Why are public spaces so uncomfortable nowadays?
Between hostile architecture and a lack of care about welfare, we're quite literally stuck between rocks and hard places.
Hello hello! How are you this fine Tuesday?
I know it’s been a couple of weeks, but between mental & physical fatigue, I needed a bit of a brain break. I hope you’ve missed me because I did, and I’m truly excited to write to you all again. Thanks for waiting for me, and I hope you find this issue insightful!
In the last five years, I’ve had the privilege of travelling to multiple countries — but mainly on a student budget. This meant lots of shitty flights, budget stays, and a perpetual hunt to find free things to do when visiting a new place.
A core memory I have is nearly freezing in an open-plan train station in London on stainless steel/aluminium seats when a snowstorm delayed a bunch of trains and cancelled all others.
I wondered, “Why the hell are the seats made from this metal — a metal that easily gets and retains the cold in a country where it’s cold for 9 months a year? Why is it so open, we’re literally getting snow inside the train station and why are there such pitifully few seats — people are on the floors trying to huddle to keep themselves warm.”
Fun fact: that’s a consequence of hostile architecture.
Most of us are now increasingly surrounded by hostile architecture (especially in cities with dense populations). Let’s all pause to think of a few examples —
By far, the most common example — benches (if any remain) have gone from being one long seating space to having dividers for 2-3 people.
Huge boulders in empty spaces (where homeless people might go to sleep/camp)
Spikes near windowsills or small flat spaces (again, somewhere someone might sit for sleep)
Those stainless steel seats or extremely uncomfortable seating options at bus stops, railway stations, etc
Huge public spaces like parks or general places without any seating at all
A lack of toilets (especially for women) unless you find a paid one or one within a private business (restaurants/malls)
One of the biggest reasons (and the ones that governments and cities give) for this kind of hostile design is to deter homeless people from taking up this space.
But there’s a lot more to it.
Public welfare vs. private safety
There’s a big difference between private businesses and establishments trying to protect their space (however inhumane it might seem) and governments resorting to anti-homelessness measures in the form of hostile architecture. Of course, it’s not a black-and-white issue, there are many facets to it — but I want to talk a bit more about how most people in power shirk their responsibility by simply making it so that the homeless are invisible instead of actually helping them out.
The first point of contention is that hostile architecture is merely a bandaid (and a really bad one at that) on a huge crack. Instead of adding spikes or changing/removing benches, governments need to direct those resources towards building shelters, monitoring them, so they’re actually livable, and focusing on rehabilitation.
The second point is that this kind of hostile architecture is also a ‘fuck you’ to most people — homeless or not. If you’re poor and can’t afford to spend your free time in a restaurant and perhaps want to take a walk around the city? Good luck finding a single place to sit. If you need to pee, you’ll most likely have to hold it or pay.
If you’re fat or disabled, those armrests on benches are automatically restrictive — and the armrests are the nicest hostile designs I’ve seen. Sloping benches, tubes, and 10-cm sitting places (I can’t even call them seats) are truly abhorrent.
Imagine being pregnant, old, or tired after a long day of work and trying to take the train with zero seats at the station while you wait.
“...part of those taxes go into making these public amenities comfortable, and it goes into a charity aspect, where homeless people should also have access to it since our taxes are meant to cover their existence as well.” — Sal from
The reason why it’s such a big fuck you is that most people who pay taxes to support the infrastructure of their resident country are the ones who need a comfortable public space to exist.
Protecting and working on the welfare of their citizens should be the highest priority for governments, but that’s a pipe dream. So instead, we get pieces of public spaces that are redone under the guise of modern art but make it difficult for us to spend time there.
Elsewhere, someone pointed out that people who need to rest after a bit are less likely to spend time outside and get exercise (old people, those recovering from accidents or traumatic injuries, etc.) — which, in turn, harms them in the long run.
A price to exist in public spaces for extended periods of time
Rich people (who mostly evade taxes anyway) can go from one place to another and afford to go inside expensive places to sit for a minute. But in the last few decades, existing in a public space without paying for it has become nearly impossible.
A robust body of research demonstrates that within cities, people of color and low-income residents are more likely to live in neighborhoods with fewer public spaces or with public spaces that are small, poorly maintained, lack programming, or have limited play options.
When I was researching for this piece, someone on Reddit pointed out the stark difference in the seating available in fast food restaurants — they’re uncomfortable and meant to make you eat and leave asap; after all, you’ve already paid for your food, right?
I’m not sure if that’s wholly true, but it did make me think when I found out that parks and recreation centres are fitted with sonic devices that emit an annoying buzz to repel young people and teens (people above 25 can’t hear this noise because their ear cells have begun to die).
Aptly called ‘youth-repellent devices,’ the Mosquito devices1 are “...intended to prevent loitering and vandalism by teens and young adults at public facilities.”
I can’t help but think that adults congregate and loiter, too — only they have some disposable income to spend. In countries like the US, where libraries are one of those few freely-accessible public spaces, it’s easy to see why people want to shut them down and build something that pulls in profit instead.
Recent studies show that poorly maintained public spaces depress property value, attract litter, and incite fear of crime. In addition, badly deteriorated public spaces can also send the very powerful message that a community has been abandoned.
All of this falls under hostile architecture, even though it’s not just to deter the homeless. Instead, it makes existing in public spaces extremely uncomfortable and almost impossible for some (think poor, disabled, old).
This is a systemic issue and not something that private businesses should have to undo alone — at the cost of running their own business safely. There should be a distinctly different expectation from the government and private businesses vis a vis how they treat their space (and the space around it).
Public space helps determine the relationship between people and their surroundings. It has the potential to create a sense of belonging, cultural vibrancy and in turn to promote happiness and wellbeing.
So, wouldn’t it be nice to be able to use a public space without feeling like you’re not welcome there?
What did you think of this issue?
Your anonymous feedback helps me improve. Thanks!
If you liked this issue (or like the newsletter in general), feel free to buy me a coffee or two — or you can just share it somewhere!
Things to check out! (Some Valentine's Day Picks!) 💖
A free checklist to consult when cleaning your home — this is so women don't bear the brunt of the cognitive/mental load.
As a society, we place a lot of importance on romantic love, even though love isn't meant to be hierarchical.
For anyone who is single and feeling a bit blue among the red today — I hope you celebrate your days with as much fervor and enthusiasm too!
If you're in the mood for a romance book today, here are 10 of my reccos to choose from.
Worth a read: OpenAI Used Kenyan Workers on Less Than $2 Per Hour to Make ChatGPT Less Toxic
Trust me and check this out — it's what I've been telling myself for the last two weeks.
I've finally understood why Rotten Tomatoes is called that.
A couple of weeks ago, I watched Pathaan — and then I wrote a ridiculously fun article about the first freelance terrorist I've seen in the media and what we could learn from him.
Thanks for reading! I’ll see you next week — maybe not at the same time, but definitely the same place.
P.S. Please hit like right below or at the very top if you liked this to let Substack’s algorithms know!
From Washington DC to London, these have been used on and off (thankfully, loads of people are fighting against them) and often cause headaches among those who can hear this pitch.
Thanks now I'm going to spend today climbing out of a depressive episode.
In all seriousness, I'm one of those people who spends a lot of time thinking about how incredibly beautiful modern life could be for practically everyone if we could manage, collectively, to be just a little bit less shitty and self-absorbed. The future can be better than the present. The present is in so many ways better than the past. But we've got to believe it and work for it and be NOT OK with things like hostile architecture.