For those not in the know, covenant house is a homeless shelter for kids based in NYC. They house homeless children up to age 21. I emancipated myself when I was 16 and started college. Stupid me didn’t realize that the dorms closed during Thanksgiving, Christmas, and other holidays. Going back home for the holidays was out of the question because my mother let my rapist back into the house to live with her, (the reason why I emancipated myself in the first place.) I spent every holiday my freshman year of college at covenant house. I slept on a mat in a room with a bunch of other kids, but it was better than being on the streets and I didn’t go hungry. I learned my lesson after that year and rented a room sophomore-senior instead of deciding to live in dorm housing. For anyone that knows any homeless children that need help, they have a crisis line called the 9 line. 1-800-999-9999.
I'm gonna mute this one
Submitted 9 months ago by SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com to [deleted]
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/cfd2134a-efca-4066-9473-6b2ba1fdc920.webp
Comments
Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
wpb@lemmy.world 9 months ago
apnews.com/…/california-newsom-homeless-61ebe5b2a…
For anyone saying that the democrats are bad for the homeless, please look at this.
timmy_dean_sausage@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Wow. I remember the way the right wing propaganda machine tried to spin that into a story of total cruelty. At the time, I assumed their version of events was bs, but never really looked into what the dem’s were actually doing. Converting old motels into homes for homeless people is an absolute no-brainer.
wpb@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I mean, it’s not perfect. A lot of advocacy groups for the homeless are actually critical of the plan, primarily because it doesn’t address the underlying issues that cause homelessness and because the efficacy of forced drug and mental health treatment is questionable at best. But it’s better than putting arm rests on benches, that’s for sure.
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
Oh, I didn’t realize it was kids hour for neolibs to comment on lemmy.
Well, get your ignorance out now kids, it is gonna hurt less than if you deny it wayyyyy into your adulthood…
sigh
falls asleep on bench
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
Anybody who uses “literally” to mean anything but “literally”: a) needs to be caned, b) literally has no valuable opinions.
daggermoon@lemmy.world 9 months ago
As someone who studies the english language, No ❤️
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
Wow so you have no heart? Figures, person who can’t use english the way I have arbitrarily decided it should be used based on other the word farts of people who are suffocatingly similar in lack of imagination to me.
callyral@pawb.social 9 months ago
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
Who is Merriam-Webster? Some woke billionaire?
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Why is this stuff being blamed on liberals and not conservatives all of a sudden? I feel like Trump and the right really succeeded in making you all hate each other while they run off with the country.
In my country at least the conservatives pull this shit, and if anything the liberals go to the other extreme too much, which is “just let homeless people make shanty towns in parks and subways it’s their right” both are stupid but one is very clearly worse
Snowclone@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Technically speaking liberalism is about letting business do whatever they want without regulation. Some of those regulations are unions and fair pay and fair labor laws. Those things all do a good job or eliminating homelessness. Social programs could easily end homelessness, and a functioning, non abusive foster care system would eliminate a huge amount of homelessnes, poverty and crime. These require regulation business and taxing the wealthy sufficiently too fund program that help orphans, children in general, and the working class who have been largely shoved below poverty, the rest of our social problems would be eliminated by an education system that is geared tower maximum education for everyone capable and NOT saving money and making sure we don’t accidently educate poor or non white children too much.
buttnugget@lemmy.world 9 months ago
By your logic, anyone from Australia would say the literal exact opposite. Let’s not forget what Liberal parties around the world are like.
That being said, in the US there are no elected center left candidates except maybe two or three. Elected Democrats—liberals, usually—are just as traitor lunatic as right wingers when it comes to anti homeless designs.
The fact that you talk about “the other extreme” without even a hint of self reflection is troublesome at best. The other “extreme” is called housing, son.
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Did an American just question my logic? You guys are kinda deranged and politically toxic
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 9 months ago
In leftist spaces, the word liberal often has a different connotation more focused on economic liberalism.
They don’t usually feel the need to clarify, and everyone gets mad. It must be incredibly fun to be an asshole these days.
Doomsider@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Because it is popular to shit on liberals like everyone of them is a neo liberal. The truth is it is the conservatives that have been destroying public spaces like this. Although you could argue that the libs have not done much to stop them.
I live in a small tourist town and the conservative business owners have lobbied to take out all the benches in town because of a few homeless people. Now our elders have no place to sit. They even did it to our little mall.
