Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Cecilia's avatar

This was thought provoking, thank you.

Expand full comment
Frank Starkey's avatar

I share your concerns about the “real” reason these benches were removed; bias, conscious or unconscious. And I’d also point out that the way they were arranged in the first place was pretty lousy and may have also been intended to limit the “troublesome“ behaviors you identify.

- they’re spread too far for people on different benches to converse naturally, implicitly limiting group to the 2-3 people who can fit on a single bench (3 being extra uncomfortable in most cases.)

- if folks on benches opposite each other did raise their voices to chat, then people walking down the walkway have to pass through their loud conversation. Awkward.

- even if there’s not a 20-Ft conversation being lobbed across the path passersby have to cross the forward gaze of anyone sitting on the benches. Natural human curiosity means that gaze is usually going to follow them a bit, which feels a lot like being stared at and judged - by people either sitting in silence (because there’s no one to talk to) or talking with another “judge”. It’s a psychological gauntlet to walk past multiple benches arrayed like viewing stands on a parade.

- the benches are evenly spaced, so there’s no “good spot” to sit. Universal Space designed for automaton citizens, subtly undermining the unique humanity of the real ones.

It speaks well of the Latin community that they have the skills to socialize in a public space designed to frustrate socializing. Perhaps that’s another reason it seems so strange, so “improper” to socialize on a bench, or to “loiter” in a “park.”

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts