Many proponents as well as advocates of gentrification like to use in many regard as code words to back up their claim that gentrification brings “revitalization” “urban renewal” and more importantly “enhances” the community. However, these are what many who are critical of gentrification deem to be “ code words”, because they appear to be ones that exude positivity when they are in fact not expressing the full story of the argument, because underneath this creeping positivity. There still exists this form of stereotyping that minorities, or those from lower socioeconomic means cannot create something that is unique or successful on their own.
Furthermore, what existed in their communities before gentrification was one that brought little to no value to society. Never mind the fact, that these very same individuals have fostered many communities that were now being destroyed and altered because of the
…show more content…
For example in the piece, many assumed stereotypically that the residents of Hartford’s Clay/Arsenal neighborhood chose to eat unhealthy without making any attempt to better themselves or their families lifestyle and eating habit. However, these stereotypical assumptions were made without taking into consideration that many did not have access to the organic fruits and vegetables, and other healthier options that were available to their critics. Furthermore, if given the same opportunities as those from a higher income level, the overwhelmingly majority responded positively to the healthier alternative of organic fruits and vegetables. Therefore, in relation to Winne’s piece, some advocates of gentrification have the tendency to stereotype these oppress classes in various ways, with the chief depiction being that minority residents never took care of these neighborhoods or cities to begin with, so any form of “urban renewal” must be great thing that all benefit from. This to me is an insulting form of thinking, because it brings to mind this “White