re: your post about Portland's homeless youth as well as their animals: It makes sense to me that there would be a common fashion sense grown out of necessity, and because that's what all subcultures do. A subculture develops a particular aesthetic that communicates its common values. It's a binding agent and and an identifying agent. It's also my understanding that within that subculture, it's expected that you feed your dog before you feed yourself.
It doesn't make sense to me that they would develop a consistent style given their circumstances. The fact that they are a subculture at all doesn't make sense to me, I see that as an indication that they choose to live that way and are proud of it, which I'm not yet willing to accept is true.
And I can't figure out how them owning pets can be ethical at all. Even if they put the animal before themselves, both parties would be better off without eachother. I've seen some of them blatantly wave the poor animal in front of people as a means to gain sympathy, raising my suspicion that that's the whole purpose of them owning pets. But again I want to avoid being that cynical, and remain in confusion.