At the Shalom community center, I observed all the ways that language, in its various forms, affects perceptions of people experiencing homelessness and why certain terms associate with more negative stereotypes are more commonly used than more factual and relatable terms. In my time at Shalom, I have come to appreciate the approach they use: they reframe suffering in the context of of strengths. "Those served by Shalom" are guests. Guests are referred to as "people experiencing homelessness." By using such language, Shalom recognizes the truth: that guests are people experiencing a difficult time in their lives that is most likely not their fault and not something they can control, which is something that every human being, housed or not housed, will have to deal with multiple times throughout life. They reframe suffering in the context of strengths. From "homeless people" to "individuals going through a rough time but who can bring themselves out of and overcome this temporary struggle."
[I elaborate on this subject much more below in my projects and writings.]
Shalom Community Center is, in my opinion formed from my time being there, taking all of the right steps toward changing perceptions associated with homelessness. I would like to pay them homage for their efforts and strides in the city of Bloomington, Indiana by concluding my blog with a final post for and about Shalom. I want to write about and make known the apparent and subtle steps they take every day to move forward to tear down the facade over homelessness that has been put their by negative stereotypes, the media, and a lack of information.
LANGUAGE
Two posts ago in my blog, I posted an essay about how language can mold perceptions of people experiencing homelessness and what a profound impact language has had on these perceptions since the 1970s. It is the "housed" community that has formulated such labels as "the homeless" and "homeless people" that imply a permanent state of being. "Homeless people" sets apart people experiencing homelessness from "housed people" and applies a one-size-fits-all bundle of stereotypes to anyone who fits into this "category."
Shalom Community Center is, as it says, a community. They are stripping away negative stereotypes from those that they help at the center by using appropriate, specific language in their literatures that they hand out to guests, in their newsletters that they mail out to organizations, on their website, in their volunteer manual, and most importantly, by word of mouth. Shalom uses "the language of strengths." They actually touch upon this in their volunteer manual:
That is exactly Shalom's approach with language. They reframe suffering in the context of strengths. Let me explain.
At volunteer orientation, Shalom Community Center instructs volunteers to refer to "those served by Shalom" as "guests." The term "guests" is pleasant, and implies a temporary stay or a visit. They are not residents because they do not reside in a homeless shelter because homelessness is a temporary experience. It is not permanent; it is solvable, and Shalom Community Center works toward solving this for every guest every day.
Shalom Community Center also refers to their guests as people experiencing homelessness. They instruct their volunteers to do the same. They recognize that homelessness is an experience, an unfortunate one. By using such appropriate language, Shalom recognizes guests as people experiencing a difficult time in their lives that is most likely not their fault and not something they can control, which is something that every human being, housed or not housed, will have to deal with multiple times throughout life. They reframe suffering in the context of strengths. From "homeless people" to individuals going through a rough time but who can bring themselves out of and overcome this temporary struggle.
Take a look at what appears on the front page of the Shalom Community Center... Analyze the language they use and image they put out about homelessness:
They write, "people experiencing homelessness and poverty." Again,we see here that homelessness and poverty are "plights," as Shalom has written. Plights are "unfortunate situations" according to the Oxford American Dictionary. As I explained previously, that is what homelessness is, and everyone is susceptible to unfortunate situations. People experiencing homelessness are no different than any other people on the planet. Their stories are unique, they do the best they can, and we all need to help each other out. The way that Shalom uses language in even this small excerpt from their website is so powerful. With words such as "vulnerable", they destroy negative stereotypes and make it known that homelessness is most often not a choice. Using words such as "respectable" reminds the reader that every human being is deserving of respect, and that is a basic human right. The paragraph finishes with "...empower people to develop their potential and to take responsibility for their own lives." Exactly. Shalom is there to, as I wrote in my fieldnotes in my previous post, to hold the rope fromt he other side of the barrier and help pull those climbing over to the other side.
SYMBOLISM
I wanted to include this because I am so enthusiastic about Shalom's logo. I think it is so appropriate and it says so, so much and yet it is simply made of 3 lines, 2 circles, and a sun.
It is, of course, two people under one sun.
They share one line which makes up both of their two arms. I think that this one painted line is the most powerful and symbolic part of Shalom's logo. Why are the arms made to be one, to be connected? Perhaps they are holding hands, a familial, friendly gesture. Perhaps one person is pulling the other along--making sure the other person does not fall behind when things get tough. What really matters is that they are connected. It is not one lone person standing by him/herself. It is not two people standing separately. It tells whoever may be looking at Shalom's logo that this is a place where no one is alone, everyone has someone, there is no such thing as alone. We've got you, we won't let go until you're ready. We're all in this together.
