There’s been a veritable explosion of outrage accross twatter and feckbook concerning anti-homeless spikes in a doorway in London: people have compared them to anti-pigeon spikes, and that we’re demonising homeless people like we would pigeons or other vermin.
The Outrage Bus has been struggling to cope.
And now, the anti “disciplinary architecture” nutters begin to appear- they seem to consider that any structures that are designed as to stop potentially undesireable activity, like this anti-skate-boarding studding, designed to protect publicly-funded street furniture from damage:
An example of studding on a public bench to prevent damage from skateboards
is an affront to their rights, conveniently forgetting that the public space is, well, public, and has to be shared with people of all viewpoints.
It got worse, with one tweeter identifying this as anti-homeless:
This is designed to stop pedestrians and vehicles crossing in an unsafe way.
When it’s clearly designed to stop vehicles and/or pedestrians crossing that space, probably for road safety, but let’s not let the facts get in the way, eh?
Just a couple of thoughts: Firstly yes, the spikes aren’t nice, but then having people sleep in your doorway probably isn’t either. Don’t we all think the outrage would be better targetted at the very fact that we have people so desperate they have nowhere to sleep but a doorway or under a bridge? It’s like the facebook “like this to stop cancer” posts: pointless. If you’re really concerned and want to help, Crisis is this way, and Shelter is over here.
Secondly, if anyone is seriously suggesting we should design the urban environment to accomodate desperate homeless people because there’s nowhere else, then we have failed as a society.
That’s worth getting angry about.