Deliberately conflating single mothers who can't pay their rent with the other group of people that the vast majority of the population refer to when they say "homeless".
This other group is composed of non functional drug addicts who refuse to stay at shelters because they require sobriety as a prerequisite to stay.
Whenever you try to propose solutions to deal with the second group you are immediately attacked as being insensitive to the first group.
This overloading that you describe is very often deliberately weaponized. It's a form of linguistic fashion and these fools are the fashion police.
Judging by the absurdly colorful hairstyles that are prevalent in this subculture, as well as the frequently confused looking clothing, it's fair to say that it is fashion. And like fashion it frequently is appealing to highly narcissistic people.
They really are the new Jacobins. I'm waiting for them to start renaming days of the week.
Yes, that's a great example! And when trying to help those two different subsets of homeless people, it's important to clarify which subset you're talking about, because those two populations have very different needs. A single mother who needs some help getting back on her feet isn't going to want to raise her kids in a housing complex where other residents are using meth. And an addict often needs forced structure to overcome their addiction.
The fashion description is an interesting one, but I've also seen the movement described as a religion (see John McWhorter). Thus, if you criticize one of their tenets, you're revealed to be a heathen.
Well said.
Other example:
"Homeless":
Deliberately conflating single mothers who can't pay their rent with the other group of people that the vast majority of the population refer to when they say "homeless".
This other group is composed of non functional drug addicts who refuse to stay at shelters because they require sobriety as a prerequisite to stay.
Whenever you try to propose solutions to deal with the second group you are immediately attacked as being insensitive to the first group.
This overloading that you describe is very often deliberately weaponized. It's a form of linguistic fashion and these fools are the fashion police.
Judging by the absurdly colorful hairstyles that are prevalent in this subculture, as well as the frequently confused looking clothing, it's fair to say that it is fashion. And like fashion it frequently is appealing to highly narcissistic people.
They really are the new Jacobins. I'm waiting for them to start renaming days of the week.
Yes, that's a great example! And when trying to help those two different subsets of homeless people, it's important to clarify which subset you're talking about, because those two populations have very different needs. A single mother who needs some help getting back on her feet isn't going to want to raise her kids in a housing complex where other residents are using meth. And an addict often needs forced structure to overcome their addiction.
The fashion description is an interesting one, but I've also seen the movement described as a religion (see John McWhorter). Thus, if you criticize one of their tenets, you're revealed to be a heathen.
Religion is a far better metaphor than fashion. Good call.