So because homeless people we no longer have anywhere to sit in public and even private spaces. It is beyond stupid.
SippyCup@feddit.nl 9 months ago
Conservatives wouldn’t build the bench.
Free public spaces don’t encourage people to go in to a shop hard enough. You wanna sit down? Starbucks has chairs. Want a sip of water, go buy a bottle.
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Can I just say I used to live in a country with shanty towns and it sucks, it’s a shit show. Why would anyone want that? Slapping tiny homes on city parks isn’t a solution it’s just stupid
maxxadrenaline@lemmy.world 9 months ago
pros of sleeping on concrete: heat from underground. cons: mice
Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 9 months ago
How would sleeping on that bench be any better than the ground even without the arms? If it was cold at all you would freeze from below.
colourlessidea@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
There’s an old saying - you’re warmer in a bush than on a bench
mothersprotege@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Provided, of course, that the leaves are variegated.
myotheraccount@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It feels safer to be a bit more above ground level, especially if people walk by
wpb@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Hygiene.
NutWrench@lemmy.world 9 months ago
A liberal didn’t build that bench.
wpb@lemmy.world 9 months ago
What makes you think that? Do these not exist in blue states?
NutWrench@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Because that bench was deliberately designed to discourage people from sitting there. To make people miserable. So which political party LOVES to be pointless cruel?
grue@lemmy.world 9 months ago
On the contrary: a leftist didn’t build that bench, but it’s exactly the sort of thing a liberal would do.
Soulg@ani.social 9 months ago
False
burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 9 months ago
the thing about Democrats and ‘liberals’ is that its a broad coalition of ideologies and political groups competing for power and having to compromise. we all want to bring about our vision of society and help people, but small differences lead to huge schisms. also, monied interests have undue amounts of power over our institutions.
conservatives on the other hand are completely united by cruelty and adherence to rigid heirarchies (in spite of how dysfunctional they are), and basically the only issues they ever have in their own base is that something isn’t causing enough pain to people they hate.
i feel it is important to hold our representatives accountable, but saying things like both sides are exactly the same or complaining about liberals as if they are one cohesive entity has no value outside of pushing people away from politics. there are VERY specific people and groups that are making very bad decisions for Americans, like AIPAC or other big donors that simultaneously fund people like Andrew Cuomo and Donald Trump
Quadhammer@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Like we can all agree plantyr or whatever the fuck it’s called needs to get dicked down YESTERDAY right?
TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Its silly that you can see one of the unifying concept that holds the Republican coalition together, but liberal one.
The Democratic gerentocracy embodies the problems of the Democrats. Hell, there’s a significant portion of the Democratic party that are just conservatives now who are disproportionately represented in the leadership. But the thing that holds them together is maintaining power.
This means they don’t fight if they deem the fallout risk to be too high. They bend a knee in symbolic support and then through all the symbolism and say it was the young progressive who poison them.
Choosing not to fight, let’s them maintain power. Most of their fight is boxing out other voices from gaining power within their coalition. But when the shit hits the fan, and the Republicans have gained control, the Democrats cry uncle, blame the progressives, and turn to us and ask us, “Who else are you going to vote for?”
ameancow@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Yah I love how places like Lemmy are packed to overflowing with “radical leftists” who scream murder at liberals and moderates and how broadly appealing progressive policies aren’t going far enough to address [issue X].
Guys, we’re getting literally murdered out there, figuratively and literally. If there was ever a time to start building larger coalitions, it’s now. No, you’re not getting everything you want. No, we’re not having a revolution, we don’t have the military. Yes, you will have to compromise. And if you hate that word because you think it means walking alongside someone you despise…
Tough shit.
Pick an issue, gather allies, overwhelm it, then repeat for the NEXT issue and realize nobody is coming, you may not see a better world in your lifetime, your immediate sense of resignation at this fact is manufactured. Get your shit together.
They’re winning because they don’t recoil in horror at the idea of working towards mid-way goals or making deals they find distasteful, that’s how they pushed the overton window off the fucking map.
wpb@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Big tent liberalism is exactly what got you the anti-union, pro-war, pro-fracking, anti-immigrant democratic party of today. Every single time someone argues for speaking to a broader base it’s used as an excuse to move further right. And it isn’t working. Please, for the love of god, learn from the past three election cycles.
areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Who exactly are you going to form groups with? I am a bit lost on where you would even get started on something like that. Most groups I have seen advertised or have any success are extremists I wouldn’t want to be a part of. I don’t want to go back to being a Trotskyist just to have any meaningful impact. You berate neurodivergent and queer people specifically as not getting off their ass, yet those are the kinds of people in the ranks of these organisations. It’s not like your average person is going to go and join the Labour party either.
