Don’t worry everyone, I’m sure someone somewhere is worse and that makes this okay somehow.
We fell in love in a homeless place… We fell in love in a hooOoomless plaaace…
How can it be that people don’t realize how badly faked this is and what position it is trying to sneak through?
I mean I think it’s just meant to be a shitpost
You mean you don’t believe that Hostile architecture exists? Or are you just saying that this specific example doesn’t?
This specific example is badly photoshopped
That’s not really the point, though.
Edit to elaborate: Whether or not this specific one is real, it perfectly illustrates the hypocrisy of trans ally neoliberals who persecute and punish unhoused people for existing near them.
get fucked with that bullshit. trans allies aren’t out there persecuting anyone. jfc, where do you come up with this bullshit?
Tell that to the homeless people forced to play frogger across the interstate near where I live. And the entire working class neighborhood whose flood risk was ignored by the city for decades until this year because it got mostly destroyed.
Camping bans are persecution. Building shiny stuff instead of taking care of people is persecution. It’s not bold or in your face but it’s real.
Bruh what the fuck did trans people/trans allies have to do with the circumstances that created these issues? Stop using them as a scapegoat.
Anti homelessness is very real and very obvious but I’ve never seen a fucking pride parade advocating for the removal of safe spaces for the unhoused. I do regularly see politicians advocating for that shit though.
They pass laws protecting the rights of LGBTQ people (Which is awesome). And then they pass laws to criminalize homelessness while they profit off the current state of real estate. (Not awesome)
“damn, rich people exist. Ow, fuck, i just fell off a bridge and broke all of my bones” - you rn.
What are you saying?
the hypocrisy? The hypocrisy of who? The fucking politicians that fund this type of shit?
WHO ARE WE MAKING FUN OF
The hypocrisy of who? The fucking politicians that fund this type of shit?
WHO ARE WE MAKING FUN OF
The liberals, politician and civilian alike, who support LGBTQ+ people’s right to exist without harassment but also are in favor of persecuting and punishing homeless people for existing near them.
Like for example New York Mayor and once a cop always a cop Eric Adams who is in favor of both marriage equality and (not much short of) hunting the homeless for sport.
it’s almost like it’s not that hard to just, have a good opinion.
True, but it’s evidently FAR too hard for anyone with power to not have at least one truly awful one, based on the fact that almost none of them manage it…
If there were so many examples of this in the real world, then you wouldn’t need to photoshop one.
Again, it’s an illustration of the hypocrisy. It doesn’t need to literally exist as a physical object in order to make the point.
It’s a fabrication of a hypocrisy. If the hypocrisy is real, you wouldn’t need to fabricate it.
I mean the hypocrisy really exists, but you’re right that this particularly egregious and shocking example is likely a total fabrication.
Sometimes fiction and altered objects depict abstract concept better than real physical objects do and neoliberals tend not to say the quiet parts loudly like the fascist party on the other side of the aisle has increasingly been doing in recent years.
It’s called satire.
The French Revolution was well documented and people still enjoy A Tale of Two Cities
Are you saying we don’t need any fiction - novels, tv, movies, jokes, comics, memes… because there exists non-fiction versions?
I think you and the others trying to pass off the same idea don’t seem to understand the problem here. It’s not that you can’t have satire, or fiction that acts as a social commentary. It’s that all of the examples you are mentioning aren’t trying to pass themselves off as reality . Nobody reads A Tale of Two Cities and thinks that it is literal. Or A Modest Proposal. This here is trying to pass itself off as real and as soon as it gets called out for it, the choir shows up to say “Oh, so we can’t have satire anymore”.
I genuinely don’t think anyone thinks these are trans-inclusive homeless spikes.
At best they got painted bright colors for visibility and they accidentally used the trans flag
You do to make it fun.
But your statement suggests you don’t think its a thing.
I mean that someone saw hostile architecture and then decided to add a trans flag for political reasons.
We, as strangers, will never know their exact motivation, but I think if their idea was a message regarding the unfair treatment of economically disadvantaged people, there would be much better ways to communicate the issue that doesn’t involve something that can easily be construed as an anti-trans messaging.
It’s a bit vibes based, but you know… People ain’t robots, and even if that wasn’t the original intent, that’s how the message comes across. So I’d rather have a better, more poignant one that’s worth repeating, rather than this, perhaps unintentionally, worse one.
If I had to take a guess at the motivations, I think someone saw the spikes as well as the equality sign in the window and took a picture because that’s kinda a juxtaposition. But I’m guessing that didn’t give enough “zing” that would be noticed as an internet post, so they edited the trans flag on the spikes to make it less subtle.
Yeah, that’s not a reasonable interpretation. Intersectionality and criticism of lack of same is by far the most likely intent behind this picture.
Pretending otherwise kinda seems like grasping at straws to avoid addressing the shortcomings of your favorite neoliberals.
My “favorite neolineral”?
I’m an entire person, not a single-sided strawman. I edited my reply to also state that I think neolibs suck too, if that helps to unflatten my thoughts on this a bit. And because I think they do.
I’d also like to add that I’ve seen this image and others like it posted in anti-progressive groups by anti-progressive people, instilling exactly the message I explained earlier. Which is why I say the message either isn’t clear, or just bad.
I don’t feel like I’m “gasping at straws”. I feel my argument is somewhat reasonable and I hope my point is a little clearer now.
