Intervention Project - Part I

Integrated into the subject Globalization, Social Justice and Human Rights, and seen as a method of evaluation, but rather as learning method, we were proposed to make an intervention project that was useful to the association concerned, in my case the association “CAIS” .

According to the information presented at the association's website, its mission is to contribute to the global improvement of the living conditions of homeless , socially and economically vulnerable in situations of deprivation, exclusion and risk. Founded in 1994 the first big project of this association was the creation of a magazine ,  “CAIS”  with the name of the association, sold on the streets by homeless people or in situations of deprivation or exclusion. In 2003, “ CAIS” has established its center thus expanding its operations.

Issues such as poverty, social exclusion and inclusion and social justice, have always been areas of study that particularly interested me and still interest.
So this week I focused on the theme of exclusion. For that, I read a part of a well-known book of Giddens (2001), Sociology published by the Calouste Gulbenkian. To start this theme it seemed to be the most suitable book, and so according to Giddens,I tried to find:
- A definition of social exclusion,
- Relate this theme to poverty,
- Try to understand why social exclusion exists and
- connect Social exclusion  homeless people (since it is essentially about these that my project will focus).

Starting with the first point, Social exclusion and according to Giddens, this topic was first introduced by sociologists to refer to new sources of inequality. Thus, it is understood by exclusion the ways in which individuals can be deprived of full involvement in society.
The issue of social exclusion is also a different issue of poverty itself.  Exclusion we can say say that focuses its attention on a broader set and factors that prevent individuals or groups have the same opportunities that other people have.
Exclusion can be seen at various levels, the economic, the political level, or  the social level.

However, the concept of exclusion also raises a question, the question of  action. Exclusion always implies that someone or something is being removed from each other.
Regarding  social exclusion and according to  Giddens , there are two chances to answer. The first is that there are actually instances in which individuals are excluded in accordance with decisions made outside their own control, as an employee of a certain age, who is dispensed and can’t get a new job because of his age, etc.. Another hypothesis is people that  are "self-excluded", if I may say this in this way,   the central aspects of society, for example : an individual decides to give up studying, abstains from voting, etc..
So, when we are studying this subject of social exclusion we should be alert to the relationship between human action and responsibility and, on the other hand, the role of social forces in the construction of situations in which people find themselves.

Finally, I decided to choose to understand what  is then the relationship between social exclusion and homelessness, and so once again according to Giddens, the homeless are people who haven’t, for several reasons, some type of home or a permanent shelter. The lack of a permanent place of residence is one of the most extreme forms of social exclusion. People without a permanent residence may be excluded from many daily activities, going to work, getting  letters by mail, going to the bank, etc.. All this excludes the person  of everyday life in all societies and even of the resident population.
What leads people to  to a  situation of exclusion and in more extreme cases of homelessness , are several factors as we have already reflected. However, what seems most relevant to study is the way of those people who want , being inserted  again into society and return  to be"included" as citizens of a society and as  active and socially integrated people.

There is still no consensus on how to help these people getting out of the streets to a permanent accommodation and to have a more stable life. However, and although this is not the final decision,the majority of the  sociologists who have studied the problem agree that the supply of housing in conditions, is an important aspect to end homelessness.
Finally, I finish quoting  Christopher Jenks from his book” The Homeless” (1994) and cited in Giddens(2001): "Regardless of the reasons people live on the street, giving them a place to live that offers a minimum of privacy and stability is usually the most important thing you can do to improve their lives. Without stable housing, nothing more will result . "

Of course, this issue is not consensual and that this is just an opinion that even though it is more or less consensual, it is still the target of criticism. It can also be particularly important to contribute to  improve the lives of these people, to offer more helps   either to the psychological level or the social level and even of training always bearing in mind   the improvement of self-esteem of these people  and bet that they can do more and be more and even better. All this  seems unrealistic now, however, with proper helps and a  bet on people  may perhaps become   quite profitable and better to everyone.

So this week I have detained myself  essentially in the creation of the conceptual and theoretical foundations for this intervention project ,in a  still very early stage I thought I should start framing the first ideas theoretically, but it does not mean they can not be

 Changed  because they are not tight, however I thought it would be a good starting point to begin by reading what Giddens says about this topic.
To conclude, I would like  to explain what  I  thought I could do and study  and help to improve the project in question, and so I built  the following scheme:

Right now, and at  a first glance, this is  the idea of project I have, it is not concrete yet and if anyone wants to help or give some opinions that may be useful,  they are accepted .

 

Projecto de intervenção - Parte I

                   Integrado na cadeira de Globalização, Justiça Social e Direitos Humanos,  e visto enquanto método de avaliação, mas sobretudo como método de aprendizagem, foi-nos proposto realizar um projeto de intervenção que fosse útil para a associação em causa, no meu caso a associação CAIS.