Not all situations are like America. Here in the UK the backsliding is happening with the traditionally left leaning party who got in power using after massive fuck ups by the conservatives. So the right wing lost hard, but the other party have moved towards them. So you can’t even say it’s an issue with the alt-right like America. Instead it’s actually an issue with the left wing party and left wing moderates. Voting for and allying with them has enabled this behavior. It has enabled them to go after transgender people specifically. Ironically the conservatives might have actually done better in this case, as they haven’t expressed issues with queer people in recent times to my knowledge.
stankbucket@lemmy.world 9 months ago
So it’s fine to paint one side with a single stroke but not the other. Got it
iridebikes@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Either make compromises with other progressives or continue to let conservatives enact their vision of society to our collective detriment. Those are the options.
Sarmyth@lemmy.world 9 months ago
In this case, at least lately, it less a brush stroke and more of a high resolution camera.
Once you support extremists, the argument of nuance becomes almost irrelevant to the rest of their victims.
jsomae@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
who here said both sides same?
pinesolcario@lemy.lol 9 months ago
Both sides currently yell and scream at anyone that doesn’t agree with them unequivocally. I don’t agree with everything liberal, and a few conservative viewpoints I do agree with. But for the most part I consider myself to be a moderate.
But vocalizing that I disagree with how to do something and both sides will either call me a libtard or a MAGAt.
This is something both sides have an issue with. So stop saying both sides is wrong. Here is an example that disproves that statement completely.
All I want is a party by and for the people. Not billionaires. Done with idiocracy and insanity.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 9 months ago
Having this opinion in 2025. Amazing
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
All I want is a party by and for the people.
Sounds like you’d be interested in Marxism then.
Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee 9 months ago
All I want is a party by and for the people Never going to happen.
Political parties are run by the wealthy elite, not “the people”
There’s nothing to allow for a candidate who is sincere but not connected to big money to succeed at anything but the most local of elections.
If someone were to win a bigger federal level election with word of mouth and no money, be sure that whatever social media platform that allowed their word to go out and grow was on their side and working in the shadows of their ‘formula’ that promotes some content over others.
andybytes@programming.dev 9 months ago
Yankee woke neo_Liberalism is stupidity trying to look good with little to no oversight. Yankee Conservatism is bitches runing wild.
Texas_Hangover@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
An angle grinder would make short work of those “arm rests.”
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
This is why I keep tearing my pants at the bus stop.
Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 9 months ago
i doubt they are welded, a wrench or pliers might do
jaschen306@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
I wouldn’t damage public property. You certainly can improve on it. A couple of weather treated 2x4s would raise the seat up, just high enough to clear the armrests. You wouldn’t draw attention to yourself while grinding, but instead it would look super clean and nobody would report it.
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Ok, but the people at Covenant House aren’t the ones who decided to put the anti-homeless architecture in place.
andybytes@programming.dev 9 months ago
Most charities are just scams. And yeah they might do some good, but charity is a symptom of failure. We are byproduct of our environment.
Tedesche@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Anti-homeless architecture is meant to encourage homeless people to actually go to homeless shelters where they might get help finding affordable housing, not to mention help for whatever issues they have going on in their lives. It’s meant to combat the problem of some homeless people choosing to avoid getting help and continue to bury themselves in drugs/alcohol and sleep on things like public benches, where they prevent other people from using them for their intended purpose.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting people to get the help they need and stop being an inconvenience for the rest of their community. Are you against homeless outreach programs too? Do you think people should just be allowed to set up shack wherever they please in public spaces? I’m not trying to pretend that the lack of affordable housing isn’t at the core of the problem, but even if we had enough of that, there’d still be mentally ill people and drug addicts that would prefer to live on the street, just to avoid social workers pressuring them to address their problems.
Tiger666@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
Amazingly, you think because someone has a mental illness that they chose to live on the street.
You: “I’m sure if given the chance to have a place to live, an unhoused person would reject it”
They remove benches and rest stops/bus shelters to stop the unhoused from occupying them to the detriment of people using the service. And you see nothing wrong with that.
