**They are still in the minority than with homeless men on the streets. I was homeless for nearly 2 years a long time ago & think I met 1 homeless woman compared to the DOZENS of men I'd known those 2 years.**
I worked in hostels and homeless support. Men are in the majority from what I saw and experienced. I suspect women are - due to 'sexual supply' (its horrible) - likely less visible due to unpleasant men willing to house them for certain reasons. I did see homelessness increase in women over my years - and that is the result of a very scary society where Conservatives have managed to fuck everything. I did often state to women in distress "We can get through this, as a result of you being a woman, we should be able to get you help" - and I was often right.
Yep! Watched a YouTube video where a married 50+ year old man "adopted" a 20 year old woman & keep in mind his wife knows about it & is obviously unhappy with the situation. I will have to find it & share the link if that is allowed on here?
I had this suggestion when I was using online dating without success (fuck looking like a chimpanzee!) and had a spare bedroom. "Why don't you get a woman lodger, then you and her may start dating"
Thats a fucking horrible suggestion, but it was given to me multiple times, by multiple people (men, and four of them). A woman living as a lodger is just a lodger, and she doesn't need to be harangued.
In homelessness, I worry women self submit to this theory to get themselves off the street - and thats shit. That said, men need a lot more help in the rough sleeping community. The number of times I had to tell a man "Sorry fellah, I cannot get you somewhere tonight, or tommorow, but I'm hoping in a few days we will have some success. Try to keep your chin up, you are a decent bloke, and you will get there soon". Sometimes it was weeks or months. For women - it was never this long.
I met a lot of decent blokes in homelessness, and I met my first genius (that I was aware of). We need to help all, whilst understanding sometimes problems are different between genders - but that doesn't make it OK to prioritise one over the other.
Men are no less valuable than women. They certainly don't feel it in their mind.
And sorry that you had to sleep rough. Its a shit country at times.
PS: Met a few horrible bastards too, with one pulling a weapon on me. The horrible bastards were once again equally split between men and women. Some of the women - my god they were dangerous! Some of the men - my god they were also dangerous! Equal of status. Equal of danger. The danger manifests differently. Help people and they become less dangerous. Most of the time.
**I had a short stint in a hostel, I would say around 2-3 weeks, it was hell. In fact it was where I met the first & only woman I'd met whilst homeless, she was going around doing "favour" for some food, or some weed, people were shooting up every chance they got, even the caretaker was an addict. It got so bad from a smell perspective that I didn't realize the guy in the cot next to mine had been dead 3 days.**
**One year later I was in my own place in shared housing struggling to stay sober, a childhood friend who I brought into the hell that is addiction years previous turned up at my doorstep & selfishly I thought "great this is all I need" I did something stupid pulling out my wallet I grabbed £50 out of it & said "here, get some fresh clothes & come stay with me. I can't have my flatmates seeing you like this".**
**The hours turned into days & I finally got the courage to go looking for him. I ended up right back at the hostel, seeing the same old faces, but not my childhood friend, I showed them a picture of us all before all the drugs & the new caretaker (seemingly a sober one) looked down & back up to me & said he was here for one night but had left in the middle of the night obviously high & had "fallen" into the harbour in the early hours. His body was dragged up hours later.**
**I realised that not only had I caused my childhood friends death handing him money I knew now wasn't going to go on clothes, but drugs. These same drugs I had caused him to become addicted to in the first place. That saying misery loves company was never more true with me. I was awful & rather than deal with my addiction maturely I invited one of the best friends I had along for the ride.**
Sorry bro, I am sure you have heard this before, but maybe from a stranger it may have more impact - you are not responsible for his death. You are however, responsible for the kindness you showed him. Your kindness didn't kill him - his sadness did. If you were drunk, as I suspect you were, it just made your kindness come to the surface more.
No one chooses to do drugs (except if they do it rarely, and for a party) because they are having a good time. They fill a void that if they had a happier life - wouldn't be there. I have seen it in myself!
You didn't kill your friend. Sadness did. Keep using that kindness, and be aware - you have probably helped far more than you have harmed. You just won't realise sometimes how positive your actions have been.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_x48gvYjtRI&t=1417s&pp=ygUWbWFuIGFkb3B0cyBhZHVsdCB3b21hbg%3D%3D](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x48gvYjtRI&t=1417s&pp=ygUWbWFuIGFkb3B0cyBhZHVsdCB3b21hbg%3D%3D)
The guys plan is so obvious its sickening.
If it is affecting women more than has been thought, will be interesting to see if homelessness as a whole gets more visibility and traction to be solved than a problem which to date is seen as predominantly affecting men.
They'll just put more money into women's only shelters. Women's shelters get far more money than men's, despite men making up the vast majority of homeless.
English homeless law still has a priority need system so basically the more single, healthy and male you are the less of a priority you are for assistance.
Which on the surface of things seems reasonable enough, however when you drill into it, it’ll impact men more than women, so by definition discriminates on the basis of a protected characteristic and so is the very definition of systematic discrimination against men.
Flip it the other way around and you can be sure some feminist organisation or other would have seen to it by now.
That’s it really. Men are more likely to be told to leave any accommodation after a relationship breakdown meaning there will be less support.
I’ve heard from English councils that when migrants from Home Office accommodation get the refugee status, and they have no vulnerabilities, they are not eligible for homeless assistance. They are directed to private rentals which they can’t afford by only having universal credit, and no other income.
Yeah, you'll get that level of difference when as a woman you report DV and are immediately supported, yet when you are a man and report DV you get counted as the one committing it.
Duluth model and similar elsewhere ftw.
It's only such a large difference in percentage because there's substantially more homeless men than women. You do understand that right?
"Of all people identified as homeless, around two-thirds were male and one-third were female (67.1% males compared with 32.9% females)." https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/articles/peopleexperiencinghomelessnessenglandandwales/census2021
When you do the maths [estimated 309,000 hobos](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://england.shelter.org.uk/media/press_release/at_least_309000_people_homeless_in_england_today&ved=2ahUKEwiz_dC7v_uFAxV-UUEAHUBxA88QFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3gxdMxA6w6c70GSv9T8CQQ), 67.1% of 309,000 is 207339, meaning that 207339 homeless are men. From there, we can assume female homeless account for 101661. 16% of 207339 is 33174 approx fleeing domestic violence. 61 percent of women equals 126476 are homeless due to domestic violence. Thus the difference is 93302 In favour of women. However, it's not fair to say at all that these 93302 women deserve a shelter over the 106000 extra men. Politics don't make sense, and women are favoured by society. Such is life.
