Semantics and the homeless

The Watchers

When I was puzzled by Hoodline's use of "unhoused" instead of the familiar "homeless" in a  recent story, the editors referred me to a 2016 Hoodline piece about why they prefer "unhoused."

I read it but was not convinced. Still looks like a failed attempt to find a euphemism for an unpleasant reality, homelessness. "Unhoused" doesn't clarify that reality; it only adds a gratuitous semantic patina to Hoodline's stories that unwary readers like me will puzzle about. 

Is this the new PC term for the homeless in San Francisco? if that was the intention, the attempt has failed, since those of us who missed the 2016 story did not get the memo. I've posted on homelessness more than 200 times since 2005, and I had never heard the term "unhoused."

Reading Hoodline's justification below shows that the term was adopted at the encouragement of Skywatchers, a dance troupe that's apparently based in the Tenderloin. Those folks think the term "homeless" is somehow a disrespectful "label":

"The final piece was this hodgepodge of the warm, comfortable and inviting sensation and smells and people they associate with home, and juxtapose this with narratives of what their homes right now look like," said [Clara]Pinsky. "They have an opportunity to use whatever words or movement they want to describe their own identities and lives, rather than having labels or statistics put on them by outsiders." One of the many labels Skywatchers are keen on eliminating? ‘Homeless.’

Why an online news site should allow a dance troupe to determine the language used in its stories is an added puzzle.

Later: My latest exchange with Hoodline:

Hoodline: 

This isn't an attempt to make an unpleasant reality pleasant, but to reflect the preferences and opinions of those who are living on the streets. As the story explains, not having a house doesn't mean not having a home. Thanks for reading.

Me: How many "unhoused" people did you poll on the word change? I suspect it wasn't very many. Even if it was, the idea that the people you write about should dictate the terms of your coverage is a flawed editorial policy.

See also Aaron Bialick: "Changing our language will help keep us safer."