• kandoh@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Language has power. You’ll notice successful effort on the right to get pundits to refer to Oil as Energy. Oil has negative implications, energy has positive. Homeless has negative implications for the person, unhoused has negative implications for the government.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      In the US they mean different things, as homeless includes people living in other people’s homes. That can include people whose house just burnt down and are living with friends or family because they lost their permanent residence (home). Unhoused is about where they are staying.

      People on the street are homeless and unhoused.

      • leisesprecher@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        12 hours ago

        And you really think people use and understand these terms like that?

        You may be correct in the academic sense, but completely wrong in all other senses.

        • BassTurd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Are you suggesting that the incorrect terms should be used to cater to those of you that don’t know there is a difference? Even if you were unaware that there is actually a difference, was the intent and meaning of the headline lost in confusion, or did you understand exactly what they meant?

          • leisesprecher@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            12 hours ago

            The “correct” term is the one the target audience understands to mean what is happening.

            The “difference”, again, is academic. They are de facto used interchangeably. Did the author know the difference? No idea. Could anyone tell, which group the people in question belong to? Probably not.

            So what exactly are you trying to achieve here?

              • leisesprecher@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                12 hours ago

                That’s the thing: You can’t know that.

                We don’t know what was meant, we don’t know what happened.

                So the autistic insistence on nitpicky details adds zero clarity to anything. It’s inherently unknowable.

                • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  We know what the meant by the word they chose to use. They specifically said “unhoused”. Your insinuation is that the author doesn’t know what they’re talking about and may have used the wrong word instead of believing they know what they’re doing.

                  You’re the one being nitpicky on details by your original response when you were critical of the word choice. We’re educating you that there is in fact a difference and that the OG headline is accurate. That hurts your butt.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 hours ago

          He isn’t correct in an academic sense. They are synonyms. Unhoused is being used because homeless has negative connotation to it.