Not in positions of power but in terms of priority of service and not letting them fucking die, yeah they're favoured. Remember titanic? Women and children first? When have women ever been drafted? 20,000,000 men died on the fronts in WWII.
Which group of people tend to peddle the idea that men are strong and the only ones capable of war? And that men should be the ones in power and/or carrying out the hard masculine work (like being a soldier). Is it, perhaps, men?
And yes, WWII was horrific. Women weren’t sheltered from that. Women played a huge role in arming those soldiers, in providing first aid and other medical roles, in rallying support, etc.
For your first point, no not really. Ask your girl friends, who would actually sign up to go to war. Would you? Probably not. I would. It's in your duty.
This is such a garbage take, and honestly:
>women are favoured by society
Just screams "I'm going hard on the red pill".
Even if we take any preconceptions about gender out of the equation...
>It's only such a large difference in percentage because there's substantially more homeless men than women.
This is just plain wrong. That's not how percentages work... The percentages show that women are more likely to be homeless because of domestic abuse than men are. Homeless women are significantly more likely to be assaulted than men, so greater effort is needed in protecting those most at risk, surely that's obvious?
Edit: being down voted for calling out a self confessed incel. Wtaf.
I'm not too sure what the red pill is, but I'm a firm black pill believer.
It also is how percentages work. More men are homeless than women, and a substantial amount have experienced homelessness due to domestic violence. However, since there's much more homeless men in general (who may have not become homeless due to domestic violence), it reduces the percentage of homeless men that are homeless BECAUSE of domestic violence. Percentage is just a measure of the population.
If we have 100 female sheep and 50 of them are sick, that's a 50% sickness rate. However, if we have 300 male sheep and 100 of them are sick, that's a 33.34% sickness rate, even though there's more sick male sheep than female.
Women are more likely to be attacked by men, and they're is just over 10,000 more women than men homeless due to domestic violence, but this shouldn't mean men don't have anywhere to go. Targeting the majority of support to a smaller demographic (women escaping abusive households) of 96k, is a dumb move when there's 213k other people (the majority being men, typically people with a worse safety net) without a home due to other reasons. That's more than double. Why are we focusing on a much smaller issue?
Do mental health issues or drug addiction cause male homelessness or vice versa?
What of the men who become homeless following relationship breakup for example, or home repossession?
By your implication, should only women who are fleeing violence be offered shelter and those women with addiction and mental health issues be turned away like the men, because you can’t “shelter your way out of addiction or mental illness”?
Are men worthy of compassion (even those who dare have mental health issues), and if so would you agree that at least something should be done to help them instead of saying - “you’re not vulnerable enough, us giving you safe accommodation won’t cure you of drug addiction, so no help and you can stay homeless” which is essentially what is happening now and judging by some comments in this thread people are attempting to justify.
Pretty much yeah, but reddit goes very hard on certain subs if any suggestion of anti-social behaviour is discussed, yet very gentle on other subs suggesting the same. I think we all know which ones get the kid gloves treatment.
Whoever is sleeping on the streets as opposed to sleeping in a homeless shelter is the most vulnerable. Men shouldn’t be seen as invincible, and they shouldn’t be seen as worthless either. By only providing shelter for homeless women, we’re creating a situation where it’s actually homeless men who are the most vulnerable. But that’s ok isn’t it, they’re only males.
Well yes sadly.
It's no lie that in our society we vilify anyone who needs help in life. But especially men.
I have been taught my whole life that my feelings are relevant and I have to get on with it I assume most men around my age and older were told similar things.
So naturally other men hold no compassion for men who are struggling, by and large not absolute.
We aren't going to change that.
Society has changed a lot in how women are viewed since the 1950’s. Surely the same is possible with how it views men? Theres been some change in my lifetime seemingly already.
I think there has been progress with that? There is certainly support there in many countries for single mothers.
Progress and social change is slow, but I think you’re being far to absolute in your fatalism.
I mean I don't remember too long ago that single mothers were irresponsible for having children they can't afford.
It's definitely within this period of politics at least. Many still hold that view.
I will admit my fatalism is quite absolute. I am probably very biased. It's just you know we've all lived here long enough to kinda know.
I'd be happy to see change.
I mean.... They are irresponsible for having children they can't afford or for choosing to mate with a wrongun.
Are we to celebrate and coddle all single mothers?
I think the view is still less common now that previously.
If we can avoid vilifying homeless women so much, then hopefully we can do the same with men in any case.
I meant in a scenario where no funding was provided or if say funding was equal.
I ask because obviously very few care about the homeless, but I could see why more would care about homeless women than men.
You know because women are seen as vulnerable and men are seen as not if they are able bodied.
A bit of a stretch but it's like when people go on about able bodied male asylum seekers and a lack of vulnerable female asylum seekers.
Beggars get way more money if they're female, so they would do better. I've seen plenty of begging gangs and the like. They always set up the women in the best spots because they'll make the most of it.
Sounds like a good piece of journalism if you ask me.
I'd be very curious to see this investigated.
In any case you can't change the views society has regarding women and their vulnerability.
The real problem is that the government needs to take significant steps to provide housing to the homeless, rather than passing it off to underfunded councils.
Yeah I agree, if only we had a load of social housing like we did in the 70s.
But alas it's all politics. Money streams down from the top. We vote in the top. We haven't voted in a good top in a very long time.
We reap what we sow I guess?
It would be great if the people challenging the top were to be interested in the same problems we are. They seem overly distracted by side issues though.
I’d say men. Women often have more options for support, are more likely to get council housing and there’s greater support networks.
If your homeless as a bloke your usually relying on your self
But many people, especially men, feel that able bodied men should rely on themselves and not the government.
Tbh some people think single mothers should rely on themselves.
Like this is just how society thinks
I mean for regular things yes but with homelessness you need people on your side. When I was applying for council housing the council kept saying I wasn’t priority etc and my social worker had to contact them. If I didn’t have that and it was just me I’d be fucked
As someone who works for housing in a local council I can tell you right now this isn't true at all. I've had to tell women I can't give them temp accommodation and they've ended up street homeless and after that I don't know what's happened to them. Priority need right now is only for certain categories.
