United Kingdom

6909 readers

497 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

tom@feddit.uk

GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

145

We must end rough sleeping but hostile architecture must go too (www.bigissue.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by okwithmydecay@leminal.space to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Norwich City Council, in apparent solidarity with rough sleepers, are taking away armrests from public benches so that night sleepers can stretch out more. This is an endeavour to be more supportive of those reduced to turning public spaces into temporary dormitories.

For perhaps the last 20 years many local authorities and private property owners have been doing the exact opposite. Putting metal bolts on flat spaces so that they become impossible to sit on, let alone lie on. ‘Social dislodgement’ you might call it; architectural solutions to social problems. One of the canniest inventions was to turn bus shelter seats slightly tilted so that after a short time you began to slip off.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] IcePee@lemmy.beru.co 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The same incentive to dislodge the homeless is the same reason they put sub par cladding on Grenfell. To remove the unsightly poor through obfuscation. Don't want the well heeled getting pangs of conscience.

[–] AviAdi@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

That's my issue with hostile architecture. I live in los Angeles. The homeless here are struggling and need material help, but to many they are deemed like animals that need to be chased away. I regularly hear people talk about the homeless as if they are an inconvenience instead of people suffering. The lack of empathy is mind boggling. I'm only one guy, what can my dumbass do though?

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

What about the ordinary residents of Notting Hill? Should they have to be reminded every day of the fire and death? Should they have to risk bits of debris falling off? Should a building with no windows be left exposed to the weather? Just so that the well-heeled have to suffer the same reminder as the poors, it sounds like?

The difference between hostile architecture and cladding Grenfell is that covering Grenfell serves practical purposes.