6 ms·

At a very basic level, when I was volunteering helping the homeless, I saw a great deal of disparity. There are many homeless shelters and programs that only ta

At a very basic level, when I was volunteering helping the homeless, I saw a great deal of disparity. There are many homeless shelters and programs that only take in women and children, and many shelters which accept people of all genders but have limited space will make men wait to gain entrance, while letting in women and children, so that if someone doesn't get in, it's always men. Donations are frequently given under the condition that they go to help homeless women and children. I do understand some of the legitimate reasons for this: women are at higher risk to be raped and experience more medical issues related to homelessness. But this only accounts for some of the disparity. Part of the issue here is that there's a belief that adult males should be able to support themselves. This is evident in the programs that do serve men: while homeless programs that target women provide food, shelter, medical care, and childcare, the few homeless programs which target men almost universally focus on helping homeless men get jobs. Men do experience privilege in employment when they're actually employed, but this idea is inapplicable to the homeless. Most homeless people are mentally ill, and a mentally ill man is no more employable than a mentally ill woman.

justifier 11y ago
children?! where do you live? in sf finding a shelter for children is disgustingly difficult and, as i finally concluded, impossible on weekends i'm sorry, but conflating the issue of a perceived disparity with 'beliefs' about social gender consensus is unhelpful and only incites issue derailing ire programs to help the homeless are flawed, i know it first hand, but complaining about someone else's idea of a solution does the least possible to help if you want a shelter organised under your own incentives i'd suggest starting your own it's an asshole thing to say but look at the landscape of shelters currently we have overcrowded, underfunded understaffed solutions: some universal, few women only, few men only how do we remove the gender bias? bulk the universal with the necessary staff that administer the specific needs of the gender exclusive shelters but the universal shelters are already overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed so to ask more of them would only aggravate the issues further so we need more shelters, and to have more people willing to open and operate a shelter, and some people get the will to do so by focusing their attention on a specific group, in this case gender based why is there gender bias in shelters? i'd argue because the people who are willing to put in the work choose to create an environment for the gender bias should we regulate out the bias with legislation forbidding discrimination based on gender? in the current landscape i only see that harming the issues because then those that have the personal will to run a gender biased shelter will lose their incentive and simply do something else, limiting the number of shelters available to share in the solution instead i think the argument should be to fund a state run universal shelter program well enough that specific interest shelters get phased out proactively
- copsarebastards 11y ago
  > i'm sorry, but conflating the issue of a perceived disparity with 'beliefs' about social gender consensus is unhelpful and only incites issue derailing ire It's not a conflation, it's acknowledging what I believe to be a causal relation. If I'm correct, changing the beliefs will help fix the issue. > instead i think the argument should be to fund a state run universal shelter program well enough that specific interest shelters get phased out proactively Yes. The solution to disparity is enough abundance that it doesn't matter.
  - justifier 11y ago
    my bad, i called it conflating because the differences between your own beliefs and the apparent beliefs of others were lost and i interpreted your statement as speaking for each ..acknowledging what I believe to be a causal relation. If I'm correct.. this new language clears up that confusion

justifier 11y ago

children?! where do you live? in sf finding a shelter for children is disgustingly difficult and, as i finally concluded, impossible on weekends i'm sorry, but conflating the issue of a perceived disparity with 'beliefs' about social gender consensus is unhelpful and only incites issue derailing ire programs to help the homeless are flawed, i know it first hand, but complaining about someone else's idea of a solution does the least possible to help if you want a shelter organised under your own incentives i'd suggest starting your own it's an asshole thing to say but look at the landscape of shelters currently we have overcrowded, underfunded understaffed solutions: some universal, few women only, few men only how do we remove the gender bias? bulk the universal with the necessary staff that administer the specific needs of the gender exclusive shelters but the universal shelters are already overcrowded, underfunded and understaffed so to ask more of them would only aggravate the issues further so we need more shelters, and to have more people willing to open and operate a shelter, and some people get the will to do so by focusing their attention on a specific group, in this case gender based why is there gender bias in shelters? i'd argue because the people who are willing to put in the work choose to create an environment for the gender bias should we regulate out the bias with legislation forbidding discrimination based on gender? in the current landscape i only see that harming the issues because then those that have the personal will to run a gender biased shelter will lose their incentive and simply do something else, limiting the number of shelters available to share in the solution instead i think the argument should be to fund a state run universal shelter program well enough that specific interest shelters get phased out proactively

copsarebastards 11y ago
> i'm sorry, but conflating the issue of a perceived disparity with 'beliefs' about social gender consensus is unhelpful and only incites issue derailing ire It's not a conflation, it's acknowledging what I believe to be a causal relation. If I'm correct, changing the beliefs will help fix the issue. > instead i think the argument should be to fund a state run universal shelter program well enough that specific interest shelters get phased out proactively Yes. The solution to disparity is enough abundance that it doesn't matter.
- justifier 11y ago
  my bad, i called it conflating because the differences between your own beliefs and the apparent beliefs of others were lost and i interpreted your statement as speaking for each ..acknowledging what I believe to be a causal relation. If I'm correct.. this new language clears up that confusion