I am going to label myself. I am a gay atheist. Yes, it is a label. I like having this label. And I do not mind if others have labels. I actually want to see those labels. What would happen if we didn't have them? And yet many refuse to accept them or want them.

I want to know if people are of the same ilk as myself. Personally, I don't want to be groping around in a dark room, full of people without labels, in fear that I would grab something that I did not want to grab or grope. There really is nothing wrong with having a label.

I would much rather be warned ahead of time, of someone's label to better prepare myself for the meeting, or whatever it is that we might be doing to have such an encounter. Would you rather know nothing about someone that you might not like or know a little about them, with their label so you know what to expect.

Yes, I suppose you can pre-judge with these labels, but I still believe they are necessary. Just think of all the places you use labels. Are you M or F ? A label. Gay or Strait? A label? Religious or Atheist? Labels. 

I want to know if my future mate is compatible with me and that means he needs to be labeled as well. Without getting too graphic, I can only imagine being set up on a blind date..without that label on the date and knowing nothing about them. 

I am a Gay Atheist. I like my label.

Views: 235

Comment by Erock68la on July 22, 2014 at 11:36pm
"Jerk" is a label. How do you know that's a fair characterization? If someone has a bad day and says something out of line or if his comment is misunderstood, does that make him a jerk? There could be so much more to that person than a jerkish comment...or maybe he IS a jerk. Once that label is applied, are you going to look any deeper?
Comment by Unseen on July 23, 2014 at 12:42pm

I want to get a horse so I can be a "gay caballero." That would be the other kind of gay.

Comment by James Cox on July 23, 2014 at 2:17pm

I remember a conversation with my father, who was 'worldly' , but not that worldly, describing a fellow worker as 'gay'. At that time, must have been about 1978, the term 'gay' might have been one of the 'fighting words', especially in a work environment made up of mostly self defined 'manly men'. Since the conversation was during our family dinner, I suggested that he really meet 'happy', to which dad responded 'yes'. I then informed dad of the linguistic mine field around us, to try to make sure that his, otherwise good work record, not be tarnished by a preventable moment of ugliness. It was rather clear that that time involved the transition into a more politicized  linguistic environment , which at present seems to have even a greater similarity to a badly actualized '1984'.

While I believe that our language should not corrupted by political M--d F--k, it also seems clear that most of us might be nearly powerless to prevent it.

So how ever 'gay' you/we/I might be, may we wish each other well, with the dearest kindness truly intended.  

Comment by Davis Goodman on July 23, 2014 at 9:10pm

Be very weary of labels themselves in the gay world. Fem. Queen. Rice-queen. Bear. Leather-bear. Jock. Scruff. Top. Bottom. Masc. Straight-acting. Pig. Flamer etc.

These terms are so full of useless stereotypes. Very little good comes from them. It leads to confusion rather than clarity and does little good for anyone.

Comment by Unseen on July 24, 2014 at 12:00am

@Davis G - I think you're wrong. I think these labels arose within the gay community and are useful to gays. A effeminate twink might want to steer clear of a leather bear bar full of hairy pudgy middle-aged men who like rough sex, for example.

Comment by Davis Goodman on July 24, 2014 at 12:42am

Wow. Your non-stereotyping wisdom here must come from years of dating experience in the gay world unseen

Comment by Unseen on July 24, 2014 at 1:03am

Accusing me of being gay? Isn't that a bit homophobic? What if I am gay? Anyway, was that supposed to be a refutation of some sort? If so, it sucked.

Comment by Strega on July 24, 2014 at 8:55am
The word "label" in itself is a very broad one. It can simply be a noun, like "table" or it could be an adjective, like "happy".

It is an inherent human trait that we feel comfortable in tribes - it's how we evolved, along with our sense of society. We like to be part of a group, clan or tribe, and can use adjective labels to self-categorise.

However, another inherent trait is rivalry or competition - again part of our evolutionary upbringing when competing with other tribes for food or land. Currently, the labels that are in play for the wars we have going on, are religious denominations. These labels are used to create a "them and us" situation, an easy tool to manipulate.

I honestly think that if a magic wand were to be waved to obliterate religion, it wouldn't take long for new labels categorizing the tribal position to enable war to continue unabated. I know many of us blame religion for sourcing war, but I think that's probably a bit shallow. I'm more inclined to believe that religious labels are the easiest way to validate wars, and should they become absent, new labels would replace them.
Comment by Unseen on July 24, 2014 at 12:16pm

The words "label," "stereotype," and "concept" can all be exactly the same thing depending upon your attitude toward them. 

We think using concepts. If someone doesn't like the concept I'm using, they may call it a "stereotype." 

I've had several very close gay friends over the years and my best friend at the moment is an East Indian (Bengali) gay man with whom I lived for nearly a year. He was very open and brought his gay friends/lovers home. We talked extensively about gay life. 

One thing I know is that the labels applied to gay men ("bears," "sissies," "leather queens," etc.) are terms gays use and which were most likely invented by gays to make talking about different sub-lifestyles within their community handy to talk about. They were NOT labels imposed on them by straight people. Most straight people are largely unaware of these labels and probably could care less, a gay being a gay being a gay as far as they are concerned.

Comment by Strega on July 24, 2014 at 8:07pm
I liked the "what if I am gay" response better. More succinct.

Comment

You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

Blog Posts

PI = 4

Posted by _Robert_ on September 16, 2014 at 8:53pm 4 Comments

Invictus

Posted by Marinda on September 11, 2014 at 4:08pm 0 Comments

Ads

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service