
A homeless couple moved into a $4M home. Then came the calls to police - jawns
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/otisrtaylorjr/article/A-homeless-Oakland-couple-moved-into-a-4-million-13812019.php
======
mindcrime
Cue up the posts from people criticizing McGrath for doing this. I expect
several variations on "He's doing this for some ulterior motive", "Nice, but
why isn't he doing more", "The neighbors who are calling the cops are totally
justified in doing so", blah, blah, blah.

Personally I think he's doing a wonderful thing, and hope his example can act
as inspiration for others... and that this story encourages more people to
think about the problem of homelessness, and to realize that homeless people
are _people_ first and foremost.

~~~
wahern
> The neighbors who are calling the cops are totally justified in doing so

I mean... if someone was lighting a joint regularly near my home I'd call the
cops too. Same for cigarettes, though the smell doesn't carry that far. We
have asked people smoking cigarettes and lingering out front to move on. We
have two little kids.

I grew up poor. We were homeless at times. The culture is different. You _don
't_ fit in, and there's a real culture clash. I go back to the deep south and
walk into a gas station and watch the little kids load up on $20 worth of junk
food for dinner while the mom chain smokes outside and I feel more comfortable
and at ease than I do anywhere else. These are people I can relate with.
Still, I don't want my children to grow up in that kind of environment or to
think such habits are normal and okay.

~~~
mindcrime
_or to think such habits are normal and okay._

You made a pretty big jump from a lot of other stuff, to a lady sitting
outside smoking a cigarette. But in either case, isn't their some onus on
parents to educate their children that "there are some people that engage in
behaviors that we don't approve of. Those people have a right to do that, but
we don't want you to grow up doing the same things because ... $A, $B, and
$C."?

I mean, you _really_ don't have any standing to think that you can bend the
entire world to conform to your particular beliefs and values.

~~~
wahern
You can't _teach_ that sort of behavior. These habits and social norms are
internalized at a young age, or through years of habituation. My children sit
down for dinner every night like it's the most normal thing in the world. I'm
a middle-aged man for whom sitting down at the dinner table is exceptionally
stressful because growing up for as long as I could remember you ate whatever
was available in the house (if anything), whenever you wanted, and wherever
you wanted. I feel like a caged animal sitting down at the table, and that
will _never_ change. But I don't deny that doing so is much healthier in terms
of physical and social development for my children. Conversely, my wife grew
up in a household where sitting down with family was natural, so _not_ sitting
down with family for dinner is uncomfortable and unnatural for her. So I hide
my struggle from my kids because even though they're good at the table now
they're still impressionable young kids who are much more likely than an adult
to gravitate to such bad behavior if given the opportunity or excuse. I know
that because I see my oldest kid mimicking and being shaped by the behaviors
of his classmates and kids; it was clear and obvious starting from when he was
barely 2 years old. (I disagree strongly that television makes such strong
impressions. People underestimate how well children are capable of
differentiating fiction from real life, but it's dangerous to discount the
normalizing effect of exposure to real life behaviors, no matter how an adult
tries to frame the context.)

That's why I can deeply sympathize with the homeless couple in the story. They
feel alienated and there's really nothing that can be done about that. I
_still_ feel alienated in middle-class culture. It's exhausting. Are they
staring at my teeth? Am I thin enough? Did I shake hands correctly or keep eye
contact long enough, but not too long? Should I have acted surprised about the
cost of this or the cheapness of that? Am I dressed right? And given how
desperately poor the couple was and remains and the fact that they're poor
blacks living in a rich white neighborhood (making it harder to fake it, or to
be stereotyped even when they're fitting in in every other way) the feeling
must be magnitudes worse.

At the same time people, including rich people, shouldn't be shamed for
demanding certain normative behaviors. We shouldn't fetishize poverty and the
culture of poverty. We should demand sympathy, understand that bad choices
aren't always "choices", and refrain from using stereotypes (even truthful
stereotypes) to imprison individuals. But none of that implies we can't pass
judgement on _behaviors_ , even if it makes people feel uncomfortable. Shame
is an evolutionary mechanism for coaxing us to adopt normative behaviors. It's
painful, but it is what it is. We all want to live in a pain-free world--it's
what every animal wants. It's not how the world works or even should work,
however. We just need to be honest about it, not vindictive, angry, self-
righteous, or unsympathetic. And recognize that some things can only be
remediated inter-generationally.

Regularly smoking a joint on the sidewalk? Hell no! This isn't the ghetto or a
trailer park. And I'm also prepared to defend people who won't even tolerate
smoking, even though I deeply sympathize with smokers who feel put upon. You
want to light up? Go ahead! But don't feel so entitled that people aren't even
allowed to judge you for it, or pretend to be self-righteous about it on
others' behalf, even if it's ostensibly used medicinally. I mean, most smoking
is medicinal--it's one of the most common drugs used to manage depression and
anxiety, which is one reason why it's much more common among the poor and
working classes worldwide. But if you want to defend the poor and working
class you don't defend smoking, you promote wealth equality. On the other
hand, you have to remain sympathetic and give people space to live as they
are. I think the flavored tobacco ban in SF is outright racist, but that
doesn't mean I don't accept that smoking menthols is a particularly bad
behavior that's also almost entirely confined to the black community and that
society and even government should remain free to reign it in somehow. These
are messy problems without tidy solutions.