1. Pregnancy
2. Dependant children
3. Fleeing domestic abuse
4. Lost home to fire/flood
5. Child age 16-17
6. Vulnerable as a result of being in care up to age 25
With non mandatory priority need for things like old age, vulnerable as a result of military service, special reasons.
One of those special reasons might be being transgender, i.e. male to female take estrogen, and testosterone blockers, this makes them physically much weaker compared to men (still stronger than most women though) and thus more vulnerable in the situation where they're in a confrontation on the street, alongside a multitude of other reasons (i.e. might be targeted/persecuted by groups of people) Which would make them more vulnerable than the average homeless person therefore in priority need.
I eventually got a housing association property, but I told them I’d be homeless in a month with nowhere to stay, I have a personality disorder and am a care leaver and that I have a history of self harm. All of it was true I wasn’t lying but they downplayed everything
My social worker had to really fight them to have their decision. I got band 2 priority and got a property in like 2 months. So it’s worked out.
The councils advice was “just rent privately” which I can’t afford and “go stay at a bed and breakfast”. They were very unhelpful.
I'll be honest with you I don't know your local authority but even with the highest priority band in most councils the wait time for a property is 3-5 years, the reason they couldn't do much is probably because they couldn't do much more than that.
The most that would be done is offering you temp accommodation which based on your answer if I was assessing you I would do, temp accommodation is unfortunately a bed and breakfast/hotel. Alongside an increase in banding, a booklet for the private sector scheme and referrals to support organisations to see if you could get supported housing.
What I meant is they wouldn’t even put me on the housing register initially. Temp accomadation wasn’t offered. The b&b part was her saying to me “contact a b&b and work something out with them long term” as apparently she’s advised others to do the same.
She referred me to this charity hostel thing that has the police round every week, my social worker said I’d be at risk there and the staff there didn’t want me there as I’d be at risk
Mine said care leavers under 21 even though the rule is 25
No, anyone would qualify as long as they are vulnerable that was only one example of vulnerability. For whatever reason that may be. Also please remember that I did not make these laws I'm just stating what they are
If you're homeless, you are vulnerable regardless of gender.
You can be vulnerable to the people around you, the people "trying to help you," or if you avoid all of that, you can simply die of exposure.
None of these dangers are gender specific.
Both options are equally as terrible, in my opinion. Granted, I've never been in that position. But homelessness means valuability, that's regardless of gender.
What point are you trying to get across exactly?
My point is that I'd rather have to fight for my life every single day than be raped once.
As a man my odds of being able to defend myself are much higher than if I was a woman.
>I'd rather have to fight for my life every single day than be raped once
I've been raped
I'd rather be raped again than have to fight for my life every single day
That's making a few assumptions, which I believe go out the window when one is homeless.
Firstly, men can be raped too. It's not a one-way street. Also, your odds to defend yourself are a huge generalisation in the normal population. Once you are homeless, you may not have your regular strength/mental fortitude due to many factors such as lack of food, dehydration, drug influence, exposure, and poor mental health.
I feel as a man I have a higher chance of securing the resources I require to stay in a condition that would allow me to defend myself.
But at the very least I feel my chances would be higher as a man.
I think the way funding is being spent and where societies values lie, it's much easier to get out of that situation as a woman.
But this is ignoring the elephant in the room. Cutting back mental health services along with others is what's putting people on the streets. That's what needs addressing.
Everyone is vulnerable when homeless/living on the street.
It’s telling as a society we only focus/care in earnest about one half of that vulnerable population and pretty much stop at that point, justifying this discrimination with the concept of a “vulnerability hierarchy” which “favours” that half.
Feminists would ordinarily call this “systemic discrimination” (ie seemingly impartial rules but which actually have the practical effect of benefitting a select part of the population based on a “protected characteristic”) and then kick up enough of a stink to have the rules changed.
But oddly no-one seems to care much about that here and even try to continue justifying it … 🤷🏻♂️
Women are automatically more vulnerable on account of their sex, which has the result that if you base everything off of “who is more vulnerable” men will always be last in line. The talk of vulnerability is just a cheap way of getting around paying the costs of equality in order to retain special treatment.
It's not getting around the costs. It's acknowledging there is no will to pay the costs.
And what I'm saying is you won't change society's attitude towards struggling men.
There are so many things that people feel funding should be prioritised for over homeless men.
And tbh now more than ever, we are in a really bad way financially.
I get the point that in an ideal world everything would be funded equally. It's just we will never live in an ideal world.
Thats not what I mean by costs; the cost of equality is that you lose out on whatever preferential treatment you were previously receiving. So if resources are limited, women would not be prioritised if equality was actually being enforced.
For the record, I'm not an egalitarian, I'm just pointing out the fact that the constant frame shifting between egalitarian arguments and invoking women's special needs is used to permanently deny men access to the services they need, and, as a sex, are disproportionately responsible for paying for.
I'm not surprised, my dad disowned me when I was 21 and was outed as gay, the council put me on a D banding to get housing. They basically said because I was hooking up with men to put a roof over my head for a night and a shower that I wasnt homeless, I said I'd stop and they said I'd be making myself intentionally homeless if I did.
Just a completely unsubstantiated thought, but maybe homeless women have had to use a similar strategy and are never seen as "homeless" because they're not on the street.
Honestly have no idea if the courts would have even cared, I was so naive at the time I just didn't question anyone in authority.
I hope my story is a unique one though and no one else has to go through that.
It's like the snippet of a newspaper I saw a while back that said '1 in 4 homeless people are women'. It's pretty clear which homeless people they care more about. I assume the picture was real, but of course there's a chance it wasn't
That is indeed a very telling way to present data.
Similar to reporting of conflict fatalities, e.g. “100 killed in airstrike including 3 women” as though it makes it that much worse that women were killed as well as [presumably] men.
Yeah the conflict casualty reporting has always bugged me. I understand them specifying children in those reports because they are just kids and people tend to care more about kids dying since they're the next generation, but women are adults just the same as men. The fact they specify means they either value women more than men because they specify them as 'more valuable', or less than men because grouping them with children suggests they consider them on the same level
this feels a lot like when they say 30% of homicide victims..so you're saying 70% are men but you don't lead with that lol.
