Running head: HOMELESSNESS

Homelessness: Is Begging a Crime?

Jake Howard Introduction to Sociology Professor Seenath 11/24/13

HOMELESSNESS Homelessness: Is Begging a Crime? Homelessness is a complex issue that has shown its face in American society throughout the years of both modern and post-modern eras. A recurring issue of homelessness is the

criminalization of the certain aspects of it such as loitering and begging. In American society it is not uncommon to witness the homelessness, possibly even on a day to day basis. The social norm has recently become to ignore the homeless attempts to beg or to ask for charity personally. When put in a position to give to the homeless it has become easy for many to simply say no. Many times the stereotype is that homeless people do not know how to handle the money they are given and therefore do not deserve to have it. A question has arisen out of this issue: Is it right to make begging a criminal act? One side takes the notion that it is justified and overall better for society to outlaw acts of panhandling, while the opposite holds the opinion that the homeless need help, and outlawing panhandling hinders the progress of solving the overall issue of homelessness. Social inequality has made this issue a more and more prominent part of American culture, not only in the way we have become a society of continuing social stratification, but also in the way homelessness has become viewed. The idea of criminalizing the homeless can be considered an agreement that the homelessness represents a bad or unwanted part of society that should be ignored. In a way the class system has a part in making homelessness a stigma. A stigma has been described by Erving Goffman as an attribute that is socially recognized as deeply discrediting (Phelan, Link, Moore, & Stueve, 1997, p. 323). Being homeless can be considered as very discrediting in the sense that it leaves the individual subject to the negative predispositions of being homeless. This makes it easy to criminalize homeless activity because predispositions can allow for socially accepted generalizations of all homeless individuals.

HOMELESSNESS Social inequality is the unequal distribution of wealth, power, or prestige among certain members of society (Ferris & Stein, 2010, p. 211). Social inequality influences the separation

and formation of social groups. The current economic classifications of people in American have created a clear line that defines where people fit in. The long preached philosophy of Social Darwinism (the concept of survival the fittest applied to the socioeconomic climate) has been the primary view in the Protestant American culture that has for a long time held a bearing in the upper-class of modern and post-modern society of America (Axelson & Dail, 1988, p. 464). This concept is very approving of a self-made social standing and the expectation for everyone to have the ability to withhold this standing in society. However the socioeconomic conditions of the post-modern era have made it hard for some social classes to retain a home. The most recent economic collapse has shown how from a socially darwinistic perspective can be a little to accusing and judgmental of the homeless. Due to the difficulties of a failing market the rates of homelessness in the U.S. have grown. However the reality is that not all the people who are homeless are unemployed. In 1999, a Department of Housing and Urban Development survey found that 44% of the homeless had jobs. (Staff, 2013) This a arises complex side to the issue, because it shows that not all homeless people hold the Retreatist mindset that Robert Merton outlines in his concepts of deviance (Ferris & Stein, 2010, p. 185). What can be concluded from the realization that not all homeless people are completely responsible for their position is that social inequality fuels the social rejection of people in need of help. The social norm of maintaining a residency in a home cannot always be achieved easily, and therefore forces some individuals to become social deviance in order to survive. Contrary to accepted ideals of equality in America, it is still often frowned upon to give and accept charity. In a 2012 article From USA Today by Arjun Sethi it is stated:

HOMELESSNESS A recent survey of 234 cities by the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty found that on nearly every front, municipalities are cracking down on the homeless: 24% prohibit begging, 22% prohibit loitering and 16% say it's illegal to sleep in public places. Social compliance is the act of conforming in order to gain something socially (Ferris & Stein, 2010, p. 185). In order to stay in line with our social groups beliefs and to get where we want socially we use this. Sometimes this can be at the expense at another social group. The common compliance to the idea that one should not give to homeless on the side of the road is a playing factor in the criminalization of homeless. As more and more people comply with the common class system belief of ignorance of the begging the more it becomes deviant to need charity. The power of compliance may be connected to what society views as the causes for

homelessness. American society sees that a lack of ambition or trying is the main cause for being homeless. The connection of these lacking traits to the perceived outcome creates the stigma that all homeless people are either lazy or detrimental towards themselves (Lee, Jones, & Lewis, 1990, p. 255). In post-modern America homelessness is associated with a loss in social capitol which makes the thought of being associated with it in any aspect a sinful act against the norms of the dominant culture. It is also a social compliance in the opposite direction of the issue. Sometimes it is viewed to be the norm to support the homeless, but these beliefs are held in association with institutions that are trusted and known to work. These institutions are often supported by people unknowingly and sometimes are not done out of simple kindness. Soup kitchens and homeless shelters are known to be supported by general consensus. People comply with this belief because

