{"id":755,"date":"2020-09-23T15:06:38","date_gmt":"2020-09-23T14:06:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/socialhousingmatters.co.uk\/?p=755"},"modified":"2021-01-13T15:37:36","modified_gmt":"2021-01-13T15:37:36","slug":"language-matters","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/socialhousingmatters.co.uk\/index.php\/2020\/09\/23\/language-matters\/","title":{"rendered":"Language Matters: It ain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it…"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"
Language Matters: the way we speak about people can enforce negative stereotypes<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

One of the core lessons from my PhD<\/a> was that language matters<\/em>. In my research, where I looked into job searching practices and digital exclusion, I made a conscious effort to not talk about \u2018the unemployed\u2019. Not in my thesis, not in any presentations I did, any papers I wrote or any conversation I had about it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are two main drivers for me doing so and advocating for avoiding the use of phrases like \u2018the unemployed\u2019 across the board. The first is because they are anything but a homogenous group. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second is because unemployment isn\u2019t a personal characteristic, it doesn\u2019t define you as a person. It\u2019s an employment status, nothing more and nothing less. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

By allowing it to be more than that, it becomes a tool that those in a position of power can (ab)use to create division and stay in power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Other<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

You only need to look at how headlines and political rhetoric talk of \u2018the unemployed\u2019, \u2018the homeless\u2019, \u2018immigrants\u2019 and \u2018tenants\u2019 to see that they are seldomly used in a very positive context. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, it\u2019s always \u2018the immigrant problem\u2019, \u2018the unemployment problem\u2019, \u2018the homelessness problem\u2019, ‘(council) estate problems\u2019. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

By grouping people following in this way, we burden them with a negative reputation that places them in a subordinate position; one that is different from what \u2018good\u2019 looks like, i.e. \u2018hard working people\u2019, \u2018expats\u2019, \u2018home owners\u2019, etc.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This difference between \u2018good\u2019 and \u2018bad\u2019 is what we know as \u2018Othering\u2019. It\u2019s the \u2018other\u2019 that\u2019s bad\/different\/evil\/lazy\/vile, not you. It\u2019s what creates divisions that allow such language and narratives to become engrained in society, making sure that policies that focus punishing on \u2018the other\u2019 for their bad behaviour to keep being voted in. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

How? Because people want to be part of that good group, and the easiest way to feel like that is to find faults in \u2018the other\u2019, by distinguishing themselves from those who DO conform to the image of \u2018the unemployed skivers\u2019, \u2018the bad immigrants\u2019, \u2018that kind of\u00a0 tenant\u2019. \u201cIt\u2019s people like them<\/em> giving people like me<\/em> a bad name!\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Inclusive Language<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

If we want a fairer society, instead of othering each other, we need to come together. We can do so, I believe, by using more inclusive, neutral language that does not come with or encourage any value judgements and does not encourage any de-humanising, and instead focus on what people have in common rather than what differentiates them based on, for example, if we\u2019re talking about housing matters, tenure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, there is the big customer\/tenant\/resident debate, where each of these terms to talk about the people paying rent to live in a housing association or local authority home has both its supporters and its haters. As it is quite an interesting and big debate, I think it\u2019s best to talk about that another time. For now, I want to focus on inclusionary (or exclusionary) language and terminology used within the sector that I believe deserve some rethinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Business versus (Social) Purpose<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019d be lying if I\u2019d deny that housing associations are businesses as well and up to a point have to be run like that. They are. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

At their core they own dwellings that they rent out to people for, if all is well, truly affordable rents. They are responsible for a major part of the maintenance of these dwellings. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

They have to <\/em>have documents stating rules that are to be adhered to by both parties. What they don’t have to be is incomprehensible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rent has to be paid in exchange for living in the dwelling, as without the income the home cannot be maintained, and other services provided as part of the service level agreement cannot be funded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You might have noticed I have used the word \u2018dwelling<\/em>\u2019 multiple times now. It\u2019s not because it is a word I used often. It’s because I didn\u2019t want to choose a different word until I had made my point about language in the (social) housing sector.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because social housing associations and local authorities are run as businesses, it is very easy and tempting to use business language that doesn\u2019t differ from its for-profit cousins. Many annual and financial reports, internal communication and data use words like \u2018asset\u2019, \u2018property\u2019, \u2018unit\u2019 and \u2018stock\u2019 to talk about dwellings. They fit in neatly with the capitalist partners of many housing associations that allow them to operate, such as lenders, banks and builders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It ain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it…<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

We have to do what we need to do, action-wise, to keep our business afloat. In the case of social housing that is to make sure we can develop more homes and provide better services. But it’s the way we do it and the way we talk about and to people while doing this that sets the tone and influences or starts a relationship on a bad or good footing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using the same legal and technical words for all \u2018official\u2019 communication surrounding the business internally, such as units and property, makes that staff use these same words, which in turn can make tenants (my personal preference) feel like they\u2019re just another part of the business, a source of income, and sometimes even a nuisance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If it were up to me, and I know I\u2019m not the only one, we use the word \u2018home\u2019 when we talk about the dwellings rented by housing providers. Regardless of tenure or (extent of) home ownership (i.e. percentage still owned by the bank\u2026), the place where you live is (or should be) your home. Your home is where you (should) feel save, where you can be yourself, which is the basis for everything going on in your life. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To me, it\u2019s the most important thing in someone\u2019s life, which is why I chose to work in housing, as I want to be a part of making sure that everyone has got that place to call home. To have that safe space, that base from which everything else can flourish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Therefore, if social housing associations and local authorities are committed to making sure these people feel at home, we should talk about these places confirming and acknowledging they are peoples\u2019 homes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, it might be their business. But, actually, the business aim is to make sure as many people as possible have a place to call home. So, let\u2019s join them in calling it home.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, are you going to mention tech and data somewhere?<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

You might wonder what am I doing writing this in my capacity as a newbie tech\/data\/business consultant. And ask where is the data\/tech bit of this article? What has language got to do with tech and data? Well, here it is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019d like to argue that it has everything <\/em>to do with tech and data. Because tech and data have got everything to do with how we run the business part of social housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In my new job at DtL Creative<\/a><\/em> we have recently started to develop Dream HA<\/em>. This is a project that is part of the non-commercial ‘Blue Banana’ bit of the business where we focus, similar to SHM, on facilitating conversations, discussions and from those moving to actionable insights. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dream HA<\/em> is a fictional housing association where we are going to try to get as much right as possible. Perfect doesn\u2019t exist, but we can at least try. Try to mix and match the best of great practice that we can find to provide the best possible service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As we\u2019re starting it from scratch, and because anything goes because it\u2019s fictional, I want do do something bold. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I propose we design a completely new core system that, regardless of its functions or embeddedness within other existing systems, uses language that encourages everyone talking about tenants and their homes to use language that acknowledges just that: that we\u2019re talking about people<\/em> living in their homes<\/em>. In fact, everything should be related to or consist the word \u2018home\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the end\u2026<\/h3>\n\n\n\n