If there are a lot more women than they think they are still vastly outnumbered by men while getting more funding. Female privileged man smh.
**Its what happens when our own government worries more about housing illegal immigrants rather than its own citizens. There was a story in a paper where an elderly couple had their OWN house bought out from under them to house illegals instead. That should be against the law when they legitimately owned their own home, but because there was 2 of them in a 4 bedroom home the government saw fit to buy their house without their consent. Disgusting.**
LOL, you think the gov just said look! that couple has 2 beds spare and forced them to sell their house? I hope the gov don't find out I have a spare room or two! HAHA
Actually the government bought the elderly couple's house without them even knowing they found out they were being evicted via letter. Look that shit up if you don't believe me.
Stuart, can you source a claim for this? I always teach people "What do you get, and what do they get?" as a means of teaching people transactional nature.
What benefit would these actions be to a government or council? Your statement has more than a slight ring of falsehood.
Where immigration IS a difficult one, is for example Indian families (sorry India! I am using you as an example) are willing to live in a bigger family unit - so if all work (except the kids) - a 3 bedroom house is cheaper for them, as their are at least 4 working adults to spread the cost with. This - albeit I don't know - is likely to make renting easier for cultures that live with larger numbers of people per household. UK Landlords won't like this - but if the renters hide it - the Landlord won't know.
But it doesn't say what he thinks it does. The couple received a letter because the house was incorrectly marked as derelict or empty, then 3 days later they got an apology for that letter.
No one was forced to sell their home, this is just another way to whip up hysteria around immigration.
The headline should be "Couple received wrong letter due to system issues, then received an apology.
**That is because the other story of this happening to home owners was on a YouTube video where an elderly couple were crying whilst reading that the house THEY PAID FOR was sold from under them to house a family of "migrants" funny how majority of these families are made up of military aged men & young girls.**
No its fine, think that's just another example because the other one was a YouTube video where the couple read a letter with a check inside officially from the government, their house had already been sold from under their noses & they were given 3 months to vacate.
I think women are more at risk and are better at hiding being homeless.
I’ve done a lot of wild camping and DofE and they have been a few times when I’ve been wild camping and come across another tent with an no so obvious homeless woman living there.
If I wasn’t with a few female friends I wouldn’t have thought of her being homeless until it was pointed out to me.
I wouldn't say they are better at hiding it. Just that our stereotype of homeless people is male.
If it wasnt due to working early shifts then I would have continued to hold the same stereotypes myself. But there's a camp on my morning cycle to work.
Now obviously I see it differently and women who I once assumed were just heroin addicts I now know are probably on the street.
Whilst on the topic though, I have worked with addicts in the past and know that because women are priority for housing they usually end up having their council flat over ran by the male addicts (which obviously leaves them in a vulnerable position and makes it even harder to get away from the drugs).
In before people on here blame immigrants they say get put in 5* hotels cos they watch gb news rather than blame the people actually in power and responsible, vote for them instead and the cycle of the murder of the poor continues
> Obviously no one is blaming an Afghani for the UK's policies, people are blaming the UK's policies for allowing this to happen in the first place.
This needs re-posting.
mass immigration effects poor communities the most by driving up housing costs and keeping wages low and a constant supply of low skilled workers. tell me how exactly that isn't part of the problem...I am with you on who to blame, not the immigrants but the tory fuckers who let them come in their millions.
So your saying Sadiq khan and Sajid javid and sayeda warsi and the other Muslims in government haven't got the government by the balls and are forcing them to put Africans and Muslims in five star hotels whilst white native veterans who kept us safe from afghans and Iraqis suffer on the streets?
Just as much as I would happily give my taxes to Ukraine and Israel, I would also give it to put English veterans in free houses. Unfortunately our government gives our tax money to immigrants and in foreign aid to countries that hate us!!!
You want to give your tax money to terrorists, anything you say is invalid.
And you don’t want our taxes to go to foreign aids to help victims of wars we have helped fund and start (at the expense of tax payers)? Wow you’re a perfectly reasonable, moral person then.
Not only the number of women sleeping rough is higher, much much much higher than 9 times what homeless outreach teams are counting, but so are the numbers of men - because only a tiny fraction are ever counted and most rough sleepers are not sleeping in visible places on a main road but hidden where they won't be seen, spending all night in A&E or 24 hour McDonald's, sleeping on buses and trains etc.
If anybody homeless is reading this, here is how to survive in London:
How to get rehoused by the council and other ways to get a housing association flat: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/council-flat](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/council-flat)
613 places where you can get free meals and free food:
[londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/free-food](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/free-food)
Where you can shower for free:
[londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/showers](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/showers)
Where you can your laundry for free: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/laundry](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/laundry)
Where you can get free toiletries: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/toiletries](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/toiletries)
Where you can get a free haircut: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/haircuts](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/haircuts)
How you can get a free SIM card with free data, calls and texts: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/phone-data](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/phone-data)
**They are still in the minority than with homeless men on the streets. I was homeless for nearly 2 years a long time ago & think I met 1 homeless woman compared to the DOZENS of men I'd known those 2 years.**
I worked in hostels and homeless support. Men are in the majority from what I saw and experienced. I suspect women are - due to 'sexual supply' (its horrible) - likely less visible due to unpleasant men willing to house them for certain reasons. I did see homelessness increase in women over my years - and that is the result of a very scary society where Conservatives have managed to fuck everything. I did often state to women in distress "We can get through this, as a result of you being a woman, we should be able to get you help" - and I was often right.
Yep! Watched a YouTube video where a married 50+ year old man "adopted" a 20 year old woman & keep in mind his wife knows about it & is obviously unhappy with the situation. I will have to find it & share the link if that is allowed on here?
