post
I wish these kinds of services could target specific at risk groups, not a gender.
I would be happy if it was focused on homeless parents with young children, or homeless victims of family violence. With those things they might still end up getting only women, but at least they'd be selected based on their situation instead of bigotry.
Maybe bigotry is the wrong word in this case, but maybe not. Either way it's still discriminating based on an unchangeable characteristic of those people. I'd be equally annoyed if they targeted men or a specific race or an eye colour. I just think that when you try to help people, you should try to discriminate on circumstance, not things like race or gender. And we should be calling it out so people can do better in the future.
I do know there is a lot of correlation between gender and circumstance, but I think it's either lazy to use gender as a proxy or they really are bigoted.
On the other hand I would still like to give them props for helping people in a significant way.
They have "discriminated on circumstance". Due to structural factors like losing superannuation and workplace advancement due to biology, women are disadvantaged as a group to start with. When it comes to housing, especially after a relationship breaks down, women are the ones who generally have much less resources to start over. This is a structural and societal problem, so if you want "equality" learn about the backpack of privilege and start acknowledging structural biases that discriminate against women.
I really wish that these services were for people to build huge houses instead of tiny houses, and that the houses had big chicken legs and could run around like baba yaga
top 8 comments