It’s very obvious to most why this is done.
But not you.
untorquer@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Shelters, even if there was enough space, can be dangerous for vulnerable people, do not allow pets, and rarely provide medium term housing or transitional opportunity.
Anti-homeless architecture simply attempts to push the houseless further away from urban centers, and consequently food kitchens, shelters, and other resources. This is deadly when extreme weather occurs or acute health problems arise.
It actively makes the city more dangerous to those most fucked by society.
As far as “wanting” to live on the street, this is a narrative made up to victim blame and deny empathy. It only needs one or two examples for the false narrative to be cast on the population writ large.
dgmib@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Anti-homeless architecture is meant to encourage homeless people to actually go to homeless shelters
Umm no… anti-homeless architecture isn’t meant to encourage people to go to homeless shelters, it’s meant to make it inconvenient to be homeless where “rich people” might have to see and acknowledge you. Its goal is to make the problem easier to ignore not drive people to get help.
Kickforce@lemmy.wtf 9 months ago
That may be true in some cases but most of the time anti homeless street furniture is just made to get homeless people to not hang around that particular area.
porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
but even if we had enough of that, there’d still be mentally ill people and drug addicts that would prefer to live on the street
How about we get there first and then you can hand wring about any of these supposed people who are left?
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 9 months ago
So leftism is about wanting more comfortable public benches for the homeless to sleep on, while liberalism is about not wanting people to be homeless at all?
Do you ever get tired of needing to be outraged by everything all of the time and just want to be in a society where people actually work to improve things rather than just expressing impotent outrage? Ah but that would require doing work and leftists don’t want to do any work or they might be screamed at by other leftists for being “liberal.”
ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
I’m a side sleeper. I can sleep on this bench. Given the other half of the government would get rid of the bench altogether, this is a good compromise. Now if you want to get rid of the divider altogether, the fascist side of the government needs to be thoroughly and consistently beaten. That’s just the system. You can make an argument that the “ideal” left is incompetent too for always losing.
ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
I’m a side sleeper. I can sleep on this bench. Given the other half of the government would get rid of the bench altogether, this is a good compromise. Now if you want to get rid of the divider altogether, the fascist side of the government needs to be thoroughly and consistently beaten. That’s just the system. You can make an argument that the “ideal” left is incompetent too for always losing.
JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Is that just a weird perspective, or is that bench just an inch or two off the ground?
LodeMike@lemmy.today 9 months ago
Perspective.
joyjoy@lemmy.zip 9 months ago
“No kit should ever be able to sleep on the streets”
anachrohack@lemmy.world 9 months ago
This is not literally liberalism lmao
piefood@feddit.online 9 months ago
Every "liberal" city that I've lived in has had these, or a variant. So I'd have to say yes, it is liberalism in action
anachrohack@lemmy.world 9 months ago
What makes those cities liberal?
zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 9 months ago
Literally means figuratively? What a country!
SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
Revisiting and damn I made a good call to turn off notifications.
My visionary foresight knows no limits
peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 9 months ago
We got a figure out a way to remove first past the post.
There are really at least 3 groups, not liberals and conservatives.
There are progressives, neoliberals, and fascists.
Progressives believe the government exists to help all people.
Neoliberals say people should not be descriminated against, but wealth segregation is fine
Fascists are, well, fascists.
salacious_coaster@infosec.pub 9 months ago
Working class: “Can we have meaningful reform?” Conservatives: “No.” Liberals: "No 😘 🌈 "
TachyonTele@piefed.social 9 months ago
Aww they put kid sized sleeping areas on the bench!
Noite_Etion@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Saw a guy sleeping under a bench with a similar design as this one, checkmate.
LeFrog@discuss.tchncs.de 9 months ago
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging on the streets and stealing bread.
Anatole France, 1894
PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 9 months ago
Think of the kids.
But don’t do anything.
CalipherJones@lemmy.world 9 months ago
How is this liberalism?
considine@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
Liberalism is a political-economic ideology that gives a friendly face to capitalism. While market discipline enforces inhumane measures like a park bench that prevents homeless people from sleeping on it, simultaneously the same society produces the friendly face “solution” of a small, overburdened charity organization to help homeless people.
So the state, which has the authority to enforce public park design, or, you know, regulate housing, won’t help. The liberal solution to systemic social inequity is charity.