The sight of armrests dividing a public bench is common in cities worldwide. Their stated purpose is often ergonomic, providing support for individuals when sitting down or standing up. However, a more contentious and widely recognized function is to prevent people—particularly those experiencing homelessness—from lying down and sleeping on the bench. From a purely functional perspective, yes, armrests are effective physical barriers that segment the seating space, making it impossible for an adult to stretch out fully. Proponents argue this ensures benches remain available for their primary purpose: sitting. They claim it maintains cleanliness, order, and accessibility for all residents.
This design choice falls under the umbrella of "hostile architecture" or "defensive design"—urban strategies that use elements to guide or restrict behavior in public spaces. Other examples include sloped window ledges, segmented seating, and anti-skateboarding bumps. While advocates see it as necessary maintenance, critics condemn it as an inhumane way to manage poverty by making homelessness less visible, rather than addressing its root causes. They argue that public space should be inclusive and that denying basic rest is an ethical failure. The debate forces us to question the core values of our city planning: Are we designing for comfort and community, or for control and exclusion? Ultimately, the armrest on a bench is a small symbol of a much larger conflict about who our public spaces are for and how we choose to care for the most vulnerable among us.