They share two separate lines as legs in the logo. I think this is important. It tells the observer, we help people stand on their own two legs. We help give people the strength to take steps forward on their own, but we still will be there for you to hold on to (the arms) when you cannot stand alone.
And then there is the sun. This piece adds excellence to this logo. It could have simply been two people, as I just described the logo, but it is not. They stand together, under one sun. I think this is an important symbolization. It shows that we are all human beings and the same sun the rises and sets every day. It also simply symbolizes a sunny day, good spirits, light, hope, the fact that tomorrow is another day, a fresh start, another chance, and the sun will keep on rising. Nothing is so awful that it will keep the sun from rising, and this logo is saying nothing can keep Shalom's guests from rising above.
INFORMATION
Shalom makes information about homelessness and the causes of homelessness readily available. Shalom is ready to fight assumptions and stereotypes with facts. Outsider perceptions of homelessness in America have long stressed laziness, immorality, wanderlust, heavy drinking, and other character deficits as reasons for descending the social class ladder (Lee, Barrett A., Sue H. Jones, and David W. Lewis. "Public Beliefs about the Causes of Homelessness." Social Forces 69.1 (1990): 253-65.). Contrary to to this image given off by the media and culture, recent studies have shown that more and more Americans who are not experiencing homelessness are more likely to cite forces out of one's control and mental illness as top underlying causes of homelessness (Lee). Perhaps this shift in paradigm of the American people is due to such information as the kind Shalom Community Center makes available being made known to the public from reputable sources, such as shelters, community centers, and volunteers themselves (rather than biased media sources.)
Shalom has on their website:
These are facts from a reputable source. The problem is that these facts are a bit outdated, since it is now the year 2011. But no worries! My classmates and I are working on updating these statistics, facts, and more in the volunteer manual for Shalom, which will hopefully be transferable to the website as well.
OUR PROJECT
In my post of homage to Shalom, I think it is important that I let my readers know what WE, the students of ENG-W240, are doing for the agency, Shalom Community Center. I hope that by including what we are working toward in out time here, perhaps we can inspire or spark ideas in others who may come across this blog. Also in our final project, we will be providing our blog addresses so that others may read or browse our blogs and get an idea what it is like volunteering at Shalom and understanding homelessness from our point of view. We hope that by providing our blog addresses, we can help others understand homelessness from a reliable insider and outsider point of view as well as create incentives to make some sort of change or difference, no matter how great or how small.
Michael will be updating the statistics listed by Shalom in the volunteer manual, as well as expanding upon the causes of homelessness. He is going to highlight how homelessness is a truly complex issue with a multitude of causes, which exceed the information currently provided in the volunteer manual.
Talia is going to write about what it would take, in terms of works hours and minimum wage, to afford an apartment in the surrounding county area. She is going to describe the cost of raising a family, whether it is a family with younger or older children, because may individuals either do not provide for a family or may take it for granted, so they do not understand how hard it can be.
Samantha is going to research and update the causes of homelessness in Bloomington in particular. She is going to rewrite the information currently provided in a way that will help newly orientated volunteers understand and utilize this information in the best way possible.
Jack is going to include more information on homelessness and poverty in order to make this section of the volunteer manual more well-rounded and rhetorically effective. He is going to help write about what we believe is the most important information to tell new volunteers.
*
Some food for thought that I discovered in my time at Shalom:
Want to know more? Curious to see what the final project outcome will be? Just want some more information on homelessness or even volunteering at a center like Shalom?
I came in early today to speak to Joel Rekas, the Shalom Community Center director. I am writing a paper for [ENG-W240] that focuses on language associated with homelessness and how it shapes perceptions of people experiencing homelessness. I walked through the main room where guests socialize and greeted a few familiar faces :)
I went upstairs to find Joel. He was at his desk. As soon as I mentioned what my paper would be on, Joel's eyes lit up and his mouth dropped open. He was so eager to talk about this with me. Language associated with homelessness was something he felt very strongly about and worked so hard to change it for the better. He immediately jumped to the Herald Times, a local paper that frequently covers Shalom and other centers and shelters in Bloomington. He had a large printer paper cardboard box full of articles in which the Herald Times covered Shalom and the similar surrounding areas. Joel explained to me that so much of the images that the Herald Times puts out there are negative. He said they associate "low barrier" shelters with "druggies" and "drunks." Joel looked and sounded so disgusted when he was telling me about these articles. It was as if the stereotypes that these articles were reinforcing were not only hurting guests at places like Shalom, but also hurting what Joel has worked so hard for in his time at Shalom. Some shelters will have guests take sobriety tests before coming in if they deem it necessary. Low barrier shelters don't have such requirements (only that guests of course don't make any trouble.) Low barrier shelters will take guests for who they are, no questions asks. No judgements. And yet they get the bad reputation.
