior to reading the book, let alone using it as “insurance.” I hope not only publishing fake ads changes, but all work environments that are not physically, emotionally, or mentally healthy for a person to be working in. Personally though, I do believe unskilled jobs are targeted with unfairness because employers are taking advantage of those who will accept any job.

In general, a class structured with an andragogy style is something I have not had too much experience with. My typical classroom consists of one professor lecturing to an entire class but this class in particular allows me not only to speak my mind but take in others opinions as well. While reading Nickel and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich, I interpreted the authors comments regarding her financial background as insensitive with a superior attitude towards the homeless or near-homeless. It was not until discussing this book in class where I understood the reasoning for the authors repetitive comments about her socially accepted life. The author was not intending to sound as if she placed herself higher in rank than low-income workers, she was intending to make the readers not only think about this economic issue but realize that society needs to do something in order to make an actual change. This perspective about Ehrenreich’s choice of writing style was not an option for me to consider until listening to others opinions and perceptions in the class discussion.

In class, we discussed the discrepancies with America’s class system. I was already aware of the huge inequalities found within social and economical policies but further discussion and readings have made me no longer blind to these subjects as I have always been taught the issues but never shown what to do in order to change these issues. In the article, “Tenants under Siege: Inside New York City’s Housing Crisis” by Michael Greenberg, the Mayor, Bill de Blasio,  implements certain policies and reforms as an attempt to take legal action to provide a bed for anyone that seeks it. In response to these actions to help the homeless, residents of the city protest the statements of being “connected” to these homeless individuals. These citizens who firmly believe the homeless are not real people who deserve just as equal rights as the wealthy/middle class have been so blind to the realities of human nature that they often deceive the “poor” in order to gain personal interests. I have been blind just as these people but the main difference is I actually see the issues with certain policies and actions completed against the homeless community and I want to use this class to gain more knowledge on the topic/ways to promote good practices that will benefit the homeless/near-homeless.

In our discussion last Wednesday, I remember that we made distinction between Ehrenreich’s approach to investigating the predicaments of poverty and those utilized by ethnographers. In contrast to the way in which Ehrenreich wrote mostly about her own experiences in Nickel and Dimed, some of us argued that ethnographers seem to focus more on describing the experiences of their “subjects” than their own stories. We ultimately seemed to conclude that ethnographers’ investigative methods are superior to the “let me try that” style of investigative journalism employed by Ehrenreich because it is probably more conducive to capturing the “truth” of realities such as poverty and homelessness.
Yet, according to Gans in “Positive Functions of Poverty,” we could also argue that the two seemingly contrasted approaches share an important similarity in that they are both modes through which middle or upper class professionals benefit from the predicaments of poverty. This argument might then lead us to question the morality of anthropology—how can those in more privileged circumstances approach anthropology or investigative journalism tactfully and justly? I think that we alluded to similar inquiries in our discussion on Wednesday too, and from what I remember, Professor Spickard brought up the utilitarian perspective as a means of determining morality in anthropology or investigative journalism, meaning that a work of anthropology can be justified if it ultimately benefits more people than it harms (like an ends justify means sort of reasoning).
I like the utilitarian perspective because it evaluates overall social benefit, but I also find the way it which it might encourage people to live over-examined lives problematic. For example, should a musical artist who creates disturbing music videos steer away from doing so because he might be initiating more societal harm than good; should a tattoo artist decide to pursue another profession on the grounds that they ultimately capitalize on other peoples’ hapless searches for meaning in their lives? To bring this back to our discussion, isn’t an anthropologist’s obvious motivation to pursue their craft enough of a justification?

I would like to take this time to write about the character Holly in the book, Nickel and Dimed, by Barbara Ehreneich. Ehreneich described her as “twenty-three, has been married for almost a year, and manages to feed her husband, herself, and an elderly relative on $30-450 a week” (Ehreneich, 95). Holly was also in an extremely unhealthy condition and admitted to being pregnant. Is there anyone taking care of her? I finished that chapter feeling angry at Holly for some reason. I wanted to shake her and yell, “Why are you putting up with this?” Then I realized that she does not have an option. Ehreneich struggled with the fact that no matter what she did or said, she could not help Holly. “She’s going to keep going until you pry the last cleaning rag from her cold, dead hands” (Ehreneich, 111).

While both men and women suffer in poverty, women have less resources to cope. According to the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, women in poverty “are likely to be the last to eat, the ones least likely to access healthcare, and routinely trapped in time-consuming, unpaid domestic tasks.” They have more limited options to work, and education may be out of the question. Holly’s life was an exact example of this struggle. Women in poverty face extra marginalization. Their voices are rarely heard.

It is frustrating because these women, like Holly, work and work until they literally have nothing left and it almost never makes a difference. I consider myself a positive person, but I could not think of anything that could make Holly’s situation better. These women are trapped in this position.

We’re only two weeks in and I feel as if my knowledge of American homelessness has already changed and evolved drastically. It is not that I wasn’t aware of the inequalities in our social system before, but I had never sat down and really examined the shocking  numbers that accompany our widespread issues of poverty. I have lived in an incredibly small town my whole life, away from practically any indicators of homelessness. Driving into the nearest city of Portland always provided a stark contrast to what I was used to. In a place where there are many people visibly living homeless I never really knew what had led them to that point or what help they were being provided. After reading Nickel and Dimed and learning about the deep cracks in our social safety net propelling the cyclical pattern of poverty, I am more curious now about how Portland, in particular, is aiding their homeless population. My dad is a firefighter for the city and works in an area where there are countless RVs and campers that litter the streets, filled with people who don’t have anywhere else to stay. Recently the city has put more of an effort into ridding these areas of the “transients” as the firefighters call them. To me, this doesn’t seem productive. Where do they go? What help are they being given? On the other hand, Portland has instated new tent and tiny home cities where people can stay the night and get off of the streets. It appears  the city is perhaps conflicted about what to do, and maybe that is how all of the U.S. is feeling. Cities and states want to provide safe communities for their constituents, but the ones they are willing to help the most are those at the top, by encouraging gentrification, by pushing the homeless to the outskirts, and by increasing housing costs (as Portland certainly is). As discouraging as this is, I am excited for the remainder of this class because I think it will provide us with a more personal, realistic, and critical view of the inequalities in America we typically like to avoid.