Beautifully put. I've noticed a lot of the barometer (if you will) for gauging peoples "feelings" of safety is if you're personally scared and/or uncomfortable with just the existence of homeless people. I live DTLA - 4 blocks off skid row - and I've never felt unsafe. Uncomfortable? Sure sometimes. Disheartened by the state of one of the richest cities in the world? Absolutely. But unsafe? never.

But if you equate homeless people near me = unsafe, then that's a different discussion.

Unsafe was 80's-90's Compton crack gang wars with machine gun drive-bys.

Unsafe is the current Baltimore or south side of Chicago.

The Tenderloin isn't anything remotely like that. Sure there are dealers on the street and people hawking stolen goods at the bus stops, but there doesn't seem to be violent unsafety.

One of the reasons it feels unsafe to people is the trash scattered across the streets and sidewalks, the rundown condition of those same streets and sidewalks, and just generally rundown feel of many buildings. It's a look that reminds people of neglected neighborhoods of the city they moved here from.

So you only feel safe because you have the means / are affluent enough to avoid crime ridden areas?

That‘s not entirely fair.

Sorry if it came across that way, wasn't my intent.

I live in the city, and travel through all parts -- including the less desirable parts. I ride down Market every day. I go to the central library at Civic Center. I do bike loops through Candlestick. I frequent bars in the Tenderloin.

So no, it's not just because I can avoid "crime-ridden areas". It's because I don't find those areas fundamentally unsafe.

It seems to me like a lot of the people claiming to feel unsafe are equally affluent.

Thanks for calling out privilege, but I think we should assume good faith. I don't think they were trying to say that everything is good, they're just saying the narrative isn't as simple as the media is making it look.

Depends on what media you're reading I suppose. Quite a lot of it paints SF is a city of haves and have-nots which fits nicely into the above poster's experience.

I've lived in a lot of places with, in many states, in many countries, all with different population densities and economic diversity... and that statement holds true for all of them.

One of these days the sheer weight and remaining shelter of class consciousness will break through the cognitive dissonance. One of these days.

Affluence is not always privilege. It can be hard earned.

> Affluence is not always privilege. It can be hard earned.

But once you're affluent, you're almost by definition privileged, surely?

My Google results defined it as follows:

“ A privilege is a certain entitlement to immunity granted by the state or another authority to a restricted group, either by birth or on a conditional basis”