                De acordo com informação presente no site da associação, a mesma tem como missão contribuir para o melhoramento global das condições de vida de pessoas sem casa/lar, social e economicamente vulneráveis, em situação de privação, exclusão e risco. Fundada em 1994 o primeiro e grande projeto da CAIS foi a criação e venda de uma revista com o nome da associação, vendida nas ruas por pessoas sem-abrigo ou em situações de privação ou exclusão. Em 2003, a CAIS criou o seu centro expandindo assim a sua actuação.

                Temas como a pobreza, exclusão e inclusão social e Justiça social, foram desde sempre áreas de estudo que particularmente me interessaram e interessam.

                Assim, esta semana centrei-me na temática da exclusão. Para isso, li uma parte do livro bastante conhecido de Giddens (2001), Sociologia publicado pela Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Para iniciar esta temática pareceu-me o livro mais adequado, assim e de acordo com Giddens, tentei encontrar:

- uma definição de exclusão social,

- relacionar esta temática com a pobreza,

- tentar compreender o porque da exclusão social e

- relacionar exclusão social com as pessoas sem-abrigo (visto ser essencialmente sobre essas que o meu projeto incidirá).

                Começando pelo primeiro ponto, Exclusão social, segundo Giddens,  primeiramente este tema foi introduzido pelos sociólogos para se referirem a novas fontes de desigualdade. Assim, entende-se por exclusão as formas pelas quais os indivíduos podem ser afastados do pleno envolvimento na sociedade.

                A questão de exclusão social é também uma questão diferente da de pobreza em si. A exclusão digamos que foca a sua atenção num conjunto mais amplos e fatores que impedem que os indivíduos ou grupos tenham as mesmas oportunidades que a população tem.

                A exclusão pode ser vista em vários níveis, ao nível económico, ao nível politico, ou ao nível social.

                Contudo, o conceito de exclusão levanta ainda uma questão, a da ação. Pois, exclusão implica sempre que alguém ou alguma coisa esteja a ser afastada de outra.

                Relativamente ao porque da exclusão social e segundo Giddens, existem duas hipóteses de resposta. A primeira é que, existem realmente instâncias em que os individuos são excluídos de acordo com decisões tomadas fora do seu próprio controlo, como um empregado de certa idade, dispensado a quem podem recusar dar de novo emprego devido à sua idade, etc. Outra hipótese é as pessoas que se "auto-excluem", se é que posso dize-lo assim, de aspectos centrais da sociedade, por exemplo: um individuo optar por desistir dos estudos, abster-se de votar, etc.

                Assim, ao estudarmos este tema da exclusão social devemos ter em atenção a relação entre acção e responsabilidade humana e, por outro lado, no papel das forças sociais na construção das situações em que as pessoas se encontram.

                Para terminar, decidi optar por entender qual é então a relação entre exclusão social e os sem-abrigo, assim e mais uma vez de acordo com Giddens, os sem-abrigo são pessoas que não tem, por variadissimas razões, algum tipo de casa ou abrigo permanente. A falta de lugar de residência permanente é uma das formas mais extremas de exclusão social. As pessoas sem residência permanente podem ser afastadas de muitas actividades diárias, ir para o trabalho, receber cartas pelo correio, ir ao banco, etc. Tudo isto exclui a pessoa da vida quotidiana natural em todas as sociedades e até da própria população aí residente.

                Aquilo que leva as pessoas a verem-se numa situação de exclusão e em casos mais extremos, de sem-abrigo, são vários factores como aliás já reflectimos. Contudo, o que me parece mais relevante estudar é a maneira de, os que querem claro, se inserirem de novo na sociedade e se voltarem a "incluir" como cidadãos de uma sociedade e enquanto pessoas activas e socialmente integradas.

                Não existe ainda um consenso sobre como ajudar estas pessoas a sairem das ruas para um alojamento permanente e a ter uma vida mais estável. Contudo, e embora esta não seja a decisão final, a maioria dos sociólogos que estudou o problema concorda que o fornecimento de habitações em condições é um aspecto importante para acabar com os sem-abrigo.

                Para terminar, concluo com uma citação de Christopher Jenks presente no seu livro The Homeless (1994) e citada em Giddens (2001):

" independentemente das razões pelas quais as pessoas vivem na rua, dar-lhes um lugar para morar que ofereça um mínimo de privacidade e estabilidade é geralmente a coisa mais importante que se pode fazer para melhorar as suas vidas. Sem habitações estáveis, nada mais resultará."

                É claro, que esta temática não é consensual e que esta é apenas uma opinião que mesmo sendo, mais ou menos consensual, ainda é alvo de criticas. Pode ser também particularmente importante para contribuir para a melhoria de vida destas pessoas, oferecer mais ajudas, quer ao nivel social quer ao nivel psicologico e ate de formação tendo sempre em vista a melhoria da auto-estima destas pessoas e apostar que elas também podem fazer e ser mais e melhor. Tudo isto neste momento parece irreal contudo, com as ajudas certas e uma aposta nas pessoas poderá quem sabe, vir a tornar-se bastante rentável e melhor para todos.

