It sounds as if you are looking for a deeply philosophical answer here, which, unfortunately, I cannot provide. I can provide a psychological and personal perspective, however.
Psychologists tend to see reality differently, depending on specialty. For example, clinical psychologists will have a narrow perspective of reality in dealing with clients who frequently experience hallucinations and delusions as indicated by common symptoms and lack of empirical support. Cognitive psychologists might offer a more broad version of reality in that our perceptions define our reality. I am generalizing here, but the point is, "reality" can be defined many ways. When someone wants to impose their "reality" on other people, other people generally expect and demand evidence for that reality. People often abuse the broad definition of reality in an attempt to change people's behavior, beliefs, and actions.
If someone is trying to convince me that "God" is "real" (that is, a reality), I don't accept or reject that claim because I don't know what "God" is to that person. On the one hand, if a person defines "God" as their inner-voice that guides much of their behavior, then I would have to accept their version of God as real (although I would just call it intuition). On the other hand, if someone were to define"God" as a being who created the universe, I would reject the reality of that being based on the lack of evidence for such a claim. So in short, people can use "reality" as they wish, but my shared acceptance of their reality is provisional based on the claims they are making about their reality.
Hope that helps!
Bo Bennett, PhD
My Latest Book: https://www.uncomfortable-ideas.com
About Me: http://www.bobennett.com