I have to go back to work now.
I still believe that your interpretation is unreasonable and mine is much more likely regardless of your anecdotal experience in anti-progressive groups, but I apologize for unfairly assuming bad intent on your part. Have a nice day!
Thanks, you too!
You’re at the top of my comment chain, so I’m replying to agree with you and take this further.
Whoever photoshopped this and the other one with the park bench that’s floating around is trying to pit liberals against each other by making it seem like fighting for trans rights and fighting to house the unhoused are opposed to each other.
For anyone reading this, don’t fall for it.
people fall for this?
Damn, didn’t realize conservatives put that little amount of thought into their political statements.
Literally the best result here is someone goes “yeah, that’s politicians for you, pretending to do something, by displaying something, but actually doing something else” If anything, this is basically commentary on how shitty politics is. More than whatever the fuck anyone else thinks it could possibly be.
Sure, except I’m in California where it is two very different fights. Try reversing any LGBTQ Rights and you’ll get tarred and feathered. Suggest the Homeless shouldn’t be hunted in the streets and you also get tarred and feathered.
It’s like living in reverse land where instead of “fiscal responsibility” and “traditional social values”; we have “fiscal responsibility” and “progressive social values”.
That sucks. None of us are free until all of us are free.
Amen to that
This concept is liberalism at its finest
Specifically the NIMBYest of NIMBY “the solution is to fund the police” neoliberalism. 🖕
Is this one real at least? Because that’s a great concrete example of the kind of hypocrisy the op is alluding to
I honestly don’t know and still contend that it doesn’t matter whether or not it is 🤷
I mean yeah the point is the same, and this is universally awful no matter the colour. I would still like to know if this exact case of lib bs has actually occurred
Turns out it’s not:
“Ya’ll, we made a mistake! While rocks r a common [part] of anti-homeless architecture, this particular rock is NOT. It’s a Japanese garden,” said the Coalition On Homeless. “Izakaya Sushi is a valued member of the community and is supportive of its homeless neighbors. We apologize [and] offer deep appreciation to the staff.”
Good to hear. Especially this part
Restaurant management also says that homeless people sometimes sleep in their entryway after hours without disturbance.
It pokes you if you sit on it?
Great! If the spikes weren’t inclusive trans people might feel excluded from the ban of sleeping on them
/s
*on the trans-inclusive anti-homeless spikes
Soon they will sell inclusive bullets in Texas
LGBT identity is being exploited by assholes
insert BMW Nazi logo beside the BMW trans logo
This is a photoshop. It’s not real. It’s old enough that it’s not even “AI.”
They think LGBT is benefited by having more visibility. In reality it puts them center stage for anti-LGBT rhetoric and the world is more antagonistic. In the 90s nobody cared about the gays.
You both have a point and have a not point at the same time. LGBT is benefitted by more visibility, because it being denormalized harms people who are gay/trans/etc. In the 90s, gay marriage was illegal, participating in gay culture outside of specific establishments means risking confrontation with cops, and someone’s kid being gay was every parent’s worst nightmare (it still is for some people nowadays unfortunately). More visibility and pushing for more rights and the same integration into society that the “in-group” has naturally means that people who are higher in the hierarchy will throw a tantrum and start committing hate crimes and attacking the group and using them as a scapegoat. But making others angry is necessary if you want a disprivileged group to have the same accessibility and rights as the ruling group.
In the 90s nobody cared about the gays.
I know a guy who was put in the hospital in 1997 because some dudes thought he was gay.
It was illegal to be gay in my western country in the early 90s. Your opinion is wrong and sucks ass
Shit like this should be spray painted over
Free acupuncture.
Finally, UHC in USA.
My trans homies and I would probably throw a brick through that window… just saying.
Okay, in reality we’d talk to the owner first and explain why this is shitty behavior. The brick is plan B.
You think they don’t know? This is Photoshop, but the point would have been the meme.
I mean yeah, probably they would know, but it wouldn’t hurt to talk to em. Either way, specific negative feedback from potential customers gives them at least a small incentive to change… not that it’d probably be significant enough to make a difference in this case. But hypothetically, if enough people did get upset about it and it hurt the business’ bottom line, I’d want them to know the reason.
If nothing else, at least they’ll know what the brick is for. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Plan B is for Brick. Primary plan is Plan Ы.
Plan A is for axeplain
Got it, throw axe through window at shop owner.
A soul for a soul (and that’s not how it has to be).
This is California in a nut shell.
Defeated by 2" x 4"'s.
Nice, anti homeless and anti disabled all at once (lack of streetside seating makes getting around challenging for mobility limited people)
Also anti elderly. And anti kids. Although for kids EVERY surface is sitting surface.
This is not anti-homeless. This is anti-idiots sitting on the window sill of the house you live in, making it a gathering place and a nuisance of themselves. A window sill is not a bench in the park.
And right below a “no human is illegal” poster
“We’re so progressive! We like the gays! FUCK OFF YOU DIRTY HOBO! PULL YOURSELF UP BY YOUR BOOT STRAPS!”
The shop owners didn’t put the spikes there, the building owners did
No human is illegal.
The irony
That, and the painting, might be put there by people protesting the spikes and not necessarily the owners of these spikes.
“Women’s rights are human rights.” ** ** Doesn’t include homeless women.