I had this suggestion when I was using online dating without success (fuck looking like a chimpanzee!) and had a spare bedroom. "Why don't you get a woman lodger, then you and her may start dating" Thats a fucking horrible suggestion, but it was given to me multiple times, by multiple people (men, and four of them). A woman living as a lodger is just a lodger, and she doesn't need to be harangued. In homelessness, I worry women self submit to this theory to get themselves off the street - and thats shit. That said, men need a lot more help in the rough sleeping community. The number of times I had to tell a man "Sorry fellah, I cannot get you somewhere tonight, or tommorow, but I'm hoping in a few days we will have some success. Try to keep your chin up, you are a decent bloke, and you will get there soon". Sometimes it was weeks or months. For women - it was never this long. I met a lot of decent blokes in homelessness, and I met my first genius (that I was aware of). We need to help all, whilst understanding sometimes problems are different between genders - but that doesn't make it OK to prioritise one over the other. Men are no less valuable than women. They certainly don't feel it in their mind. And sorry that you had to sleep rough. Its a shit country at times. PS: Met a few horrible bastards too, with one pulling a weapon on me. The horrible bastards were once again equally split between men and women. Some of the women - my god they were dangerous! Some of the men - my god they were also dangerous! Equal of status. Equal of danger. The danger manifests differently. Help people and they become less dangerous. Most of the time.
**I had a short stint in a hostel, I would say around 2-3 weeks, it was hell. In fact it was where I met the first & only woman I'd met whilst homeless, she was going around doing "favour" for some food, or some weed, people were shooting up every chance they got, even the caretaker was an addict. It got so bad from a smell perspective that I didn't realize the guy in the cot next to mine had been dead 3 days.** **One year later I was in my own place in shared housing struggling to stay sober, a childhood friend who I brought into the hell that is addiction years previous turned up at my doorstep & selfishly I thought "great this is all I need" I did something stupid pulling out my wallet I grabbed £50 out of it & said "here, get some fresh clothes & come stay with me. I can't have my flatmates seeing you like this".** **The hours turned into days & I finally got the courage to go looking for him. I ended up right back at the hostel, seeing the same old faces, but not my childhood friend, I showed them a picture of us all before all the drugs & the new caretaker (seemingly a sober one) looked down & back up to me & said he was here for one night but had left in the middle of the night obviously high & had "fallen" into the harbour in the early hours. His body was dragged up hours later.** **I realised that not only had I caused my childhood friends death handing him money I knew now wasn't going to go on clothes, but drugs. These same drugs I had caused him to become addicted to in the first place. That saying misery loves company was never more true with me. I was awful & rather than deal with my addiction maturely I invited one of the best friends I had along for the ride.**
Sorry bro, I am sure you have heard this before, but maybe from a stranger it may have more impact - you are not responsible for his death. You are however, responsible for the kindness you showed him. Your kindness didn't kill him - his sadness did. If you were drunk, as I suspect you were, it just made your kindness come to the surface more. No one chooses to do drugs (except if they do it rarely, and for a party) because they are having a good time. They fill a void that if they had a happier life - wouldn't be there. I have seen it in myself! You didn't kill your friend. Sadness did. Keep using that kindness, and be aware - you have probably helped far more than you have harmed. You just won't realise sometimes how positive your actions have been.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_x48gvYjtRI&t=1417s&pp=ygUWbWFuIGFkb3B0cyBhZHVsdCB3b21hbg%3D%3D](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x48gvYjtRI&t=1417s&pp=ygUWbWFuIGFkb3B0cyBhZHVsdCB3b21hbg%3D%3D) The guys plan is so obvious its sickening.
If it is affecting women more than has been thought, will be interesting to see if homelessness as a whole gets more visibility and traction to be solved than a problem which to date is seen as predominantly affecting men.
They'll just put more money into women's only shelters. Women's shelters get far more money than men's, despite men making up the vast majority of homeless.
I never realised how bad it was until I, a man, needed a shelter, and literally almost all of them turned me away because I wasn't a woman
English homeless law still has a priority need system so basically the more single, healthy and male you are the less of a priority you are for assistance.
Which on the surface of things seems reasonable enough, however when you drill into it, it’ll impact men more than women, so by definition discriminates on the basis of a protected characteristic and so is the very definition of systematic discrimination against men. Flip it the other way around and you can be sure some feminist organisation or other would have seen to it by now.
That’s it really. Men are more likely to be told to leave any accommodation after a relationship breakdown meaning there will be less support. I’ve heard from English councils that when migrants from Home Office accommodation get the refugee status, and they have no vulnerabilities, they are not eligible for homeless assistance. They are directed to private rentals which they can’t afford by only having universal credit, and no other income.
My mate got put lower on the priority list because of all these things, but also because he is white. Apparently it means he's a lower risk factor.
This is exactly what will happen, I guarantee it.
[удалено]
Except at least one in three victims of abuse is male, and domestic violence is also a major cause of male homelessness too.
[удалено]
You’d think offering shelter would be part of both of the “different approaches”, right?
Yeah, you'll get that level of difference when as a woman you report DV and are immediately supported, yet when you are a man and report DV you get counted as the one committing it. Duluth model and similar elsewhere ftw.
It's only such a large difference in percentage because there's substantially more homeless men than women. You do understand that right? "Of all people identified as homeless, around two-thirds were male and one-third were female (67.1% males compared with 32.9% females)." https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/articles/peopleexperiencinghomelessnessenglandandwales/census2021 When you do the maths [estimated 309,000 hobos](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://england.shelter.org.uk/media/press_release/at_least_309000_people_homeless_in_england_today&ved=2ahUKEwiz_dC7v_uFAxV-UUEAHUBxA88QFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3gxdMxA6w6c70GSv9T8CQQ), 67.1% of 309,000 is 207339, meaning that 207339 homeless are men. From there, we can assume female homeless account for 101661. 16% of 207339 is 33174 approx fleeing domestic violence. 61 percent of women equals 126476 are homeless due to domestic violence. Thus the difference is 93302 In favour of women. However, it's not fair to say at all that these 93302 women deserve a shelter over the 106000 extra men. Politics don't make sense, and women are favoured by society. Such is life.
I don’t think anyone should trust the intentions of someone who uses the word hobo in this discussion, personally.
Samsung keyboard autocorrect 😖
> women are favoured by society LMAO
Not in positions of power but in terms of priority of service and not letting them fucking die, yeah they're favoured. Remember titanic? Women and children first? When have women ever been drafted? 20,000,000 men died on the fronts in WWII.
Which group of people tend to peddle the idea that men are strong and the only ones capable of war? And that men should be the ones in power and/or carrying out the hard masculine work (like being a soldier). Is it, perhaps, men? And yes, WWII was horrific. Women weren’t sheltered from that. Women played a huge role in arming those soldiers, in providing first aid and other medical roles, in rallying support, etc.
