“But when people say queer people are obsessed with labels, or “I’m not cis; I’m normal”, what they’re almost certainly taking issue with is non-cisheteronormativity being recognized and validated.” - Umechan
I think younger queer people are obsessed with labels, and I am not taking issue with non cishet people being recognized and validated. And I’m pretty confident that’s a frequent and normal mindset. You keep taking about other, more radical, obviously trans or homophobic statements, but we’re not talking about any of that. Just labels.
It’s one thing to say that there are a lot of labels used, and you find some of them either dubious or unneccessary,
Yes, and that is the one thing I am saying. Not “I’m not cis, I’m normal”. Not “people are obsessed or making up labels for attention.” Not “I’ve never heard of it nor do I understand it, therefore it’s not real.” Not “they’re attention seeking, deluded, or mentally ill.”
I don’t know who you’re arguing with here, but it ain’t me.
I had a whole rant about how I’ve been involved in the queer space since I was seven, and how insulting it is to be subtly called a bigot, but it’s not worth it. You want to argue with a bigot and by god if you can’t find one you’ll pretend I am one. This is a pointless discussion.
“But when people say queer people are obsessed with labels, or “I’m not cis; I’m normal”, what they’re almost certainly taking issue with is non-cisheteronormativity being recognized and validated.” -
That statement doesn’t mention anything about weaponizing language or rhetoric. The two examples of language I gave there are very problematic. Even for the less malicious example of “queer people are obsessed with labels”, I really don’t think people should use them unless they can really back up what they’re saying with evidence and concrete examples. Making blanket, derogatory statements about a certain group of people, like “queer people are obsessed with labels” is problematic, and people should examine their thinking if that’s what they claim.
I think younger queer people are obsessed with labels, and I am not taking issue with non cishet people being recognized and validated.
I’m not going to change your mind, but I’d suggest you’d examine why you believe that, how much of it’s based in reality, and maybe engage with people with embraced a certain label and consider why you would want to gatekeep a label from them. No one’s perfect, and as I said before, there are plenty of labels and identities that I don’t understand. We can however try and engage with people’s beliefs.
Yes, and that is the one thing I am saying. Not “I’m not cis, I’m normal”. Not “people are obsessed or making up labels for attention.
You did however say “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.” So even if you’re not claiming that people are obsessed, you argued that it’s not likely that they’re probably taking issue with being confronted with gender identities/expression or sexualities outside of what they’d consider normal.
Maybe you disagree, but I would say “queer people are obsessed with labels” is a broad and disparaging generalization, and I believe it is at best a knee jerk reaction, and at worst an attempt to weaponize anti-queer sentiment. If your position is that you find some of the labels unnecessary and dubious, then that is a much more reasonable position, even if some might argue that you should try and educate yourself more. My original argument was in no way aimed at people who hold your position, so unless you believe that claiming “queer people are obsessed with labels” is not a problematic statement, there is no need to conflate this position with yours. I did not address your position in my original comment because I do not have to address ever potential position someone might have every time I make a comment.
I had a whole rant about how I’ve been involved in the queer space since I was seven, and how insulting it is to be subtly called a bigot, but it’s not worth it. You want to argue with a bigot and by god if you can’t find one you’ll pretend I am one. This is a pointless discussion.
I’ve at no point in this discussion called you a bigot. You brought up disagreements with my comments, and I addressed them. The examples of weaponizing and marginialization I mentioned are absolutely real, and the intended consequences of them them are clear.
“But when people say queer people are obsessed with labels, or “I’m not cis; I’m normal”, what they’re almost certainly taking issue with is non-cisheteronormativity being recognized and validated.” - Umechan
I think younger queer people are obsessed with labels, and I am not taking issue with non cishet people being recognized and validated. And I’m pretty confident that’s a frequent and normal mindset. You keep taking about other, more radical, obviously trans or homophobic statements, but we’re not talking about any of that. Just labels.
Yes, and that is the one thing I am saying. Not “I’m not cis, I’m normal”. Not “people are obsessed or making up labels for attention.” Not “I’ve never heard of it nor do I understand it, therefore it’s not real.” Not “they’re attention seeking, deluded, or mentally ill.”
I don’t know who you’re arguing with here, but it ain’t me.
I had a whole rant about how I’ve been involved in the queer space since I was seven, and how insulting it is to be subtly called a bigot, but it’s not worth it. You want to argue with a bigot and by god if you can’t find one you’ll pretend I am one. This is a pointless discussion.
That statement doesn’t mention anything about weaponizing language or rhetoric. The two examples of language I gave there are very problematic. Even for the less malicious example of “queer people are obsessed with labels”, I really don’t think people should use them unless they can really back up what they’re saying with evidence and concrete examples. Making blanket, derogatory statements about a certain group of people, like “queer people are obsessed with labels” is problematic, and people should examine their thinking if that’s what they claim.
I’m not going to change your mind, but I’d suggest you’d examine why you believe that, how much of it’s based in reality, and maybe engage with people with embraced a certain label and consider why you would want to gatekeep a label from them. No one’s perfect, and as I said before, there are plenty of labels and identities that I don’t understand. We can however try and engage with people’s beliefs.
You did however say “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.” So even if you’re not claiming that people are obsessed, you argued that it’s not likely that they’re probably taking issue with being confronted with gender identities/expression or sexualities outside of what they’d consider normal.
Maybe you disagree, but I would say “queer people are obsessed with labels” is a broad and disparaging generalization, and I believe it is at best a knee jerk reaction, and at worst an attempt to weaponize anti-queer sentiment. If your position is that you find some of the labels unnecessary and dubious, then that is a much more reasonable position, even if some might argue that you should try and educate yourself more. My original argument was in no way aimed at people who hold your position, so unless you believe that claiming “queer people are obsessed with labels” is not a problematic statement, there is no need to conflate this position with yours. I did not address your position in my original comment because I do not have to address ever potential position someone might have every time I make a comment.
I’ve at no point in this discussion called you a bigot. You brought up disagreements with my comments, and I addressed them. The examples of weaponizing and marginialization I mentioned are absolutely real, and the intended consequences of them them are clear.