[Edit: I later researched some Herald Times articles and there are some that strongly imply or even outwardly make a connection between these negative stereotypes and low barrier shelters. For example in "More homeless choosing to stay at low barrier Interfaith Winter Shelter" on December 17, 2010 by Dann Denny, it is written, "...feel the shelter is enabling people to remain homeless and addicted by allowing them to find shelter after they have been drinking or taking drugs". And in "Addition of Interfaith Winter Shelter isn't reducing use of other shelters" on November 17, 2010 by Dann Denny, it is written, "...the community has a low barrier shelter -- because some people cannot free themselves of the stranglehold of addiction." Source: HeraldTimesOnline.com]
Joel spoke about how the new building had more room for guests to mingle and eat and spend time with their children as opposed to the church basement in which they had the previous Shalom Community Center located. He said there is "more room for guests to walk around and guests now have more access [to areas within the vicinity], whereas in the church basement, much of the center was pretty 'hands off'." Then Joel added, "But it's still not perfect here. We're low barrier, but there's still barriers...." He sort of trailed off.
I thanked Joel for his time and for all of his input. I walked down the stairs.
Down the stairs.
Down the stairs and behind the front desk.
Behind the front desk.
I thought about what Joel had said, "We're low barrier, but there's still barriers." I come here every week to help people get their mail, their bills, their belongings, applications for phones, for loans, for assistance, for employment, for living... And I do it from behind a desk, behind which guests are not allowed. Listen to me... writing about barriers and how awful they are... and I am reinforcing these barriers every time I put on my name tag and stand behind a front desk at Shalom Community Center. I feel sort of... conflicted. I remember I wrote in a paper for [my ENG-W240] class where I said that we need to break down barriers. Let me find it...
Okay, in my positioning essay I wrote,
"There is no single answer, there is just breaking boundaries between conventionalized classifications and building bridges over these demolished boundaries. As for the many complications that may arise, especially the previously discussed predicaments, we will have to cross those bridges when we get to them."
Today made me rethink these statements. What would we do without the front desk? We are low barrier, we will not judge you. But we don't trust you not to take any of the center's things or any of the other guests' belongings in storage. So we have this front desk up here and we will serve you from it.
But what would we do without the front desk? We need it. But it is probably the biggest and most obvious "barrier" between the community of people experiencing homelessness and the volunteers and directors in the center. And I stand behind it. I am on the side of a big barrier that guests approach every day, but do not dare cross.
I wrote in my paper: "demolished" boundaries. We can't... demolish the front desk. It serves an important purpose. But how can we help our guests completely overcome barriers and boundaries from across a barrier/boundary? Maybe... Maybe I was wrong before? We cannot demolish boundaries. We cannot destroy boundaries and then build bridges over them. That almost seems like these easy, not-thoroughly-thought-through way out. Throw some TNT on the boundaries, they explode, there's a big mess leftover, but we just ignore the mess, build a big bridge over the mess, and have everyone cross. No.... Barriers will always be there. What we need to do is overcome them. This sounds harder... not the easy way out. Climbing over the barriers that will still exist despite all efforts to eliminate boundaries. Climbing. This sounds like hard work. No one said it would be easy though. Maybe I'm not reinforcing the separation. I am on one side of barrier, but I am on the other side of boundary, holding onto the rope that was thrown over from the other side so that the climber can hold tight to the rope, without having to think we'll let go on the other side, so that they can climb over. Over the boundary, over the barrier. I feel like I've been looking for an easy solution this whole time and maybe I am too naive to realize that there isn't one. Do I need to realize that there is a solution, but it is a complicated, complex, difficult solution and it's not one-size-fits-all? My job isn't to change the world single handedly. It's to help people help themselves. It's not just one person who can change it for everyone. It's everyone helping each other and it. is. not. easy.
I asked Melissa if instead of being behind the front desk today, I could be on the other side, talking to and listening to and socializing with guests in the main room. She said it was okay and really encouraged me to go speak with the guests. I wanted to be on the other side today.