HOMELESSNESS it is considered right to help people in need. Comparing these institutions to panhandling shows the way that when an effort is generalized and not so individual or personal the view of homelessness can change. In he recent years society has put less blame on the homeless for things such as community living conditions and cultural degradation. The attitude has become less about what the homeless are doing to the community but what the homeless are doing to themselves. This shift of focus has brought into question the real need in supporting the homeless community at all. The social disposition remains that the homeless are responsible for their condition (Phelan, Link, Moore, & Stueve, 1997, p. 324), so the idea of supporting those who do not wish to support themselves becomes a violation of a social folkway, or a norm that when violated does not usually entail harsh consequences (Ferris & Stein, 2010, p. 104). The misconception that most homeless want to remain homeless leaves room for sanctions to be set in place if the folkway eventually turns into a taboo. Efforts to end homelessness such as affordable housing and job opportunities for most people can help decrease the population of people out on the streets. This kind of work to end homelessness is only capable of happening if the society as a whole accept the issue and is willing to help those in need of help, even when not everyone in need is in search of help (Wright, 2000, p. 27). The neglect of human need for shelter is the core reason why homelessness is a pressing issue, however the reason that it goes on unnoticed for the most part is because of the alienation that occurs in the social classes today. Alienation occurs when an individual no longer feels the need for social ties and feels a more important need for impersonal attachments (Ferris & Stein,

2010, p. 225).When one is homeless they do not possess the means to produce anything, by such

HOMELESSNESS circumstances these people rely on the middle class for their means of survival. This makes the homeless less reliant on any sort of social connection, by doing so they feel removed from community. This separation can attribute to more than just the social segregation of classes but also the criminalization of the homeless. With this alienation also comes the ability for homeless people to do things that are not socially acceptable in the dominant culture. The acceptability of a homeless person breaking a folkway is much more than that of a person of dominant class culture. This allows the homeless to withhold habits that society may deem as unacceptable, which by virtue causes more alienation and criminalization. However, in cases where homeless withhold ties to the dominant culture you will see a much more accepted individual because the connection has allowed the individual to stay in touch with the norms of society. These individuals dont usually stay in the

condition of homelessness for very long. Those who are chronically homeless however are more likely to become alienated. The culture of the hobo was one that exemplifies alienation creating a subculture. The culture of the hobo involved moving geographically and searching for opportunities to get work or to have shelter. This culture did approve of begging (Axelson & Dail, 1988, p. 464). But the criminalization of these people was present in that time too, even with the hard working nature of the hobo movement. Many were subject to discrimination and laws prohibiting movement of individuals to new areas for work. The perspective that explains homeless criminalization the best is the symbolic interactionism perspective. This perspective says that the things that we see in society represent things and how we interpret things determines how we interact with them. This explains the criminalization the homeless well because the way society sees homeless affect how we decide

HOMELESSNESS

to deal with the situation. The discrimination of homeless people is the precursor to the laws that prohibit them begging. This plays in with the idea of social inequality because as homeless people become more criminalized they start to lose more prestige and therefore lose the equal opportunities that they would have if they werent homeless. The issue of whether or not it is right to is governed by many factors, some of which are on the society as a whole, were as some are dependent on the individual. The generalization of all homeless people is not good enough to justly outlaw begging. However there is just cause in the fact that there is so many other ways to acquire help outside of begging. Society does not always fully get behind the cause. This can make the distribution of help to the homeless to slow and not plentiful enough, leaving the homeless to beg if they want to survive.

HOMELESSNESS References Axelson, L. J., & Dail, P. W. (1988). The Changing Character of Homelessness in the United States. Family Relations, 37(4), 463-469. Ferris, K., & Stein, J. (2010). The real world: An introduction to sociology. (2 ed.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. Lee, B. A., Jones, S. H., & Lewis, D. W. (1990). Public Beliefs about the Causes of Homelessness. Social Forces, 69(1), 253-265. Phelan, J., Link, B. G., Moore, R. E., & Stueve, A. (1997). The Stigma of Homelessness: The Impact of the Label "Homeless" on Attitudes Toward Poor Persons. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60(4), 323-337.

Sethi, A. (2012, Feb 15). Homelessness treated as criminals in america. USA TODAY. Retrieved from http://sks.sirs.com Staff, P. (2013). At issue: Homelessness ProQuest LLC. Retrieved from http://sks.sirs.com Wright, T. (2000). Resisting Homelessness: Global, National, and Local Solutions. Contemporary Sociology, 29(1), 27-43.

HOMELESSNESS Reflection This research paper helps understand many parts of sociology. The analysis of social

class structures and its effect on homelessness, the recognition of social compliance to dominant culture, and the affect homelessness has on individuals connections to society help solidify the concepts learned in class. The interesting thing about homelessness is that it has been criminalized for a longtime, and even though it is considered right to help people in need the dominant culture has still made it questionable to accept charity. The norms that we exhibit dont always all agree. Some beliefs we have in culture contradict each other. This can make for very strange issues in society. The good will society is sometimes over shadowed in American culture by the capitalist ideal that built the country. This makes growth of the country economically sound, however this also makes the lower classes less stable and less in control. American culture values the idea of equality, but the balance of power in this country could never be so off set as it is right now. The diverse and structured class system that post-modern society accepts, works in a way that I believe the functionalist perspective describes very well. Each part of the class system holds a purpose in the society as a whole. In the case of American society it is evident that the bottom class in which most of the homeless reside is there to reaffirm the ideals of Social Darwinism. I do not think this makes it right to punish the homeless/underclass. It only means that the society must strive to reach the ideological concept of equal opportunity and not punish those who may need a bit of help, especially if there is someone willing to give.