                Assim, esta semana detive-me essencialmente em criar as bases teóricas e conceptuais para este projecto de intervenção, ainda muito no começo achei que deveria começar a enquadrar teoricamente as primeiras ideias, não significa que não se alterem poi não são estanques, contudo achei que seria um bom ponto de partida começar por ler o que di Giddens sobre este tema.

                Para terminar, gostaria agora de explicar aquilo que pensei fazer e aquilo que gostaria de estudar e ajudar a melhorar com o projecto em causa, para isso construi o seguinte esquema:

Neste momento, e em primeira análise, é esta a ideia de projecto que tenho, ainda não está concreta contudo se alguém quiser ajudar ou dar opiniões que possam ser úteis aceitam-se opiniões.

          Margarida Piçarra Navalhinhas

Violence - initial questions

                       During this week I had the opportunity to read and analyze a text entitled "Violence and its sociological critique."

                Inserted in the theme of Globalization, Social Justice and Human Rights, the text is essentially looking at violence in a scientific manner.

                According to the author, violence exists, it is present in societies and should be studied so that it does not become excessive or inappropriate. We should study it as a whole  , without underestimating any part of it and this in itself reminds us of Durkheim and the study of social facts because it advocated the study of social phenomena as a whole. Violence as social fact , that it is, should thus be understood as a whole, because ignoring parts of it , we will never come to an objective  study  adequated to reality.

                Violence can then be regarded as an object of study and therefore can be classified and typified in many ways, so we have: political violence, economic, social or even cultural. The author moves in the text with empirical examples of all these kind of violence, but I will go straight to the main point that is,all types of violence are connected, related and can influence one another or even originate a new one, a new type. 

                Continuing the analysis of the text, after these introductory remarks about violence as an object of study, the author proceeds to analyze this issue sociologically.

                It starts by addressing the vision of Giddens (1985) on violence related to sociology, referring and summarizing in essence a study that itself argues that sociology has a problem of lack of adherence to social realities, which leads to replace traditional social dimensions used by sociologists (political, economic, social and cultural) to others as capitalism, industrialism, social control and militarization, however, these had no  followers, and here the author of the text proposes a name for these new categories that is, contributing to the modernization process. These contributes have associated manifested social contradictions such as labor movements and workers, peace movements and anti-war movements, environmentalists, etc..

                Studying violence through the prism of Giddens puts a question ; studying violence, or  violence processes, as something separated from everything that is, not studying violence as a whole inserted in a and in a context but apart from that, or studying violence as something inserted in a context, in a society, produced and reproduced in the same and constructor of the modern society. The latter will thus have to take into account a reorganization between various disciplines (criminology, sociology, engineering work, ...) to study violence.

                The author concludes that Giddens's view on violence is dysfunctional and demonstrates this by declaring its most obvious malfunction, the exclusion of the female world, one of the first and most important social differentiations. Giddens in his conception of violence does not understand that the evolution of society has been given, considerating the evolution of simpler societies and, by this logic the issues of women's empowerment and gender studies, among other issues that Giddens does not study, would be unsolved and  that in his theory he neglects ,which leaves several questions open, to be solved. .

                The text in question ends with an exhibition about violence in sociology by pointing out that there are parts or fractions of violence that are neglected by sociology (Giddens this view), such as violence against women, children, the elderly, and other marginalized groups of people.

                As a way of conclusion, the author develops a new concept called "states of mind" to make us see that violence can be understood as a soul, as a state of mind that incorporates suddenly, for whatever reason, a man or woman and / makes the act a certain way. According to this definition of violence, to avoid it one just needs to have self-control that can be able to resist  the entrance of this spirit.

                The classification of violence must also take into account the social values ​​of the society where it occurs so that you can understand the violence integrated into the dynamics and social processes.

                Violence can also be understood as a set of procedures particularly social and coercive energy, which if used properly may be used for useful work. Viewed this way, violence will not be a harmful thing but a constant risk of misuse of social activities and the associated energy, controlled by habitus, institutions, education, etc..

                Thus, in fair measure, violence can be seen as a good thing if it is properly channeled and dispensed in the same energies serve to provide play and the common good in society and their populations and with this, the company evolve and become more just and humane for all citizens.

                We can conclude with this text that violence can and should be understood as an object of study that can and need to be studied because violence  is present in societies and is a social fact. This should be studied as a whole, taking into account their various dimensions or classifying.

                The violence is intertwined with sociology and can only be studied in view of its positive and negative aspects and all its dimensions. This way you can devise a scheme which could be useful for future studies in this area:

Violence - sociology - social services - political (state)

                However, the important thing is not to finish with all opposing forces and the struggles for better conditions or to reach consensus (which can lead to violence, without it being inappropriate or harm someone) but to find a balance so that cohesion and social life develops and evolves by meeting the common good for society, even if all this seems utopic now, hopefully that's what  we should  work to.

Margarida Piçarra Navalhinhas