this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2024
146 points (87.6% liked)
textsfromsolarpunk
231 readers
1 users here now
Inspiring, infuriating, meaningful or amusing, solar and punky text posts. From Tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, greentext boards, or wherever.
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Am I the only one that thinks that calling them uNhOuSEd instead of homeless makes absolutely no fucking difference to the homeless person but serves only to make the person calling them uNhOuSEd feel a bit morally superior?
I don't think I've seen anyone explain why they decided to call them unhoused instead of the normal term homeless.
This is the explanation I got from a super liberal person. I don't know if I fully agree with it, or if it's even the correct origin of the term. Here it goes:
Sentences like "he is unhoused" instead of "he is homeless" are important to assign blame/responsibility to society/governments. Since "unhoused" is a verb, it sort of implies/specifies that not all homeless people are homeless because of their own actions but rather due to a society's/government's inability to protect its people from the realities of life (mental health/disability/escaping from abusive families/evicted by a shady landlord etc etc).
It was meant to change people's perception of homeless people and demand better from their governments. But words can have the power to ignite our imaginations - there's a reason why "gigantic" exists when "large" would be enough. And there's a reason why when most people think that a homeless person is homeless because of their own fault and deserve it.
I guess it makes sense why some would choose to use it, but I feel like it's just going to make people roll their eyes when they hear it. It's not like homeless was assigning blame to the homeless people or anything.