‘Unhoused’: Sanitising Homelessness via Terminology

I was recently asked by a good friend of mine how I felt about the term ‘unhoused’. She asked me extremely respectfully, and it felt like she was honouring my experiences in doing so. It is something I wish people who are perpetuating this terminology change would do. ‘Unhoused’, has been on my radar, and something I must admit, I do not agree with. Since the question has been asked of me, it feels like this terminology change is becoming more real and I need to express my feelings on it. This opinion is coming from someone whom this term would refer to, I have experienced homelessness, and continue to live with it’s affects, both physically and mentally. I urge you, if you’ve used this term, to understand that terminology that is assigned to people without their consent is historically one that doesn’t end positively.

The term ‘unhoused’ has been gaining popularity over recent years to reference those that have experienced, or are experiencing homelessness. The term originated almost simultaneously through Canada and the United Kingdom, with it being seeded within the social welfare lexicon around 2017-2019.

Since then its use has been sporadic, but rapidly increasing, mainly amongst those that wish to redefine homelessness to suite a more palliative narrative. One which removes the problematic past and derogatory usage of homelessness, a sanitised version of the true term to which I refer to my experiences as.

The irony of those wishing to sanitise the terminology that refers to society’s dirty little secret aside, ‘unhoused’, is only more palatable to those that wish to use it, those that have never experienced homelessness. Those of us that have experienced homelessness, that work in the sector, are usually much more focused on educating and advocating the more important issues around homelessness, trauma, poverty, domestic abuse and violence, and how housing is used as a motivator to perpetuate the labour markets.

Semantics, with regards to homelessness, are the realm of those with too much time on their hands that wish to sanitise the past and the present, while disenfranchising those which the term refers.

The issues that surround homelessness are extremely deep, vast and deadly. The time and effort placed on this pathetic debate around terminology, to put it simply, costs lives. It deviates from the truth, and distracts from core issues. Let me be blunt, the terminology change isn’t being pushed by those that have experienced or continue to experience homelessness.

At its heart, ‘unhoused’ is an oversimplification of homelessness, it sees the problem in its most elementary and basic form, which is based in the pathetic and erroneous belief that to solve homelessness all we need to do is provide housing. Imagine if we approached racism the same way, neglecting the underlying issues, and devolving it into a more palatable simplified term. As an example, replace the term racism with “pigment intolerance”, because the history of racism is too traumatic, and think about all the injustices and atrocities it would attempt to erase.

This oversimplification is a problem I face constantly when I educate people about homelessness, its one I expect from the general public, but not one from those that “work in the sector”.  It neglects the myriad of issues which those of us that have experienced, or continue to experience homelessness, have faced. It also flies in the face of the memory of those that have lost their lives to the conditions that homelessness forced them into.

One of the most fundamental and underlying facts about humanity, and the human experience, is we’re all individuals. We have different needs, wants and motivators in life, what one may desire may not be the desire of the other, and what one person needs may not suit another. This is a lesson that healthcare, and education, have taken on board; the best outcomes occur when based on individual needs.

This is where ‘unhoused’ as a term has its first major failure. It’s the assumption that everyone needs the same thing, and to solve the problem is to house the unhoused. You might then argue that it’s being more inclusive, because it’s assuming that people can find “home”, or a place of belonging, in other places besides a house.

Although, I agree with this sentiment (I speak at length about my affinity for dog beaches while I slept rough), it is devoid of any understanding of how trauma impacts those decisions. Those of us that experience homelessness have little to no choice in our circumstances, and hence finding alternative solutions to home, are based in conditions that are absent of security and agency. People may find “home” in places besides a house, that is not by choice and has been at the hands of physical, domestic, mental, economic, political, environmental and/or medical trauma.

‘Unhoused’, the more I hear it, sounds like propaganda. A simple slogan that’s devoid of any real understanding. A statement to get people to nod their head and think “that sounds reasonable”. In fact, ‘unhoused’ is even more destructive than the stereotypes that are conjured by using the term homelessness. It’s an attempt to cheapen the experiences of homelessness, it sanitises homelessness to the extent that all other issues, besides housing, are able to be ignored. It truly is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a horrifying thought if it ever becomes a reality. Homelessness is a symptom of much larger issues in society, trying to sanitise it obscures the causes. We all know what happens if we treat the symptoms of a cancer, instead of attacking the cancer head on. Sanitising homelessness with ‘unhoused’ does nothing to clean up the drivers of homelessness.

Let me put it another way, and more direct. Your wish to sanitise the language you use towards us is devoid of any understanding about the things we experience, it is again an example of talking about us, not to us. Let me make this perfectly clear, homelessness, as a term, its history and derogatory usage, is not one of our making. It’s one that rests upon the feet of those of you that have never experienced homelessness. It’s the burden of your deepest fears of the system in which you live, work and play. Homelessness is the motivator that keeps you in employment. We are the alternate of that motivator, we are the deviants, and will continue to be the deviants as long as the system we currently have is perpetuated. We’re the demonic image that is conjured within your mind of every rent increase, interest rate rise, redundancy and firing. We’re the spectre of the cost of living crisis, we are the reality of your crumbling system, and now, when you’re at the cusp of experiencing it, you concern yourself with the terminology.

Let’s be real, even though you’re pushing this terminology change to rid the world of the horrible stereotypes that are conjured when you’re forced to utter the word “homeless”, myself and the rest of the people that have experienced homelessness are still being demonised in your own mind at the very thought of the change in your economic conditions. A horrifying hypocrisy, but one that might answer the question, why the change now, more loudly than anything else.

The systems of greed, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, abuse, violence, racism, and xenophobia need to fall, at the very least, before we can begin to see an end to homelessness. ‘Unhoused’, fixes nothing but your guilt with a feeble band aid for your conscience as you edge closer and closer to joining us.  

Until you have witnessed the true pain of homelessness firsthand, the complete and utter disdain towards your existence from government, the economy, and wider society; the trauma, the scars, the suffering, and the death, can you truly understand how ignorant and repugnant ‘unhoused’ truly is. And, as long as these systems persist, you might get that opportunity to experience homelessness sooner, rather than never. Maybe then you’ll wish you spent your time differently than pursuing ‘unhoused’.