Thread by @grootled

It's coming up to Christmas (I know! I know!) & TV charity appeals are plastering the ads.
Which brings me to my seasonal rant.
If all you knew of homelessness was from TV you'd think only rough sleeping counted. You'd think rough sleeping accounted for most >
#Homelessness 1/n

>if not all homelessness. You'd think begging was the only way you could get money if homeless. You'd even think you're only "three pay cheques away" from #homelessness yourself.
And it's not true.
Rough sleeping *is* a horrific, degrading thing for anyone to go through 2/n

>but far more people are in temporary accommodation or staying with friends and relatives. There are people who are living in unsafe or overcrowded conditions because to them the alternatives are worse. Others have no legal tenancy or are in exploitative relationships to 3/n

keep some form of stability in their children's lives.
These people are also homeless.
But the fundraising teams know that the real complexity of #homelessness can't be conveyed in 30 seconds. That people are less likely to part with their money for an employability project 4/n

that looks to improve the life chances of ex-offenders, even though that might be the most helpful thing to prevent #homelessness . People want to feel good about giving to charity, so we get the same tropes wheeled out every year - help the hopeless and helpless; *they* 5/n

can't survive without you; only *we* can help.
It's a very Victorian, paternalistic view of charity -. but it parts people from their money, so...
One aspect of this approach that bugs me more than any other is that the charities *know* they are selling a lie. It doesn't 6/n

reflect the work they do...
And this creates a vicious circle when it comes to getting support to make real and lasting change for people vulnerable to homelessness: politicians are of and for the people (well, they're supposed to be...); they don't know everything, but they 7/n

use the resources available to get expert opinion in order to make decisions. Expert opinion is often in stark contrast to public perception. This creates a conflict - to decide to do some things (fund ex-offenders) may well be in contrast to what the electorate want 8/n

and so sometimes instead of what's needed, what's expedient takes place instead.
Policy is a compromise.
(Tea break...) 9/n

But it still galls me: to get the money to do the things needed #homelessness charities have to distort what they do. To get govt to change the law (generally) there has to be public appetite to do so. To get the public to demand change they need to be told the truth; n/10

to tell the truth about the work needed to end #homelessness -not just rough sleeping- risks losing donations etc, etc.
It's a conundrum created by charity fundraising cycles endlessly regurgitating tired tropes.
It's time to switch-up the message & be honest.
#EndHomelessness