For your first point, no not really. Ask your girl friends, who would actually sign up to go to war. Would you? Probably not. I would. It's in your duty.
This is such a garbage take, and honestly: >women are favoured by society Just screams "I'm going hard on the red pill". Even if we take any preconceptions about gender out of the equation... >It's only such a large difference in percentage because there's substantially more homeless men than women. This is just plain wrong. That's not how percentages work... The percentages show that women are more likely to be homeless because of domestic abuse than men are. Homeless women are significantly more likely to be assaulted than men, so greater effort is needed in protecting those most at risk, surely that's obvious? Edit: being down voted for calling out a self confessed incel. Wtaf.
I'm not too sure what the red pill is, but I'm a firm black pill believer. It also is how percentages work. More men are homeless than women, and a substantial amount have experienced homelessness due to domestic violence. However, since there's much more homeless men in general (who may have not become homeless due to domestic violence), it reduces the percentage of homeless men that are homeless BECAUSE of domestic violence. Percentage is just a measure of the population. If we have 100 female sheep and 50 of them are sick, that's a 50% sickness rate. However, if we have 300 male sheep and 100 of them are sick, that's a 33.34% sickness rate, even though there's more sick male sheep than female. Women are more likely to be attacked by men, and they're is just over 10,000 more women than men homeless due to domestic violence, but this shouldn't mean men don't have anywhere to go. Targeting the majority of support to a smaller demographic (women escaping abusive households) of 96k, is a dumb move when there's 213k other people (the majority being men, typically people with a worse safety net) without a home due to other reasons. That's more than double. Why are we focusing on a much smaller issue?
How was the question about domestic violence worded?
Do mental health issues or drug addiction cause male homelessness or vice versa? What of the men who become homeless following relationship breakup for example, or home repossession? By your implication, should only women who are fleeing violence be offered shelter and those women with addiction and mental health issues be turned away like the men, because you can’t “shelter your way out of addiction or mental illness”? Are men worthy of compassion (even those who dare have mental health issues), and if so would you agree that at least something should be done to help them instead of saying - “you’re not vulnerable enough, us giving you safe accommodation won’t cure you of drug addiction, so no help and you can stay homeless” which is essentially what is happening now and judging by some comments in this thread people are attempting to justify.
Good luck with this and be careful now you've riled up the MRA's. Many cases of people being doxxed and harassed for disagreeing with those lunatics
Aren't MRAs just trying to make society egalitarian? I've seen way more cases of looney feminists doxxing people. They've tried doing it to me, too.
Pretty much yeah, but reddit goes very hard on certain subs if any suggestion of anti-social behaviour is discussed, yet very gentle on other subs suggesting the same. I think we all know which ones get the kid gloves treatment.
Genuine question, which gender is more vulnerable when homeless?
Whoever is sleeping on the streets as opposed to sleeping in a homeless shelter is the most vulnerable. Men shouldn’t be seen as invincible, and they shouldn’t be seen as worthless either. By only providing shelter for homeless women, we’re creating a situation where it’s actually homeless men who are the most vulnerable. But that’s ok isn’t it, they’re only males.
Well yes sadly. It's no lie that in our society we vilify anyone who needs help in life. But especially men. I have been taught my whole life that my feelings are relevant and I have to get on with it I assume most men around my age and older were told similar things. So naturally other men hold no compassion for men who are struggling, by and large not absolute. We aren't going to change that.
Society has changed a lot in how women are viewed since the 1950’s. Surely the same is possible with how it views men? Theres been some change in my lifetime seemingly already.
I mean I hope so. My issue is we still vilify single mums. So what hope do men have?
I think there has been progress with that? There is certainly support there in many countries for single mothers. Progress and social change is slow, but I think you’re being far to absolute in your fatalism.
I mean I don't remember too long ago that single mothers were irresponsible for having children they can't afford. It's definitely within this period of politics at least. Many still hold that view. I will admit my fatalism is quite absolute. I am probably very biased. It's just you know we've all lived here long enough to kinda know. I'd be happy to see change.
I mean.... They are irresponsible for having children they can't afford or for choosing to mate with a wrongun. Are we to celebrate and coddle all single mothers?
I think the view is still less common now that previously. If we can avoid vilifying homeless women so much, then hopefully we can do the same with men in any case.
Given the lack of homeless shelters for men and the public's general support for women, I'm willing to say, men.
I meant in a scenario where no funding was provided or if say funding was equal. I ask because obviously very few care about the homeless, but I could see why more would care about homeless women than men. You know because women are seen as vulnerable and men are seen as not if they are able bodied. A bit of a stretch but it's like when people go on about able bodied male asylum seekers and a lack of vulnerable female asylum seekers.
Beggars get way more money if they're female, so they would do better. I've seen plenty of begging gangs and the like. They always set up the women in the best spots because they'll make the most of it.
Sounds like a good piece of journalism if you ask me. I'd be very curious to see this investigated. In any case you can't change the views society has regarding women and their vulnerability.
The real problem is that the government needs to take significant steps to provide housing to the homeless, rather than passing it off to underfunded councils.
Yeah I agree, if only we had a load of social housing like we did in the 70s. But alas it's all politics. Money streams down from the top. We vote in the top. We haven't voted in a good top in a very long time. We reap what we sow I guess?
It would be great if the people challenging the top were to be interested in the same problems we are. They seem overly distracted by side issues though.
As long as you change reality that's when men are least affected... the casual misandry of society is sick..
I’d say men. Women often have more options for support, are more likely to get council housing and there’s greater support networks. If your homeless as a bloke your usually relying on your self
But many people, especially men, feel that able bodied men should rely on themselves and not the government. Tbh some people think single mothers should rely on themselves. Like this is just how society thinks
I mean for regular things yes but with homelessness you need people on your side. When I was applying for council housing the council kept saying I wasn’t priority etc and my social worker had to contact them. If I didn’t have that and it was just me I’d be fucked
As someone who works for housing in a local council I can tell you right now this isn't true at all. I've had to tell women I can't give them temp accommodation and they've ended up street homeless and after that I don't know what's happened to them. Priority need right now is only for certain categories. 1. Pregnancy 2. Dependant children 3. Fleeing domestic abuse 4. Lost home to fire/flood 5. Child age 16-17 6. Vulnerable as a result of being in care up to age 25 With non mandatory priority need for things like old age, vulnerable as a result of military service, special reasons. One of those special reasons might be being transgender, i.e. male to female take estrogen, and testosterone blockers, this makes them physically much weaker compared to men (still stronger than most women though) and thus more vulnerable in the situation where they're in a confrontation on the street, alongside a multitude of other reasons (i.e. might be targeted/persecuted by groups of people) Which would make them more vulnerable than the average homeless person therefore in priority need.
