In our work helping children and youth who experience homelessness to access school, we often lapse into the "homeless child" and "homeless youth" lingo. I think many of us do it because in an instant we get a picture --not a bad picture, a sympathetic picture of these kids. But it is nevertheless true that it's not such a good way to go about things. Not everyone conjures up a sympathetic picture of "the homeless" as John and Michael eloquently argue. And language use really does matter. Research has shown that language colors perception and shapes understanding. I am old enough to remember the struggles of the feminist movements of the 60s and 70s when we insisted that the words "he" and "him" did not genuinely include women but, instead, reinforced subtly the idea that men were the movers and shakers and women were subordinate. We were right. So, too, deeming a student a "homeless child" is not the best we can do. If we're a little more careful such as using "children experiencing homelessness" we challenge the listener to recognize that homelessness is not an immutable characteristic of a particular (perhaps stereotyped) child but a societal condition. Societal conditions we can change and we must!
e martë, 10 korrik 2007
Abonohu te:
Posto komente (Atom)
3 komente:
I think the comparison you make between the language of homelessness and the feminist critique of the universal use of masculine pronouns and words like mankind or man to represent both genders is right on. It might be easy to dismiss these points as too academic or abstract, but they are not. Words matter because they are one of the primary ways in which we understand ourselves, others, and our world.
And sadly, I can't conceive of any way to subvert that semantic power when it comes to the issue of homelessness. For instance: Some circles of feminists have reclaimed the word bitch, (i.e. there is a bi-monthly magazine that examines culture from a feminist perspective by that name). When other circles of feminists and the mass media enter in the discussion as to the merits of this action then a somewhat useful dialogue and awareness ensues.
The same with once derogatory terms being re-appropriated in the African American and gay communities to name a couple of others. You may not agree with it but at least it brings a discussion of stereotypes and language to the forefront.
Yet as a label I am betting you will never see see the term homeless reclaimed and reappropriated by those that suffer from lack of permanent housing.
Part of the reason is certainly that such a large chunk of people experiencing homelessness in the U.S. and worldwide are mere children. They want to blend in, not stand out or apart and they are deserving of our protection from hurtful language.
Keep up the good work.
Posto një koment