The primary issue people who have never been homeless, even those who work with the homeless, focus on is the obvious—the lack of money, food, health, shelter, a job etc. But that’s not what destroys, demeans and hurts. The worst part of homelessness is not the hard times. That sucks, but what destroys us is the humiliation, the shame, being looked down on, excluded, ostracized, and attacked. The emotional trauma of homelessness far exceeds the physical.

I camped for most of my life. Life in a van sucked because of the heat, the cold and not having a place to park without feeling hassled or safe. I could have handled that. But what devastated me was walking into my job and having co-workers ignore me, shun me or call me “that homeless woman.”

People who were my friends suddenly weren’t my friends any more once someone found out I was living in my van. The shame, the fear, the frustration, the looks, and the fact that people think there’s something wrong with you because you’re going through a rough patch is what is demoralizing. To be able to be employed, to be approached, heard and respected is powerful. THAT’S where this experiment WORKED. It’s a start. It’s not perfect, but what is the first time out?

There are several things that anger me about the homeless hotspot debate.

• That people don’t think I have a right to feel or express my anger at the critics (well behaved women never make history)

• The self-righteous attitude and arrogance to ASSUME that the homeless really need you to decide if they’re being exploited because someone offered them a job YOU find beneath you, but that is honest, legitimate work

• That claiming a company was “selling something” GASP!!!! is evil!! Hello. You didn’t mind buying drinks, food, a hotel room, parking, gas, and whatever else was being SOLD at SXSW, so why are you so opposed to BBH MAYBE selling something? Do you object this much over Craigslist’s adult porn ads? Why aren’t you so vocal about Craigslist promoting the sale of 12-year girls and boys to 50 year old men so Craig can make a million peddling porn? Or don’t you consider pedophiles who sodomize children exploitation?

• That people think a job has to be long term or permanent to have an impact or “be worth” doing. If you have 10 cents to your name, no food and no job, a job that lasts a couple of hours is a godsend. A job that lasts a week to 10 days with the potential to make enough money ($100 to $500) to last a month is a windfall!

• That it’s okay to attack me personally if they don’t agree with my position about homelessness

• That those who are the most vocal and vicious about the debate have done the least to help

• That those who claim to be “helping and protecting the homeless” by “standing up for them” have no problem hating on a formerly homeless person whose opinion differs from theirs

• The automatic attitude that the homeless are somehow “less than” them in terms of intelligence, drive, creativity, compassion, family, ethics or faith.

• The arrogance that people think they have the right to tell a homeless person how to spend their money or live their lives. If a homeless person earns money through panhandling, selling something, barter or however, it is THEIR money to spend as they please. No one tells you how to spend your paycheck. What makes you better, smarter or more financially savvy than a homeless person? We all have the right to make our own financial decisions and suffer the consequences or the benefits of those decisions. If you don’t want to give a homeless person money because you’re worried they’ll spend it on drugs or alcohol, don’t give it to them. But if you do, it’s up to them how to spend it, not you. That’s how people learn to manage money. If you borrow money from a friend and they hand you $20 or $2,000 and say, “Now this is how I want you to spend it, and I don’t want you to spend it on ….” what’s YOUR response to that? You think the homeless are thinking anything different?

What I know and what I’ve learned from being homeless is that America runs on money, not compassion. People don’t care if you’re homeless if you have a lot of money. Homelessness is a class and economic issue, not an issue of whether or not you have a permanent roof over your head. Millions of people in this country live in RVs, tour buses, 5 star hotels, and $100,000 camper vans. They’re not treated poorly, snubbed, looked down on or ever have to worry about people telling them what is demeaning work or not.

As long as you can wave money at a problem, you can dress like you want, live like you want, do what you want as long as you can afford it. The 20’somethings who live in beat up vans and windsurf and camp along the Columbia River in Oregon aren’t considered “homeless” and aren’t hassled by the police or sheriff. But the guy who’s unemployed and can’t afford to do anything BUT crash in his van, is. The only difference? Money. I can’t camp in many campgrounds across the country because I have a van without hookups and a water source. KOA campground owners ASSUME I’m homeless if I’m camping in a van that’s not a commercial recreational vehicle. I have to lie and tell them I’m tent camping, but then I can only stay 3 nights, not a month like someone living in their $50,000 RV.

Homelessness is a multimillion or even multibillion dollar industry. There ARE solutions to getting the homeless off the street, but if we did, then the economic industry created by the homeless would collapse on itself. Housing the mentally ill in hospitals (as we once did), to address the problem of mental illness and addiction would go a long way to clearing the streets of the most visible and at risk homeless. Helping people bridge the unemployment gap rather than criminalizing them for being unemployed would solve a lot of issues as well.

Providing transition housing, training and “tent cities”—much like the temporary housing the military uses (not FEMA trailers) would solve many issues as well, but cities don’t want to approve the use of land for such purposes. In the western states hotels and businesses install electrical outlets in their parking lots for construction crews, utility company trucks and RVers to pull up to and “plug in” for the night. Why not have lots with similar services for the homeless who live in their vehicles? Why not more public showers with attendants who can live on premises, or work in shifts? Many people in NYC live in a 100 or 200 square foot studio apartment and consider themselves lucky to only pay $1,000 for the privilege. A 100 square foot room with heat/ac and shower/bath access would have been a dream job for me and sure beats a box.

If communities would allow for 100 and 200 and 400 square foot homes instead of forcing people to build 1,500 and 2,000 square foot minimum homes on their property, more people could afford a home. But no, communities want the tax revenue from McMansions so they force people to build more home than they can afford.

America also goes out of its way to make entrepreneurship impossible for the sole proprietor. Regulations, red tape, licenses, taxes, laws and paperwork make it impossible to get back on your feet selling bottled water, artwork, crafts or self-manufactured products, mowing lawns or anything else that could turn a creative person into a working one. Why?

When cities turn off public shower facilities they keep the homeless from keeping the one thing they need most to get and keep a job— good hygiene. The most fantastic part of my day when I was homeless was finding a shower inside an office building, or going to the Y to shower. Until you haven’t been able to bathe for a week you don’t know the fantastic feeling of being clean.

Ideas and solutions BEGIN with experiments and ideas. They don’t spring fully formed and perfect from the first inception. Why not LOOK at this, WAIT for the results, then start tweaking, adding and changing. Like Mark Horvath pointed out in an interview. How many sponsors do you think are going to risk getting involved in anything to do with innovations around the homeless after the media crucified BBH on this one? Those who jumped to “defend” people who didn’t want to be “defended” and who were happy with the opportunity didn’t think about that. So do I think their self-righteousness got in the way? Yes.

Do I still think the critics did the project and the homeless a disservice? Yes. They didn’t promise to end homelessness. They didn’t promise to create jobs. They didn’t do anything but try an experiment. Where were all the haters and critics when every media outlet in the country was selling Ted Williams, the man with the golden voice? Wasn’t that exploitation? Weren’t they using Ted to get viewers? Odd how no one mentions that?

If you can get this wigged out over a word on a shirt…then you need to get a life. Maybe actually sit down and figure out how YOU’D end homelessness in your city is a good place to start.