臺灣無家者的污名：針對其日常生活實踐戰術的分析

The stigma of being homeless in Taiwan: An analysis of the tactics of their everyday life practice

遊民又雅稱無家者、街友，指的是居無定所、棲息街頭的人。過去研究發現，對於突破無家者的污名化現象，教育的效果有限，要扭轉社會大眾的偏見需要長期的努力，去改變潛在的社會價值觀。成功的日常生活實踐及戰術操作，不僅可以消除無家者的污名現象，同時也與社會產生互動。雖然國內已有若干探討弱勢者去污名化手法及方式的研究，然而並無針對無家者此一族群進行全面且長期的參與觀察研究。
本文運用污名及日常生活理論，採取質化研究取徑，以參與觀察法、文獻分析法、敘說分析法三大研究方法進行資料的蒐集與分析。研究發現，臺灣無家者日常生活實踐及戰術操作方式可分為空間碎片的爭取與占用、結合異己、下有對策、符號挪用、二度創作、敘事框架的轉化等六大戰術。本研究以主體能動性的展現、個體轉變的行為傾向、空間位置等三大效應，分析臺灣無家者的日常實踐及其戰術操作。這六大戰術除了運用多元的空間位置外，亦展示一定的主體能動性，以及無家者或多或少正向的轉變行為。

The homeless refers to people who live on the streets without a fixed place. Studies have found that education has a limited effect on breaking through the stigma of being homeless. To reverse public prejudice requires long-term efforts to change the underlying social values. Successful everyday practices and tactics not only remove the stigma of homelessness, but also allow homeless people to interact with society. Although there have been several studies in Taiwan on de-stigmatization techniques and methods of disadvantaged people, there is no comprehensive and long-term participant observation study on the homeless.
This paper is mainly divided into the following two research purposes: 1) Discuss the tactical operation methods of homeless people in Taiwan in daily life practice. 2) Analyze the effects of tactical operations in daily life practices of homeless people in Taiwan.
This paper uses the theory of stigma and everyday life, adopts the method of qualitative research, and collects and analyzes the data by three methodologies: participatory observation, literature analysis and narrative analysis. This study finds that the everyday life practice and tactical operation of the homeless in Taiwan can be divided into six tactics: strive for space fragmentation, combination of dissidents, countermeasures, symbol appropriation, secondary creation, and transformation of the narrative frame.
This study analyzes the everyday life practice and tactical operations of the homeless in Taiwan from three aspects: display of subject initiative, behavioral tendency of individual transformation, and spatial location. The tactics summarized above from the theory of daily life are also similar with and correspond to several ways in which those stigmatized respond to situations, as proposed by Goffman (1963, p. 9-12). This is a means of“directly correcting the objective basis of what he regards as a defect”. Some“secondary creation”tactics allow the homeless to benefit through stigma. The“transformation of the narrative frame”tactic allows the homeless to“reversely evaluate ordinary people who are different from themselves, and there are also some limitations.”The“combination of dissidents”tactic can help the homeless“deliberately engage in certain activities that others find difficult for him to engage in.”
In addition to using multiple spatial locations, these six tactics also show a certain degree of subjectivity and positive transformation behavior of the homeless. This study observes the relationship among“display of subject initiative”,“behavioral tendency of individual transformation”, and“spatial location”. Those weak“display of subject initiative”tactics such as“combination of dissidents”,“secondary creation”, and“transformation of the narrative frame”adopt more dotted styles in the“spatial location”, which is carried out in a guerrilla manner. However, because of its strong implement, the effect of“behavioral tendency of individual transformation”is excellent, which forms better mainstream shifts such as employment opportunities and opportunities as an influence.
While de Certeau’s daily life theory focuses on the operational logic or process of use, this study targets more on the“spatial location”obtained by Taiwanese homeless people using daily life practice tactics. de Certeau’s“spatial location”refers not only to physical space, but also to Goffman’s concept of“bounded area”. Taiwanese homeless people (theatrical troupe) present a“socialized”performance and based on this shape and modify it to adapt to social understanding and expectations and carry out“image management.”
This study finds that de Certeau’s view (1984) - in which using tactics constantly involves seeking opportunities for resistance on the fringes, and that these gains cannot be maintained in specific locations - is not entirely correct. Victories achieved by the stigmatized such as the homeless by the tactics of daily life (bottom-up) may also likely influence capitalist producers to develop another strategy (top-down), which may also become a“stability space”(formal, official, regulatory, surface). Thus, ordinary users without capital do not necessarily need to resist all the time.
The purpose of this study is to get closer to homeless people and find meaning for their daily life tactics, which is its first research contribution. In the past the theories of daily life were mostly based on written discourses, and there was no structural analysis framework. This study aims to use the three effects of“display of subject initiative”,“behavior tendency of individual transformation”, and“spatial location”as the main body of analysis to discuss their interaction, which is its second research contribution. This study further combines de Certeau’s daily life theory and Goffman’s stigma theory for analysis of the topic. It is known that“display of subject initiative”may also be Goffman’s front stage performance and re-confirms that“it is not that power is unimportant or has no influence, but it is difficult to perform without daily life”and other concepts of individual daily self-performance (Goffman, 2017). Through the description of the common presence and encounters of homeless people in Taiwan, this study also complements the lack of understanding in the original Goffman study on“how the mechanism he described enters and internalizes humans”. This is the third research contribution of this study.
We put forward the following three points of review and suggestion. First, this paper took six years to cover participation observations. In the recent two years, due to COVID-19, many observation fields could only be conducted online, and it was a pity that various details could not be fully observed. This is one shortcoming of this study.
Second, as homeless counseling agencies do not recommend that researchers contact homeless people by themselves, most homeless people contacted in this article are“former homeless”or“successful homeless people”who have escaped from homeless life. While these“successful homeless”may be familiar with the daily life practices and tactics of homelessness, their perspectives may differ from other homeless people. In addition, most homeless people in this study participated in some activities of organizations. Does doing so maintain the existing hegemonic narrative framework? This is also an issue we find worthy to evaluate. It is suggested that future researchers can further think about better fieldwork methods based on this point.
Third, the main research field of this paper is biased toward northern Taiwan. The daily life practice and tactical operations of the homeless in northern Taiwan may be more diverse and exciting. Therefore, it is suggested that future researchers focusing on homeless topics may conduct research on central or southern Taiwan and thus potentially draw more complete research conclusions.