Unhoused or Homeless

Unhoused or Homeless:  Does the Language Matter?

Language is a powerful thing. It shapes how we see the world, how we frame issues, and sometimes, how we distance ourselves from uncomfortable realities. Lately, there’s been a shift in how we talk about people living on the streets, in tents, or in vehicles. Instead of calling them “homeless,” we now hear the term “unhoused.”

At first glance, it might seem like a small, even thoughtful change—maybe a way to soften the harshness of reality. But does it really reflect the lived experience of those affected? Or is it just another well-meaning euphemism, created by those who aren’t directly impacted?

The History of Sanitized Language

This isn’t the first time language has been used to reframe an issue. In the past, when developers and city officials wanted to take over populated areas, they didn’t just say, “We’re pushing people out.” Instead, they called it “slum clearance.” Later, we got terms like “urban renewal,” “gentrification,” and “revitalization.” These words made displacement sound like progress while ignoring the people whose lives were being uprooted.

Instead of addressing the root causes of poverty—like lack of affordable housing, wages that don’t keep up with costs, or insufficient social support—governments and developers focused on rebranding. They relocated people, cleaned up neighbourhoods, and then marketed them to those who could afford the new price tags. The problem wasn’t solved; it was just pushed somewhere else.

The Difference Between Being Unhoused and Homeless

Now, we see a similar linguistic shift with the term “unhoused.” But to me, “unhoused” feels vague. It doesn’t create a strong visual. Technically, most of us don’t live in houses—we live in apartments, flats, shelters, trailers, or even single rented rooms. Does that make us all “unhoused”? Of course not. Because having a house isn’t the same as having a home.

A home is more than four walls and a roof. It’s a space of comfort, safety, and belonging. You can live in the most luxurious residence and still not feel at home. Or you can have very little but create a space that feels like one.

That’s why “homeless” feels like the more accurate term. It speaks to the reality of someone who has nowhere to settle, nowhere they feel safe, nowhere they can truly call home. Someone forced to live on the street or in a tent when they’d rather be somewhere else isn’t just “unhoused.” They are homeless.

Why This Distinction Matters

Words influence action. When we soften language, we risk softening the urgency to address the problem. If we call it a “housing crisis” instead of a homelessness crisis, the focus shifts from people’s lived experiences to something more abstract—like real estate statistics and zoning laws.

The truth is, people don’t just need housing. They need homes. Safe, stable, and affordable places where they can build their lives without the fear of being pushed out for the next “revitalization” project.

So, while language evolves, we need to ask: Are we changing words to bring real awareness and change? Or are we just making things sound less uncomfortable for those who aren’t living it?