![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Labels are messy. My feeling is, a label should be an aid to communication, not a limit, and very few labels fit absolutely perfectly, because humans are complicated and messy. For example, I find women aesthetically pleasing on occasion and now and then am vaguely attracted to one. Not enough to sleep with one, mind. Hence, I pick the androphilic label. I've been berated for not choosing bi instead. I maintain that a bisexual label would be misleading as there is zero chance of me being interested enough in one for dating or sex. A lot of labels are about shorthanding something that's complicated. Orientation, gender, and desire are often a little more complicated than the label and sometimes a lot more complicated than the label. Sometimes, the longer explanation is TMI. Sometimes it's inappropriate for the situation. Sometimes there are issues of politics, reclaiming, safety, or triggers.
Y'all know I'm huge fan of communication and disclosure. I think it's simpler in the long run to disclose things to potential partners and to have ongoing discussion about all sorts of things that effect the relationship itself or bed room activities. These things can include all sorts of things from the obvious like kinks, orientation, and gender identity, but can also include things like current mental illness, goals, religion, politics, geographical preferences, and child freeness or eventual desire for children, etc.. For example, I like to know up front if someone is a bigot or a ditto head so I can save myself and them time if there are deal breakers. Similarly, while I with happily accomodate a variety of kinks, there's a list of things I don't do including, but not limited to shiza, golden showers, age play, anything involving tying me down and/or hurting me, etc.. I'm up front with that, which saves folks looking for those those things time. I'm not judging folks who want those things from me; it's simply a matter me not enjoying them to the point that I won't do them.
My point is, the longer, more complicated conversations need to happen, but when you're doing the initial screening, a lot of things need to be short handed because what you're looking for is if there is chemistry and any deal breakers. I need to know right now if you use the n-word, are a neo con, are going to be a jerk about my gender, or are expecting sex acts I simply can't provide, etc. before I decide if it's worth investing time, energy, and emotion in you. In that situation, I'm expecting a little rounding up or down, a little simplification.
Labels exist in time, also. Maybe you picked something that seemed closest a decade ago, but with more information and exploration, that label doesn't fit so well. Maybe you used to not like X and now you do. Maybe the culture has changed and there's a new label that fits better. (Ex: you were bisexual, but it turns out pansexual's a better fit). Maybe the labels of twenty years ago had little to do with who you are, but the language and culture evolved so that you fit now (There's been a lot of this is the trans gender world, for example). Maybe a term comes back into vogue, but you have understandable problems with the term for personal or political reasons. All of this is perfectly valid.
What I'm trying to get at here, is that my labels are a best approximation taking into account the language, politics, paradigms, and understanding of myself available right now. Your labels are most likely chosen much the same way. Because all this stuff is complex and messy, we may pick different labels for what may look like similar identities. That doesn't make either of us wrong. As log as the labels are descriptive enough to be functional to us then they are performing their function. This is why I don't police other people's labels or harass the person for making different choices then the ones I would make. This is why I think It's a dick maneuver to hassle someone for not grabbing the newest, shiniest identity label or latching on to one that's so new that it's not established.
Let's all strive to be excellent to each other and when it comes to identity labels go with Wheaton's Law.
Y'all know I'm huge fan of communication and disclosure. I think it's simpler in the long run to disclose things to potential partners and to have ongoing discussion about all sorts of things that effect the relationship itself or bed room activities. These things can include all sorts of things from the obvious like kinks, orientation, and gender identity, but can also include things like current mental illness, goals, religion, politics, geographical preferences, and child freeness or eventual desire for children, etc.. For example, I like to know up front if someone is a bigot or a ditto head so I can save myself and them time if there are deal breakers. Similarly, while I with happily accomodate a variety of kinks, there's a list of things I don't do including, but not limited to shiza, golden showers, age play, anything involving tying me down and/or hurting me, etc.. I'm up front with that, which saves folks looking for those those things time. I'm not judging folks who want those things from me; it's simply a matter me not enjoying them to the point that I won't do them.
My point is, the longer, more complicated conversations need to happen, but when you're doing the initial screening, a lot of things need to be short handed because what you're looking for is if there is chemistry and any deal breakers. I need to know right now if you use the n-word, are a neo con, are going to be a jerk about my gender, or are expecting sex acts I simply can't provide, etc. before I decide if it's worth investing time, energy, and emotion in you. In that situation, I'm expecting a little rounding up or down, a little simplification.
Labels exist in time, also. Maybe you picked something that seemed closest a decade ago, but with more information and exploration, that label doesn't fit so well. Maybe you used to not like X and now you do. Maybe the culture has changed and there's a new label that fits better. (Ex: you were bisexual, but it turns out pansexual's a better fit). Maybe the labels of twenty years ago had little to do with who you are, but the language and culture evolved so that you fit now (There's been a lot of this is the trans gender world, for example). Maybe a term comes back into vogue, but you have understandable problems with the term for personal or political reasons. All of this is perfectly valid.
What I'm trying to get at here, is that my labels are a best approximation taking into account the language, politics, paradigms, and understanding of myself available right now. Your labels are most likely chosen much the same way. Because all this stuff is complex and messy, we may pick different labels for what may look like similar identities. That doesn't make either of us wrong. As log as the labels are descriptive enough to be functional to us then they are performing their function. This is why I don't police other people's labels or harass the person for making different choices then the ones I would make. This is why I think It's a dick maneuver to hassle someone for not grabbing the newest, shiniest identity label or latching on to one that's so new that it's not established.
Let's all strive to be excellent to each other and when it comes to identity labels go with Wheaton's Law.
