I’m comparing similar spaces in Leslie Robertson’s article and in  Evelyn Peters’ article. In Robertson’s article, she examines the multiple meaning of ‘home’ for the women she interviews. Space in this regard is the home that these women share, and also the spaces in which they experience exclusion and alienation. All of the women in Robertson’s study were from the DTES, a space stigmatized and usually perceived negatively as a space where one ends up when many things go wrong in one’s life. Many of the women were Aboriginal and described experiencing exclusion from spaces due to their race, and due to stereotypes. The women in her study stated that the DTES was their chosen home, as opposed to a space they were forced into. Another concept she discussed was “homelessness at home”, where many women growing up were abused and mistreated at their homes, meaning that the took on “forced journeys” (running away) to get out of difficult situations and to move on to a space which feels like a home to them. The DTES is the space they constructed as a home with people who share their experiences and hardships.

In Evelyn Peters’ article, she discusses the exclusion of Indigenous people in the definition of the city.  She talks about how colonialism lead to this exclusion by “[defining] First Nations cultures as incompatible with urban life” (665). Spaces are excluding and homogenous, with those who are different being excluded as their differences are considered “deviant” and this leads to a segregation in space. She also talks about the intersection of race and gender in the creation of these exclusionary spaces in the city.  She also discusses the boundaries put on the minority cultures, which allow people to keep their ethnic values as long as they don’t overstep boundaries of space and interfere with the dominant culture. This reminds me of spaces such as Chinatown, where the cultural expression is kept within boundaries.