I saw Harley again today! He introduced me to his "lady friend" from Wales, whose....}
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Samantha Adams Professor Graban ENG-W240 Critical Bibliographic Essay Due: 25 March 2011
Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, But Words Will Form Your Perception of Me
“People are tired of homelessness. … It’s affecting who we are and how we look—and we look terrible” (qtd. in Pascale). This quote is taken from a newspaper that quoted a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development representative. Now, who, exactly, do you think is tired of homelessness? Surely it would be most logical to assume that those individuals experiencing ‘homelessness’ are the ones who are tired of living it. Did you assume that the speaker was talking about the housed community before you knew these were the words of a HUD representative? Or did you realize that the people who should be rightfully tired of homelessness and whose self-images are affected by it are those who are actually living it, experiencing it? However, there was nothing in this newspaper’s article that suggests that the people who are tired of homelessness are those who are living without shelter (Pascale 261). The word “we” implies that the HUD representative being interviewed is speaking for a larger group or community of housed people. The speaker is establishing audience identification with the use of the word “we” and is, at the same time, placing people who cannot afford housing outside this circle of identification. The words of this HUD representative are just one of countless demonstrations in our society of how language, whether written or spoken, places people into categories from which results in stereotypes, loss of identities, and subsequent dehumanization. Much of the language that shapes the ideas about, images of, and common inclinations toward the people commonly referred to as “the homeless” is not given a second though. Housed people read about “homeless people” in the newspaper. They hear about “homelessness” on the news. They donate to charities that provide basic resources to “the homeless.” Not once do most of these “housed people” give a second thought as to how the words they read, speak, and hear are possibly defining and dehumanizing the individuals experiencing homelessness. I, however, have second thoughts about how these forms of language not only report the news or tell a story, but how they define certain human beings and how this, in turn, shapes the attitudes toward those experiencing homelessness, which can ultimately attenuate genuine efforts to support these individuals. I want to explore all the ways that language, in its various forms, affects perceptions of people experiencing homelessness and why certain terms associated with more negative stereotypes are more commonly used than more factual and relatable terms. First it is most important to understand how certain labels such as “the homeless” have come to be. According to Celine-Marie Pascale in There’s No Place Like Home: The Discursive Creation of Homelessness, the term “the homeless” is a fairly recent discursive formation (250). In the 1980s, “the homeless” actually referred to hardworking people who had lost their homes due to economic changes that caused them to lose their jobs. The term “the homeless” recognized the unexpected distress families were experiencing and that losing their houses was not a result of their own choices, but of economic decline. During this time, newspapers would publish articles highlighting the hardships the new “homeless” were experiencing by writing short personal stories about families such as Mrs. Culley and her children (254). Unfortunately, these insightful articles were short lived. Eventually newspapers and even high profile officials started to attribute homelessness to noneconomic causes, such as mental illness, substance abuse, and personal choice (254). Newspapers started to suggest that perhaps people’s compassion toward “the homeless” was misplaced (255). During this time, homelessness was transformed from an acute recent problem to a chronic issue. Along with the creation of the term “the homeless,” there is a subsequent separation by applying this label: there is “the homeless” and then there is everyone else. “The homeless” or even “homeless people” implies a permanent state of being. These labels simply say that homeless people are homeless; it’s who they are. As previously described, terms such as “the homeless” have become linked with issues such as substance abuse and laziness. When these terms are constantly used by popular news sources or spread by word of mouth, their association with negative stereotypes is reinforced. Olusola Olufemi explains this in Barriers that disconnect homeless people and make them difficult to interpret: by exercising the power to name, we construct a social phenomenon, namely homelessness, the criteria used to define it, and a stereotype of the people to whom it refers (462). Perhaps it is, in fact, not those experiencing homelessness who have earned their label associated with negative connotations, but simply it is the housed community that has labeled them as such. It seems as though perhaps it is the “housed people” who have defined “homelessness” even though most of them have never even experienced such a situation nor worked directly with it. Why are the “housed” and the media defining “the homeless?” Why do they get choose a one-size-fits-all façade for a “group” of countless unique, individual people that happen to be experiencing the same misfortune? Since when does