5 Days For CHANGE
Over the week we have received some criticism about the 5 Days for Homelessness campaign and I wanted to take some time to address some issues so that we can continue to move forward in a positive way! In ways, criticism over the past week was valid but it is important to know that we have never been closed off to a critical discussion. In fact, we encourage it and it is said in the Queen’s Project on International Development (QPID) mandate that we use a “holistic approach to development through engagement in critical thinking and informed action”. The problem with some of the criticism is that it can stem from the perpetual belief that homelessness must, and always does, look a certain way. This is a stigma that we aim to break, by addressing how homelessness does not just look like a ‘rough’ looking adult you pass on Princess St. Although this is a reality in some cases, it is by no means the only truth, and it does not mean that these bodies should be dehumanized because they do or do not look a certain way.
The 5 Days for Homelessness at Queen’s University is dedicated to not only raising money and awareness for the youth homelessness occurring in our own community but to break the very stigmas that some criticism can root from. To break a stigma implies that discussion is occurring and myths are being debunked. One criticism that we have received is that volunteers were still using technology, yet the technology being used was to keep up with school work and to raise further awareness about youth homelessness. And the reality is that homeless youth often do not look homeless. Between the ages of 16-24, youth who experience homelessness are often still attending school, extra-curriculars, and seeing friends, while simultaneously experiencing not having a guaranteed place to sleep. Balancing schoolwork, a job, and other commitments while constantly being conscious of the fact that you don’t know where your next meal is coming from or where you’ll be sleeping is exhausting. Not only is it exhausting, but it is burdening.
Now I know what you might be thinking, those circumstances are completely different than a bunch of Queen’s students attending class, doing school work on their laptops, and campaigning in shifts—and you’re not wrong. We might not know exactly how it feels to be homeless but we are also not pretending to be homeless. In no means are we ‘pretending to be homeless’. That would be extremely problematic and what could be considered a form of appropriation. We are aware of this and we are more than welcome to criticism about it. It would create a much-needed conversation about a larger systemic issue—the crisis of homelessness in Canada. We are also aware that at any point, if we were not able to continue, we could head home and that on Friday night we would be back in our own beds. This campaign was not built with the idea that by the end of 5 days and 5 nights we would know what it was like to be homeless.
However, we do have the intention of bringing awareness to an often ‘invisible’ problem. Seeing your classmates raising awareness and asking for donations in both sunny and rainy weather, sleeping outside, and depending on others to help provide food, is meant to create a reaction. Standing in neon orange is meant to attract your attention, bringing your eyes up and making eye contact with a body that, if we were not in orange or were not students, you might have otherwise ignored.
Now it is not just the misunderstanding of the campaign that can become frustrating. Through conversations and awareness we can continue to tackle the stigmas that surround homelessness and in particular, youth homelessness. What is more frustrating for myself is when negativity and criticism are confused. To just be negative is not always productive, but to critique something offers an opportunity for growth (or degrowth, ‘sup DEVS 492) and alternative approaches. We often get caught up in looking at something from a million different angles, picking apart the flaws and leaving it to feel inadequate. My issue with this is that criticism is only really helpful if alternatives are suggested, and if struggles manifest into recommendations that are consulted by all parties involved. There is no denying that you can critique anything, but what I’m trying to say is that it makes a difference when criticism builds some form of positive change.
In conclusion (since I just wrote a blog post instead of my essay), yes the campaign of 5 Days for Homelessness can be critiqued; anything can be critiqued if you look hard enough. But to critique without seeking alternatives is just as problematic as developing something like this campaign without reflecting on how others will interpret it and how those who are in circumstances of homelessness may interpret it (which we did). We are not trying to speak for others, but raise awareness about how these circumstances are often viewed by attempting to break stigmas often associated with youth homelessness. We are so happy that over the past 5 days and 5 nights we have been able to raise over $5500 for the Kingston Youth Shelter and that these funds will allow other individuals to avoid these exact circumstances. We are working towards a future where an invisible population is no longer invisible.
THANK-YOU to everyone that has showed support over the last week!!! Our team is so thankful for every donation, Timbit, warm coffee, and conversation we have had over the past 5 Days!