Selfridge's installs anti-homeless spikes outside store

[Shucks]

gonna boycott selfridges forever for this...


(click image for article)

[Monoral]

^

Sigh humanity...

[Ulf]

I can understand that the homeless aren't welcome at Selfridge's (unless they somehow have money to spend), but this is inhuman. Offensive, really.

[guardimp]

What is the problem with this? A store does not want homeless people to sleep or stay outside of it and has done something about it. It's not like they did something to homeless people, they just changed their building.

[DudleyGray]

What is the problem with this? A store does not want homeless people to sleep or stay outside of it and has done something about it. It's not like they did something to homeless people, they just changed their building.

If anything, it's just tasteless. Homeless people aren't animals. If they're causing a disturbance, ask them to leave like a normal person.

It would be funny to affix mattresses on top those spikes, though.

[eleves]

There is always going to be debate about these spikes and the homeless situation in general. Clearly the cities don't have enough resources to deal with homelessness in general in a proper and ethical way. I get that the store wants to cater completely to their customers and I guess this means keeping anyone not shopping or working there from disrupting what they are trying to present. They are homeless people all over NY and there are also more and more of those spikes popping up. I definitely feel bad and I do what little I can to help when I am able but I've also seen homeless people acting belligerent and with just complete anger and disregard for the people around them. This includes pissing and shitting in front of and near stores and restaurants, sleeping there and leaving garbage. It's sad that this is what it comes to but the store at the end of the day I guess has to do what it has to do to prevent dangerous practices (angry homeless people, spread of disease) At what point however is it the store's responsibility to try to help their city with the overarching issue of homelessness? Does the store hold any responsibility at all? I can totally see Selfridges installing those spikes to keep sleeping homeless away but can they make donations? Do they run coat drives? Really quite a slippery slope

[Nickefuge]

If anything, it's just tasteless. Homeless people aren't animals.

Exactly. It´s the equivalent to those anti-pigeon spikes.

It would be funny to affix mattresses on top those spikes, though.

Sounds like a cool guerilla action.
Or someone important from the fashion industry could sleep there (dressed in full PH to look the part, of course) as a sign of protest.

[eleves]

If anything, it's just tasteless. Homeless people aren't animals. If they're causing a disturbance, ask them to leave like a normal person.

It would be funny to affix mattresses on top those spikes, though.

I've seen them being asked to leave and resorting to violence, not a good environment for a store's customer which is their top priority. Trust me though, I want to help as much as I can with homelessness and I'm not against them at all. I have also seen mattresses or layers of anything placed on top of those spikes! A lot of these guys are true urban nomads and the ingenuity of many of them in regards to survival is honestly astounding, sucks that people just have bad breaks sometimes.

[Shucks]

It would be funny to affix mattresses on top those spikes, though.

concrete is better:



fuck selfridges. i'm never ever buying from them again. fucking barbarians.

sucks that people just have bad breaks sometimes.

yeah, but it's not that simple. affordable housing, healthcare (mental and physical) and job security are disappearing fast and homelessness in the UK is rising quickly. funding of shelters and non-profits is being cut. it's not just about people having bad breaks. once u are out of the system there is very little chance to get back in. and thanks to companies like selfridges, now it's harder to even find a place to sleep.

[Fuuma]

What is the problem with this? A store does not want homeless people to sleep or stay outside of it and has done something about it. It's not like they did something to homeless people, they just changed their building.

There are a series of aggressive urban measures specifically targeting micro-spaces the homeless can use, coupled with police and store owners harassment it says a lot about our humanity. Disciplinary architecture is shaping urban lives in ways small and big. Capitalist subjectification is, once again, getting in the way of us being a community of citizens.

[DudleyGray]

I definitely feel bad and I do what little I can to help when I am able but I've also seen homeless people acting belligerent and with just complete anger and disregard for the people around them. This includes pissing and shitting in front of and near stores and restaurants, sleeping there and leaving garbage. It's sad that this is what it comes to but the store at the end of the day I guess has to do what it has to do to prevent dangerous practices (angry homeless people, spread of disease) At what point however is it the store's responsibility to try to help their city with the overarching issue of homelessness? Does the store hold any responsibility at all? I can totally see Selfridges installing those spikes to keep sleeping homeless away but can they make donations? Do they run coat drives? Really quite a slippery slope

I get what you're saying, but thought it was worth noting that a lot of that belligerence isn't necessarily from disregard for people but mental illness.

