Montreal shopping mall plays “Baby Shark” on repeat to prevent unhoused people from loittering : nottheonion

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 10 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Just in case people do not fully grasp the amounts of "doo"s in this song:

Baby shark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Baby shark!

Mommy shark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Mommy shark!

Daddy shark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Daddy shark!

Grandma shark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Grandma shark!

Grandpa shark, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Grandpa shark!

Let's go hunt, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Let's go hunt!

Run away, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Run away!

Safe at last, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

Safe at last!

It's the end, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo.

It's the end!

[–] Biggles@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I love that song doo doo doo doo doo doo.

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 3 points 1 hour ago

The last two verses on repeat are I think my new sound track to the end of times

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago

homeless

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 20 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

What's with the wording of this title? "Unhoused people" instead of "Homeless"/"Homeless people"

[–] Famko@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

A home is an abstract thing, a house is a quantifiable object.

Also it kind of implies that society should provide a house for them.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 12 points 4 hours ago

It's like the difference between calling someone wittless and uneducated.

One implies that's just how the person is, the other implies a failing of society/family.

[–] ziggurat@lemmy.world 17 points 4 hours ago

I like the word unhoused, it implies they should just be housed if they are homeless. Everyone should be housed, even if they don't own a home

[–] bricklove@midwest.social 43 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

What about the people who work there? Are they trying to make them quit then become homeless and leave the mall too?

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 18 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

According to the article, it plays in the emergency exit stairwells, a place that if you're using it you should be trying to leave as quickly as possible.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 33 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

If I was escaping a fire, and the stairwell had baby shark playing, I'd walk back into the fire.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 8 points 2 hours ago

I really don't want to die with Baby Shark being the last song I hear

[–] Akasazh@feddit.nl 14 points 8 hours ago

No they are supposedly insane already.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Undearius@lemmy.ca 109 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (6 children)

This is from the city where it's illegal to be homeless. One man even collected over $100,000 in fines for being homeless.

Yeah, that'll help.

[–] Bonsoir@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (5 children)

It's not "being homeless" that is illegal, though. It's drinking in public, begging or sleeping in the metro. And it sure is tough not staying in the metro during winter. There are some organisms that can provide shelter, but not enough for everyone, and it usually cost a couple dollars, which not everyone have everyday. And it's a real problem on both sides, as the metro was not meant to become a shelter for the homeless, and people have been complaining more and more they feel unsafe there.

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

Which orgasms provide shelter?

[–] redisdead@lemmy.world 1 points 4 minutes ago

Here they made being homeless illegal so they can force people into shelters/mental help/rehab/etc.

Much better than letting them shoot up heroin in parks all day.

[–] ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 2 hours ago

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." - Anatole France

[–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 hours ago

La Maison du Père costs 1 dollar a night, and they'll let you in if you explain that you can't pay the $1.

Some just don't like shelters. They don't like the rules, other people, or fear getting their stuff taken.

[–] zaph@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Sure "being homeless" isn't the crime itself but you're being naive if you don't think the laws make homelessness illegal. What are they supposed to do? Go find a piece of land no one has claim to and freeze to death?

[–] Bonsoir@lemmy.ca -2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

And what are we supposed to do? Legalize all drugs and being drunk in public just to avoid having to fine them, and install beds everywhere in the Underground City (and in this post's case, in emergency stairwells at the Complexe Desjardins) with no regard for their regular use? Sure, let's work on proposing more accessible legal alternatives. Just take note that these laws weren't created to punish the homeless, but to have a clean and safe public space - which have been degrading for some time now.

[–] ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 hours ago (3 children)

We could just house them. That seems to work.

[–] redisdead@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

Feel free to host one of them in your home.

[–] Bonsoir@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago)

That sound pretty much like the "If you're poor, just buy a house" people.
I think you don't know much about Montréal. There are solutions already in place to help homeless people who want to go out of the street, but the housing crisis is pretty new and it will take years to solve. It wasn't so bad a few years ago.

[–] Deway@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

They would be less easy to exploit! And to whom would we feel superior? And what would be the punishment for not obeying our ~~lords~~ bosses?!

[–] manqkag@sh.itjust.works 62 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Man that sounded wild to me, so I dug around a bit and it's fucking true. Although the amount is closer to $110,000 it's still insane.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 51 points 12 hours ago (7 children)

Hey, we heard you can't afford a house, so we're charging you fines in the amount of what it would have cost to buy a house.......we're so cool! We solved homelessness! Because now if you want to be homeless, it actually costs more to NOT buy a house. So you may as well just buy a house!

We did it guys! We ended the concept of homelessness! High five!

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee 57 points 11 hours ago (12 children)

Unhoused? Has homeless as a word been banned?

[–] allthelolcats@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

There’s also the difference in how the word is used more as an adjective than a noun. In the same way calling someone a disabled is a lot more dehumanizing than saying they are a person with a disability.

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 21 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I think the idea is to put the responsibility for housing onto society/authority as opposed to the victim.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 4 points 2 hours ago

Doesn't homeless imply its society's fault too?

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 42 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Not sure about Canada, but in the US:

Homeless = no permanent residence, which also includes couch surfing, parents and children who just fled an abusive family member and are temporarily ltaying with friends or relatives, and people who are living in their car. All people without a home.

Unhoused = homeless people that don't have a roof over their heads. Might include living in a car.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 12 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

They are synonyms. Please don't make things up.

Edit: to all the knee-jerk downvoting. This is literally a quote from an article the user himself supplied as proof that there is a difference.

Unhoused is probably the most popular alternative to the word “homeless.” It’s undoubtedly the one I see most often recommended by advocates. But it doesn’t have a meaningful difference in connotation from the more common term, “homeless.”

It's literally just a pc synonym of homeless.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

They are not. I work with data collections on students and have had to explain the difference to people who don't understand that a kid who is kicked out of their home and is staying with friends is homeless even if they are not out on the street for federal reporting.

Homelessness defined in law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/11302

A more thorough explanation that contrasts the terms: https://invisiblepeople.tv/homeless-houseless-unhoused-or-unsheltered-which-term-is-right/

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago (10 children)

And what's the definition of unhoused according to law? You aren't wrong in what you just said but its missing the point, unhoused literally means the same thing. The goverment only uses the term homeless if I'm not mistaken.

Unhoused is probably the most popular alternative to the word “homeless.” It’s undoubtedly the one I see most often recommended by advocates. But it doesn’t have a meaningful difference in connotation from the more common term, “homeless.”

That's a quote from the link you just gave.

load more comments (10 replies)

load more comments (9 replies)

Not The Onion

Welcome

The Rules