anyone mold anyone’s identity other than his or her own? Jo Phelan et al. writes in The Stigma of Homelessness: The Impact of the Label “Homeless” on Attitudes Toward Poor Persons that the poor and homeless are stigmatized, which in turn spoils their identities and disqualifies them from social acceptance (323). The labels bestowed upon people experiencing homelessness, such as “the homeless” or “homeless people,” carrying negative connotations, are destroying the identity of these associated individuals. She suggests that the label of being homeless is judged more harshly than just being poor housed because there is more inequality to be justified (325). These harsh labels not only destroy identities, they erase them. They take away the one thing that makes a human being a person: one’s identity. This grouping and subsequent loss of identity is not simply an outsider observation. Individuals experiencing homelessness are aware of the dehumanization that is a result of being grouped into the one-word category of “homelessness.” A study done by Check K. Wen et al., Homeless People’s Perceptions of Welcomeness and Unwelcomeness in Healthcare Encounters, is an illustrating example of this. Participants—that is, people experiencing homelessness—perceived experiences of unwelcomeness in healthcare as acts of discrimination, with the perceived basis of discriminatory treatment being the fact that the participants had to admit that they were “homeless.” A constant pattern was seen where participants felt dehumanized when healthcare providers related to them in “I-It” ways, that is, the healthcare provider reduced them to an object, was unwilling to know and empathize with them, ignored or failed to listen to them, or made them feel disempowered. However, participants described welcoming experiences that were consistent with “I-You” ways of relating with the healthcare provider, that is, the healthcare provider made the participants feel valued as a person, listened to them, and made them feel empowered (1013). So, why do we so often use “I-It” terms such as “the homeless” instead of an “I-You” term like “people experiencing homelessness”? Saying instead “people experiencing homelessness” loosens the ties between homelessness and negative stereotypes. It recognizes “the homeless” as people simply experiencing a hard time. It makes “the homeless” seem more like people to which “housed” people can relate, because, doesn’t everyone experience difficult times their in lives? But why don’t we use this term in our everyday speech and literature? Why don’t we give people experiencing homelessness the benefit of the doubt? Denny Taylor writes in Toxic Literacies that we (referring to the housed community) do not want to know it was, say, Jerry who died. We don’t want to know it was Pauline who got a degree but still lives in poverty (7). He writes, Don’t tell us [his or] her name. Why don’t we want to know their names? Is it easier that way? Is it because saying “people experiencing homelessness” is too relatable to “housed people?” Because, perhaps, people experiencing homelessness are actually people experiencing some sort of difficulty in their lives that may not be their own fault, which in turn may make the housed community feel vulnerable? Or does the housed community give people experiencing homelessness a simple label as “the homeless,” a term of unsympathetic rejection (Olufemi 460), because a label makes it easier to feel less guilty about not doing more to help this “group?” Would housed people feel more guilty about the fact that people experiencing homelessness are suffering if they called them “people experiencing homelessness,” a term of sympathetic acceptance (Olufemi 460), which may actually attribute personal identities to these people? Is the housed community of the United States afraid of facing some sort of failed American Dream by trying to understand the plight of Americans experiencing homelessness? The answers to these questions that we must ask ourselves in order to inspire any sort of change are unclear. What is clear though is that materiality—of homelessness in this case—is culturally produced through language, writes Pascale. If there is anywhere we must start to implement a change for the better and find a permanent solution to the overwhelming issue of homelessness, we may first begin by changing our choice of words. So back to that first quote, “People are tired of homelessness. … It’s affecting who we are and how we look—and we look terrible.” Whose look is really affecting? With all of the associated negative stereotypes and loss of identities that are tied to the objective label “the homeless,” who is it that looks terrible? Who is tired of homelessness? People experiencing homelessness are tired of homelessness.
Works Cited
Olufemi, Olusola. "Barriers That Disconnect Homeless People and Make Homelessness Difficult to Interpret." Development Southern Africa 19.4 (2002): 455-66.
Pascale, Celine-Marie. "There's No Place Like Home: The Discursive Creation of Homelessness." Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies 5.2 (2005): 250-68.
Phelan, Jo, Bruce G. Link, Robert B. Moore, and Ann Stueve. "The Stigma of Homelessness: The Impact of the Label "Homeless" on Attitudes Toward Poor Persons." Social Psychology Quarterly 60.4 (1997): 323-37.
Taylor, Denny. Toxic Literacies: Exposing the Injustice of Bureaucratic Texts. Portsmouth NH: Heinemann, 1996. Excerpts.
Wen, Chuck K., Pamela Hudak, and Stephen W. Hwang. "Homeless People's Perceptions of Welcomeness and Unwelcomeness in Healthcare Encounters." J. General Internal Medicine 22.7 (2007): 1011-017.
