It's the same thing as replacing "homeless" with "experiencing homelessness". It's not saying anything different, but communication efficacy isn't the point.
For me though, I simply see being offbeat phrasing as being stigmatizing in practice, it ends up drawing more attention to whatever was being described.
I’ve got a friend who was recently homeless. Thinking of him as a “homeless person” isn’t really so helpful.
That said, I think developing a thick skin should be a curricular objective for all people.
I don't think either is any more an identity than the other.
And I'd rather people engage with the problem, rather than virtue signaling by using the 'correct' terminology, whatever that is this week.
I'm sure weve all had an issue with a company, and in their communications, theyve been polite and used the 'right' words, but in the end you know they are basically fobbing you off, and refusing to sort the problem. the issue isn't the words, the issue is the attitude.
for me the issues would come in around how they perceive me. you could say that language used is indicative of that, but I disagree, polite words are often used to be very impolite. It takes very little time to assess someones perception, so I really don't see the utility in making people use 'correct' words.