If Selfridges was doing this for their customers, I think it's insulting that they think their customer base would be OK with this. Oh, the homeless people are poor and depressing to look at, let's keep them out of our sight with spikes.

[eleves]

yeah, but it's not that simple. affordable housing, healthcare (mental and physical) and job security are disappearing fast and homelessness in the UK is rising quickly. funding of shelters and non-profits is being cut. it's not just about people having bad breaks. once u are out of the system there is very little chance to get back in. and thanks to companies like selfridges, now it's harder to even find a place to sleep.

Are you from the UK if you don't mind me asking, is Selfridges on a major street? I literally have no idea and I've never shopped with them before. I'm only speaking in terms of what I see here in NY and we are definitely facing the same sort of crises. I just know that a lot of the stores here do help by donating clothing, money, food or at the very least the stores house food or coat drives. I used to work with a company that offered incentives for the drives which I thought was a cool idea because it helps multiple things at the same time. There were times where homeless people would be a legitimate reason for a customer to not enter a store just to avoid some sort of confrontation. I'm assuming a high end store like Selfridges is definitely concerned about their image too. I don't like the idea of spikes at all, it does suck but when it boils down to it with neither side actually winning before the spikes get installed, what's the solution? Does law enforcement have to get involved which then does what, continues the cycle? My current favorite charitable advents are the ones that try to get homeless people cleaned up and back into the workforce or some sort of educational system. Some homeless guys have told me about how terrible the housing really can get, where these homeless guys attack and steal from each other. I wonder if this whole thing can actually get resolved someday

I get what you're saying, but thought it was worth noting that a lot of that belligerence isn't necessarily from disregard for people but mental illness.
If Selfridges was doing this for their customers, I think it's insulting that they think their customer base would be OK with this. Oh, the homeless people are poor and depressing to look at, let's keep them out of our sight with spikes.

You're absolutely right, it's not a good ethical decision. I am also aware of the mental illness factor and healthcare obviously isn't what it should be for the homeless community. If a homeless person attacks a woman or child though, mental illness or not, it's still a dangerous situation. What else can an establishment do? This is a legitimate question. I'm trying my best to relay a neutral standpoint on this because I do think that we as a community have to try do what we can to help the less fortunate but at the same time, I want everyone to be safe. I've seen all sorts of these terrible conditions man, it's crazy. The spread of disease is so easily rampant in urban conditions, the safety of all people is an ever changing concern and clearly from a non ethical standpoint, Selfridges think that they're doing something right. If it's for an image then I don't like that but if they genuinely think that they are protecting their customer base by doing so then I can't blame then. I would definitely feel uncomfortable if a homeless person took up residence in my yard. Does anyone know how far out these spikes stretch? Is it just in front of the doors? How much space does the actual store take up on the street?

[Faust]

There are a series of aggressive urban measures specifically targeting micro-spaces the homeless can use, coupled with police and store owners harassment it says a lot about our humanity. Disciplinary architecture is shaping urban lives in ways small and big. Capitalist subjectification is, once again, getting in the way of us being a community of citizens.

I have experienced this firsthand and thought about it many a time - the way private architecture is often designed is to keep you moving. No place to sit down, to rest. That's when I recall The Grapes of Wrath where Steinbeck describes so well the prerogative of police to keep the poor moving, to destroy them by tiring them out.

[yubbermax]

What if they used something other than spikes that served the same purpose but was aesthetically pleasing?

[Fuuma]

I have experienced this firsthand and thought about it many a time - the way private architecture is often designed is to keep you moving. No place to sit down, to rest. That's when I recall The Grapes of Wrath where Steinbeck describes so well the prerogative of police to keep the poor moving, to destroy them by tiring them out.

Paris was redesigned by Haussmann to have less small streets that are easily barricaded, the urban landscape is anti-revolutionary. Recent literature about the Paris commune shows that the proletariat being driven out of the center and wanting to take back the street was a large part of the underlying current that caused this Event. I guess occupy Wall Street wasn't so stupid after all.