Jump to content

Older people and labels


Snao Cone

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Nidwin said:

. Also asexual was a mistake and we should have kept it/opt for non-sexual, same for aromantic to be replaced by non-romantic. 

 

I disagree.  I think non-sexual could be more likely describing action (as in participating in no sexual action), whereas asexual describes someone who doesn't feel sexual.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

To me labels seem quite divisive, always highlighting the little differences between people and losing sight of the fact we have far more things in common than we have differences. No two people are exactly the same so you could literally go on forever dividing and sub dividing. In my ideal world, there would be no gendered pronouns and people would be able to say who they are/ are not attracted to in the same way as they could discuss ice cream flavour preference; nobody would rush in to say "oh, well you must be .... then", nor would they be able to challenge you if you later didn't quite fit the label you'd been assigned. I think due to their limiting nature, a lot of older people probably do avoid them once they're confident in who they are. Saying all this, I can see some value in labels for people who are just learning about their asexuality, whatever their age. They're just not for me. People are just people, and no two are the same!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys...I do agree about the labeling. I tried for quite a while to figure out the closest I could come to accurately labeling where I stood. 'Let's see...I'very been mostly in gay relationships, but I find others appealing, also. It's mostly about the person for me. So I guess I should say, romantically homoflexible. Though, that's kind of limiting. It's definitely  gray-A 'cause I've had gay sex, but it was more a validation thing. I rather not have to touch anyone's genitalia.

That was just too exhaustingto go thru. So, now I don't bother, and just let it be what it is. I like it better undefined and unrestricted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think labels can be helpful in identifying ourselves and where we lie on the spectrum. Language is nice like that. I like "homoflexible," that's very descriptive!

 

I added "demiromantic" to mine, which I'm not sure is a popular label or not. But I used it to describe my romantic orientation; that I can feel romantic only toward people with whom I've built a deep connection.

 

I have a non-ace friend like this. She recently announced that she and her boyfriend of one year had finally said the "L word." I didn't say, "oh hey, you're demiromantic, too" but that's what I was thinking. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2016 at 4:46 AM, AliceinWunderland said:

Young people love exploring and pushing the boundaries of language just as we did when we were younger. Personally, I don't like all the complex terms because how does this stuff matter to anyone other than the individual? The asexual community struggles to get taken seriously by sexual people as it is, all the weird terms make it seem like a joke imho. I just identify as asexual because most people don't care what 'flavour' of asexual I am and only certain people would need to know.

I'm with the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) theory. I'm an asexual aromantic. Nothing more nothing less. If and when I come out I'll just say I'm asexual. No sense in making things more complicated than they have to be.

 

Can you imagine coming out and telling the person that you are an "agender fluid, homoromantic autosexual"? I'm pretty sure their response wouldn't be "WTF?", but "What the fuck?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2016 at 5:19 AM, oshawott said:

these labels are a teenage tumblr special snowflake fad, hopefully they will grow out of it and realise this is why nobody ever takes them seriously. its making other people look bad

i feel bad about people coming here looking for answers and seeing all this rubbish which probably confuses them even more

Speaking of "snowflake", I hope nobody was upset if they read my response in the thread about getting out of sex ed class. I don't have a lot of patience for the bubble wrap syndrome society seems to be "enveloping" younger people with. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2016 at 7:16 AM, timewarp said:

Definitions can be useful in the context of a specific research topic and are usually not meant to be used outside that very specific context.

I also understand the way labels are used in the gay community - top, bottom, versatile - because it simplifies things.

In that sense, the only labels I find useful for practical reasons are romantic and aromantic. Those are enough to give others a very rough idea and I'm confident we can assume that everybody is aware of all possible shades in between. No need to label each and every one of them (which would be a rather hopeless task in my opinion, because the grey area is probably infinite). Those who want to describe themselves in more detail can do it in plain language, that saves me hours of time wasted on Google.

I was definitely aware of those terms long before I had heard of asexuality. 

 

I know what you mean with some of the labels, if I have to Google what someone is when anyone is "identifying", I just skip the post. How do they even come up with them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

All that labels do is confuzzle me more. I really don't need to waste head space with those. That's part of the problem with society is labeling. And then I am expected to keep up with all the latest political correctness. My race is HUMAN. This being said, I don't give a f*@%! :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2017 at 2:30 PM, AnneSexnot said:

I think labels can be helpful in identifying ourselves and where we lie on the spectrum. Language is nice like that. I like "homoflexible," that's very descriptive!

 

 

I can imagine someone thinking that means an acrobatic homosexual.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
ChickenPadSeeEew

My labels are really only important to me, to make sense of myself. But I'm pretty grounded in my life, not looking for relationships, etc.

 

While we're on the topic, I don't have any problem with people finding words to help them explain something about, and to, themselves--and then help them communicate that to others, if they want. They could have an entire lexicon under their avatar and I wouldn't care. Language is supposed to serve us, to help make sense of things and to communicate that meaning to us, and if we so choose, to others as well. Honestly, knock yourself out if you need to use words that few understand. If you have to use many words... If it makes sense to you... *shrugs* Onwards we march. Some words might be needed. Some might fade away or evolve. It won't break the world. It might actually improve it for some.

 

It's probably obvious, but I really dislike the view that 'people use labels to cry for attention and feel special'. Many people who adopt certain sexual and gender identities don't tell people in their everyday world, because they don't have safe relationships in which to do that. The internet allows anonymous sharing, and thus a sense of safety, so many people who feel closeted or have to hide central aspects of their identity prefer to share their labels on the internet, sometimes shout them. Not only does that not bother me, but I support it. :) 

 

I think the internet probably enables people to pick apart things about themselves that they might have otherwise not noticed or done alone while drinking wine, waxing philosophical, and staring at the moon. Now it's shared publicly. I don't mind it. If they want to give that little thing they noticed about themselves a word? That's fine. Who am I to say it's not?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya know, it doesn't help that the terminology changes so quickly. When I first joined, grey ace and demi-sexual meant the same thing: being somewhere near the middle of the sliding scale between sexual and asexual. Now demi-sexual means that one only feels sexual attraction to someone they have a deep emotional bond with, or something like that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2017 at 5:03 PM, Twigwilter said:

To me labels seem quite divisive, always highlighting the little differences between people and losing sight of the fact we have far more things in common than we have differences. No two people are exactly the same so you could literally go on forever dividing and sub dividing. In my ideal world, there would be no gendered pronouns and people would be able to say who they are/ are not attracted to in the same way as they could discuss ice cream flavour preference; nobody would rush in to say "oh, well you must be .... then", nor would they be able to challenge you if you later didn't quite fit the label you'd been assigned. I think due to their limiting nature, a lot of older people probably do avoid them once they're confident in who they are. Saying all this, I can see some value in labels for people who are just learning about their asexuality, whatever their age. They're just not for me. People are just people, and no two are the same!

Well said. 

 

Labels can sometimes be divisive in that they prevent people from seeing the shared interest because they only focus on the label. 

 

Labels can be misleading and misinterpreted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great question. At closing in on 39, I just find it easier to say "asexual". I appreciate all the the different labels and what they mean. But, I, too, get confused with the myriad of them. Bottom line, I am happy to finally be in a place that asexuals like me can feel comfortable, regardless of how many or few additional labels we wish to use. The community itself is what makes me feel at home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...