[PREV - HUMAN_WEIGHT] [TOP]
SCUMZOIDS
~1993
Rev: July 13, 2012
In giving directions around San Francisco
to people who really don't know the place,
I often face a condundrum of how much
to caution them about "bad neighborhoods"
and so on. I know they're not going to
enjoy walking around Market & 6th, but on
other hand there's probably nothing to
be actively scared of-- the odds are low So, do I provide some kind
that anything bad is going to happen to of warning? But maybe I'm
them, they're just probably going to feel just catering to suburban
a bit nervous and uncomfortable about it. madness, and I should just
let them deal.
But then, I *do* know that
they're going to care about
this issue, and it seems to
be one of the ways in which
the travel guides I write are
And what precisely am I unique: most writers won't
warning them against, what touch this issue.
*language* do I use?
Quoting some material (from some
version or another) of my San
Francisco guide, originally written
in the early 90s:
A note on terminology: I prefer the
broad term "scumzoid" to the popular
term "homeless" (or "panhandler" or My attitude on display
"drug dealer" or whatever). "Scumzoid" here is very much the
might be criticized as a harsh, San Francisco attitude,
dehumanizing term, though I'd argue in I would say:
many cases it's an appropriate
description of people that have Callous to individual
surrendered much of their humanity. cases-- you couldn't walk
down the street,
But it is true that it's a bit harsh otherwise-- but retaining
in many cases, since many of them have a commitment to the
arguably had their humanity stolen principle that these
from them (e.g. through illness). people should be
officially helped if
But this sort of nicety is not the possible, and if that's
first thing on your mind, as you go not possible, not
walking down a street late at night officially hassled.
and you notice someone up ahead
screaming obscenities and
karate-kicking the air.
But then:
Far more of them are pathetic than are obnoxious, and
far more of them are obnoxious than are actually dangerous.
Also, you should realize that terms like
"homeless" make a lot of assumptions that
may not be true... some of the kids lying
around the Haight hitting you for spare
change are reportedly commuters from
Marin County.
So for now at least, I'm sticking with the
term "scumzoid", though I'm always thinking
about dropping it (I'd hate to have it picked
up by the "clean up the streets", i.e. "death
to the homeless" gang).
But anyway, I don't want to exaggerate the
"scumzoid" problem too much. You can wander
pretty much anywhere in San Francisco at all
hours and the odds are that you'll come out
safe and sound... in some places you may
feel a bit nervous about it, though.
And in fact, quite often someone like me
will recommend that you go to these
neighborhoods (or at least near them). It's
part of the dynamic of urban neighborhoods,
the yuppie scum push up the property values,
the suburban wannabees put pressure on the
cops to clean things up, and yeah, the
scumzoids get pushed out, but along with
them goes anything resembling "cool" and
often anything resembling "character".
Sometimes an entrenched scumzoid population
is the only thing that can scare away the
yups and subs and stabilize the TAZ... for
awhile.
In a perverse way, I think the obvious prevalence
of what I'm calling "scumzoids" is a testament to
San Francisco's civic virtue. Do you think your
home town deserves credit because they've
succeeding in making them invisible? Have you
ever wondered what your local cops are doing to
keep your city "clean"?
--------
[NEXT - SNEERFEST]