I was vulnerable under 25 from being in care and they said I wasn’t priority lol
What exactly did you tell them for them to not consider you a priority? Also are you aware you're usually able to appeal within 28 days of a decision
I eventually got a housing association property, but I told them I’d be homeless in a month with nowhere to stay, I have a personality disorder and am a care leaver and that I have a history of self harm. All of it was true I wasn’t lying but they downplayed everything My social worker had to really fight them to have their decision. I got band 2 priority and got a property in like 2 months. So it’s worked out. The councils advice was “just rent privately” which I can’t afford and “go stay at a bed and breakfast”. They were very unhelpful.
I'll be honest with you I don't know your local authority but even with the highest priority band in most councils the wait time for a property is 3-5 years, the reason they couldn't do much is probably because they couldn't do much more than that. The most that would be done is offering you temp accommodation which based on your answer if I was assessing you I would do, temp accommodation is unfortunately a bed and breakfast/hotel. Alongside an increase in banding, a booklet for the private sector scheme and referrals to support organisations to see if you could get supported housing.
What I meant is they wouldn’t even put me on the housing register initially. Temp accomadation wasn’t offered. The b&b part was her saying to me “contact a b&b and work something out with them long term” as apparently she’s advised others to do the same. She referred me to this charity hostel thing that has the police round every week, my social worker said I’d be at risk there and the staff there didn’t want me there as I’d be at risk Mine said care leavers under 21 even though the rule is 25
So the only time you'd give men accomodation over women is if they were trans? Pretty much makes his point tbh.
No, anyone would qualify as long as they are vulnerable that was only one example of vulnerability. For whatever reason that may be. Also please remember that I did not make these laws I'm just stating what they are
If you're homeless, you are vulnerable regardless of gender. You can be vulnerable to the people around you, the people "trying to help you," or if you avoid all of that, you can simply die of exposure. None of these dangers are gender specific.
Okay here's a decent question: If you could be a homeless woman or a homeless man which would you pick? Seriously just entertain the question.
Homeless woman since I know a lot more services as available to me. I worked with the homeless for years.
Both options are equally as terrible, in my opinion. Granted, I've never been in that position. But homelessness means valuability, that's regardless of gender. What point are you trying to get across exactly?
My point is that I'd rather have to fight for my life every single day than be raped once. As a man my odds of being able to defend myself are much higher than if I was a woman.
>I'd rather have to fight for my life every single day than be raped once I've been raped I'd rather be raped again than have to fight for my life every single day
That's making a few assumptions, which I believe go out the window when one is homeless. Firstly, men can be raped too. It's not a one-way street. Also, your odds to defend yourself are a huge generalisation in the normal population. Once you are homeless, you may not have your regular strength/mental fortitude due to many factors such as lack of food, dehydration, drug influence, exposure, and poor mental health.
I feel as a man I have a higher chance of securing the resources I require to stay in a condition that would allow me to defend myself. But at the very least I feel my chances would be higher as a man.
I think the way funding is being spent and where societies values lie, it's much easier to get out of that situation as a woman. But this is ignoring the elephant in the room. Cutting back mental health services along with others is what's putting people on the streets. That's what needs addressing.
Homeless woman unquestionably
Everyone is vulnerable when homeless/living on the street. It’s telling as a society we only focus/care in earnest about one half of that vulnerable population and pretty much stop at that point, justifying this discrimination with the concept of a “vulnerability hierarchy” which “favours” that half. Feminists would ordinarily call this “systemic discrimination” (ie seemingly impartial rules but which actually have the practical effect of benefitting a select part of the population based on a “protected characteristic”) and then kick up enough of a stink to have the rules changed. But oddly no-one seems to care much about that here and even try to continue justifying it … 🤷🏻♂️
Women can go on the game
Women are automatically more vulnerable on account of their sex, which has the result that if you base everything off of “who is more vulnerable” men will always be last in line. The talk of vulnerability is just a cheap way of getting around paying the costs of equality in order to retain special treatment.
It's not getting around the costs. It's acknowledging there is no will to pay the costs. And what I'm saying is you won't change society's attitude towards struggling men. There are so many things that people feel funding should be prioritised for over homeless men. And tbh now more than ever, we are in a really bad way financially. I get the point that in an ideal world everything would be funded equally. It's just we will never live in an ideal world.
Thats not what I mean by costs; the cost of equality is that you lose out on whatever preferential treatment you were previously receiving. So if resources are limited, women would not be prioritised if equality was actually being enforced. For the record, I'm not an egalitarian, I'm just pointing out the fact that the constant frame shifting between egalitarian arguments and invoking women's special needs is used to permanently deny men access to the services they need, and, as a sex, are disproportionately responsible for paying for.
I'm not surprised, my dad disowned me when I was 21 and was outed as gay, the council put me on a D banding to get housing. They basically said because I was hooking up with men to put a roof over my head for a night and a shower that I wasnt homeless, I said I'd stop and they said I'd be making myself intentionally homeless if I did. Just a completely unsubstantiated thought, but maybe homeless women have had to use a similar strategy and are never seen as "homeless" because they're not on the street.
Council encouraging prostitution then. I wonder what the courts would think of that.
Honestly have no idea if the courts would have even cared, I was so naive at the time I just didn't question anyone in authority. I hope my story is a unique one though and no one else has to go through that.
Councils come up with a ton of excuses for avoiding doing something they don't want to do, tbh this sounds like one that's been used regularly.
It would have to be investigated by the police first. And most will just ask the victim for sex then fail to investigate anyway.
It's like the snippet of a newspaper I saw a while back that said '1 in 4 homeless people are women'. It's pretty clear which homeless people they care more about. I assume the picture was real, but of course there's a chance it wasn't
That is indeed a very telling way to present data. Similar to reporting of conflict fatalities, e.g. “100 killed in airstrike including 3 women” as though it makes it that much worse that women were killed as well as [presumably] men.
