• Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I disagree; I think there’s a huge middle ground you’re ignoring.

    “Everyone should be treated equally” is a pretty simple concept that a lot of (maybe even a majority of) people agree with. It’s possible to fully subscribe to that ideology while also thinking that the explosion of labels that gen z is infatuated with is silly.

    • Evkob@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why do you think it’s silly?

      Even if it were silly, is that sufficient reason to not treat others with respect?

    • Umechan@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The rhetoric I described is absolutely being weaponized against people. If you follow the reason behind the arugment that someone is “normal, not cis”, then you would then conclude that trans and nb people are not normal. Anyone who accepts that argument would likely conclude that not only are trans women not “normal women”, and trans men not “normal men”, but that they are not actually real women or men.

      As for gen z being infatuated with labels, I will admit I don’t understand many of them, but I’m fine with them if they help people communicate their identity better. I wouldn’t claim that any labels are redundant or just attention seeking without any actual evidence or reasoning behind it.

      • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m taking issue with your first example, not your second. There’s a world of difference.

        But when people say queer people are obsessed with labels […] what they’re almost certainly taking issue with is non-cisheteronormativity being recognized and validated.

        This statement I think is incorrect.

        • Umechan@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is being weaponized in that way too. For example, Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro went on rants about asexuality recently, claiming that labels such as demisexual had no basis in reality and described experiences that are common to everyone. If you follow their argument, people become unable to use labels that communicate their preferences and experience.

          Even when it isn’t being weaponized, I don’t think you should claim certain labels are unnecessary unless you’ve engaged with the reasoning behind the people who use them and form a reasonable argument that isn’t “back in my day people didn’t have so many labels.”

          • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            “Some people are weaponizing that language” is a VERY different statement than “anyone who uses that language is almost certainly weaponizing it”. You’re alienating allies by accusing them if being enemies.

            • Umechan@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              “Some people are weaponizing that language” is a VERY different statement than “anyone who uses that language is almost certainly weaponizing it”.

              I never said that. In fact, I ended my last reply with “Even when it isn’t being weaponized”. I said people who say things like “queer people are obsessed with labels” and “I’m not cis; I’m normal”, which are both disparaging comments, are more than likely doing so in response to encountering identities and experiences outside of cishetnormativity. It’s one thing to say that there are a lot of labels used, and you find some of them either dubious or unneccessary, and another to say that people are obsessed or making up labels for attention.

              Whenever people say that someone’s choice of labels is simply attention seeking or naive, how often are these people actually listening and engaging with the person’s reasoning for identifying with the said label, and show give actual evidence for said attention seeking? In my experience, the only argument I’ve seen being used against labels that people identify with is “I’ve never heard of it nor do I understand it, therefore it’s not real.” Claiming that “queer people are obsessed with labels” is a broad generalization that comes of as a knee jerk reaction.

              You’re alienating allies by accusing them if being enemies.

              All I’m asking is that people think whenever they feel the need to dismiss others and gatekeep identities from people. In my experience, this seems to be based more on people’s gut reactions rather than science, facts, or logic, like they claim it is.

              Whenever I’ve seen people disparage certain labels like non-binary or demisexual, they never seem to have actually listen to someone with said identity and engage with their reasoning. It’s far more common for them to decide that they’re attention seeking, deluded, or mentally ill.

              And if people are going to be allies, there are going to be times when they need to examine their behaviour. Any self-proclaimed ally who says that “I have nothing against queer people, but why are they so obsessed with labels?” needs to re-examine their arguments just like anyone who says “I have nothing against women, but why are they so emotional and sensitive?” or “I have nothing against black people, but why are they so violent?”.