~~~
mindcrime
Sure, but again, you're talking about stuff that's way beyond the original
issue, which was simply about calling the cops on somebody who happened to be
smoking (either tobacco or marijuana). You're _not_ going to create a world
where no one smokes, or at least it's not very likely. But you can still
influence your children to not take up smoking. Of course you can't
_guarantee_ that they won't, but parental influence certainly plays a role.
Looking back on my own life, I'm pretty sure my parent's instruction and
attitudes play a role in my never choosing to take up smoking (which I was
exposed too regularly, as my maternal grandfather was a smoker), heavy
drinking, recreational drugs, etc.

 _We shouldn 't fetishize poverty and the culture of poverty._

Agreed, and nowhere did I suggest that we should. There's a big difference
between _accepting_ something and _fetishizing_ it. And by _accepting_ I don't
mean "embrace as normative or desirable". I just mean, "don't treat people who
engage in this behavior as sub-human".

~~~
wahern
> But you can still influence your children to not take up smoking. Of course
> you can't guarantee that they won't, but parental influence certainly plays
> a role.

Parental influence includes direct modeling as well as environmental modeling.
I'm not even sure if the two can be meaningfully delineated.

The article said the person would "occasionally" smoke marijuana on the steps,
which is another way of saying regularly (but not necessarily frequently). It
may be a little passive aggressive to call the cops, and I'm not going to bury
my head in the sand--it's probable such a passive-aggressive approach was
racially motivated. OTOH, I'm a pretty non-confrontational person and would
probably use the same approach if I wasn't already on friendly terms,
regardless of race. I mean, this is the Bay Area--nobody is going to get
arrested or even fined. The cop is just going to tell them to stop because he
doesn't want to be inconvenienced again. The unfortunate truth is that middle-
and upper-class disputes are mediated through the authorities these days. Even
if we would be better of if a more friendly approach were taken--as is still
common in many poor (urban or rural) and rural (white or black) communities--
realistically it's the couple who need to accept that disputes about seemingly
innocuous behavior will be resolved through the cops, not direct
confrontation.

The article said they simply changed their behavior to smoking in the
backyard, out of sight of most neighbors and, presumably, with less intrusive
odors. I think that's not only acceptable but desirable, regardless of any
racial or class animus.

Even if, for the sake of argument, there would otherwise be zero effect on
neighborhood children's propensity to smoke, such exposure likely _would_
perpetuate stereotypes about blacks smoking marijuana. And even if the couple
were otherwise the most respectable couple on the block admired by all the
children for being kind and caring and intelligent that simple stereotype
alone could be harmful in terms of children's (and even adults') internalized
image of blacks and black culture.

Respect is a two way street. I support legalized marijuana because I respect
it's a peculiar feature of some cultures, especially but hardly exclusively to
black culture. Adults smoked it in my household regularly. I also respect the
WASPy culture of turning their noses up at such behavior, because it _is_ bad
behavior--individualized exceptions notwithstanding--and the most effective
way to suppress it is to make it a taboo. How do you respect both cultures
simultaneously as well as all individuals concerned? Smoke it privately and
non-invasively. The neighbors and the couple each take a small step towards
better social integration. Talk is cheap, shifts in behavior are what count.

------
chatmasta
What a great story. The only thing that makes it a bit sad is how unscalable
it is. It's great to help two people, but it must be frustrating knowing there
are so many others you cannot help. Imagine if everyone in SF with a guest
bedroom did this.

~~~
tomohawk
Scale at the lower end is far more important and impactful. A guy decides he
wants to help some people and he does. He uses resources he has available to
do so. He's involved.

Much more honest than someone deciding they want to help people, and then
turns around and lobbies the government to do it.

