Though they are used sometimes interchangeably, the proximate relationship between 'home' and 'domesticity' is, at the same time, obvious and problematic. These difficulties have to do with the narrowing of both terms with a sense of security, predictability and hence, fixity, a consequence of the incessant repetition of spaces and routines connected with the act of dwelling. Yet, how are these terms manifested discursively and materially in architecture?

​

Home is the locus of domesticity. Home is where the ideologies (concepts), practices (rituals/habits) and material (objects) manifestations of domesticity are realised. In fact, home is an intensely political site. Contrary to common perception, home is not a fixed and stable location. It is shaped by inclusions, exclusions and contestations, that is to say, it is formed by specific biases towards peoples, objects, and practices.