Or just sit & talk if they want to talk 2/
I get asked a lot how to help the people I write about. My first response is pretty simple, treat them like anybody else, not someone who is broken, or fallen, or a victim, or whatever.
Give them the dignity to be your equal, as measured by things other than $, status, etc. 1/
Or just sit & talk if they want to talk 2/
For those who worry about being scammed. Well, if begging for cash is their scam, they are probably still pretty desperate. 3/
All are Bronx focused, because the Bronx did so much for me. I owe it.
There are variations of all of these in every city though 5/
VIP Community Services https://t.co/PkieDazeFY
St Ann's corner for harm reduction https://t.co/F0nkgjYgZn
St Anthony Shelter https://t.co/d9Gl3vBmch
Publicolor https://t.co/QMEGvTfpZC
6/
Engaging (in whatever fashion you feel your are most comfortable with) with people you might not have engaged with before. 7/
Also, afford people the dignity of maybe not liking them! You don't have to treat everyone as a perfect person needing your help!
8/
More from Culture
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