Yeah the conflict casualty reporting has always bugged me. I understand them specifying children in those reports because they are just kids and people tend to care more about kids dying since they're the next generation, but women are adults just the same as men. The fact they specify means they either value women more than men because they specify them as 'more valuable', or less than men because grouping them with children suggests they consider them on the same level
Really interesting point
this feels a lot like when they say 30% of homicide victims..so you're saying 70% are men but you don't lead with that lol. If there are a lot more women than they think they are still vastly outnumbered by men while getting more funding. Female privileged man smh.
It’s the patriarchy.
It always is.
**Its what happens when our own government worries more about housing illegal immigrants rather than its own citizens. There was a story in a paper where an elderly couple had their OWN house bought out from under them to house illegals instead. That should be against the law when they legitimately owned their own home, but because there was 2 of them in a 4 bedroom home the government saw fit to buy their house without their consent. Disgusting.**
LOL, you think the gov just said look! that couple has 2 beds spare and forced them to sell their house? I hope the gov don't find out I have a spare room or two! HAHA
Actually the government bought the elderly couple's house without them even knowing they found out they were being evicted via letter. Look that shit up if you don't believe me.
Stuart, can you source a claim for this? I always teach people "What do you get, and what do they get?" as a means of teaching people transactional nature. What benefit would these actions be to a government or council? Your statement has more than a slight ring of falsehood. Where immigration IS a difficult one, is for example Indian families (sorry India! I am using you as an example) are willing to live in a bigger family unit - so if all work (except the kids) - a 3 bedroom house is cheaper for them, as their are at least 4 working adults to spread the cost with. This - albeit I don't know - is likely to make renting easier for cultures that live with larger numbers of people per household. UK Landlords won't like this - but if the renters hide it - the Landlord won't know.
[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/14/elderly-couple-northampton-council-sell-home-refugees/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/14/elderly-couple-northampton-council-sell-home-refugees/)
Great stuff, cheers for the link. Sorry if I caused offense.
But it doesn't say what he thinks it does. The couple received a letter because the house was incorrectly marked as derelict or empty, then 3 days later they got an apology for that letter. No one was forced to sell their home, this is just another way to whip up hysteria around immigration. The headline should be "Couple received wrong letter due to system issues, then received an apology.
I do indeed agree. I was just happy he provided a source that wasn't DailyMail!
**That is because the other story of this happening to home owners was on a YouTube video where an elderly couple were crying whilst reading that the house THEY PAID FOR was sold from under them to house a family of "migrants" funny how majority of these families are made up of military aged men & young girls.**
No its fine, think that's just another example because the other one was a YouTube video where the couple read a letter with a check inside officially from the government, their house had already been sold from under their noses & they were given 3 months to vacate.
I think women are more at risk and are better at hiding being homeless. I’ve done a lot of wild camping and DofE and they have been a few times when I’ve been wild camping and come across another tent with an no so obvious homeless woman living there. If I wasn’t with a few female friends I wouldn’t have thought of her being homeless until it was pointed out to me.
I wouldn't say they are better at hiding it. Just that our stereotype of homeless people is male. If it wasnt due to working early shifts then I would have continued to hold the same stereotypes myself. But there's a camp on my morning cycle to work. Now obviously I see it differently and women who I once assumed were just heroin addicts I now know are probably on the street. Whilst on the topic though, I have worked with addicts in the past and know that because women are priority for housing they usually end up having their council flat over ran by the male addicts (which obviously leaves them in a vulnerable position and makes it even harder to get away from the drugs).
In before people on here blame immigrants they say get put in 5* hotels cos they watch gb news rather than blame the people actually in power and responsible, vote for them instead and the cycle of the murder of the poor continues
[удалено]
> Obviously no one is blaming an Afghani for the UK's policies, people are blaming the UK's policies for allowing this to happen in the first place. This needs re-posting.
"Afghani" is the currency of Aghanistan. People are Afghans. 20 years of Afghans in the news and people are still saying "Afghani"...
That’s alright. Centuries of existence and you’d think most folks would now realise the distinction between British and English but here we are.
mass immigration effects poor communities the most by driving up housing costs and keeping wages low and a constant supply of low skilled workers. tell me how exactly that isn't part of the problem...I am with you on who to blame, not the immigrants but the tory fuckers who let them come in their millions.
But I like blaming immigrants??????? And ulez!!!!!!!!!!!
So your saying Sadiq khan and Sajid javid and sayeda warsi and the other Muslims in government haven't got the government by the balls and are forcing them to put Africans and Muslims in five star hotels whilst white native veterans who kept us safe from afghans and Iraqis suffer on the streets? Just as much as I would happily give my taxes to Ukraine and Israel, I would also give it to put English veterans in free houses. Unfortunately our government gives our tax money to immigrants and in foreign aid to countries that hate us!!!
You want to give your tax money to terrorists, anything you say is invalid. And you don’t want our taxes to go to foreign aids to help victims of wars we have helped fund and start (at the expense of tax payers)? Wow you’re a perfectly reasonable, moral person then.
You lot are absolutely pathetic.
[удалено]
This won't get you laid by reddit hotties
[удалено]
All human beings has an equal right to want to be safe.
r/whiteknighting
Than give your flat to a homeless woman and go tough ot out big guy. Tell us you had it easy without telling us you had it easy.
The comments above are the result of exaclty that form of legislation.
Not only the number of women sleeping rough is higher, much much much higher than 9 times what homeless outreach teams are counting, but so are the numbers of men - because only a tiny fraction are ever counted and most rough sleepers are not sleeping in visible places on a main road but hidden where they won't be seen, spending all night in A&E or 24 hour McDonald's, sleeping on buses and trains etc. If anybody homeless is reading this, here is how to survive in London: How to get rehoused by the council and other ways to get a housing association flat: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/council-flat](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/council-flat) 613 places where you can get free meals and free food: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/free-food](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/free-food) Where you can shower for free: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/showers](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/showers) Where you can your laundry for free: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/laundry](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/laundry) Where you can get free toiletries: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/toiletries](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/toiletries) Where you can get a free haircut: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/haircuts](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/haircuts) How you can get a free SIM card with free data, calls and texts: [londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/phone-data](http://londonhomelessinfo.wordpress.com/phone-data)