A rant about microlabels

[_Izzy_]

@Ventrell bi ppl care abt like gender (y'know like pronouns vs biology) pan ppl dont care

like bi ppl wont date non-binary ppl but pan ppl will

its all stupid and lowkey doesnt matter at the end of the day, just date who u like, all of the labels are unnecessary, they can just say their gay/non-straight TvT

after talking abt it pan is lowkey a OD identity bc it only matters bc of the concept of gender which technically doesnt have to do with sexuality since ppl say theyre separate

[BBQboi-_-]

@Ventrell I have a more detailed and defined explanation based on the widely accepted definition in the community,that was obviously a joke/watered down explanation and even then it’s not at all the same as bi 😭

[Ventrell]

@_Izzy_ ohhh i see now so it shpuld rlly be lgbtp*. Another question what dpes "q" in lgbtq stand for

[_Izzy_]

@Ventrell q stands for 'queer' which is just... non-straight and non-cis TvT

it should just be homosexual and Queer TvT
if i could change it id have gay just mean liking the same gender in general and queer is everything else and thats it, instead of lgbtzhwj community just the queer community:p

[w1ckedsticky1983]

@BBQboi-_ this genuinely comes off as ignorant, homophobic, uninformed, and incites hateful ideology whether or not that was your initial intent. Everything here can most likely be refuted by simply stating: 'just because you don't particularly connect with a label, doesnt mean that nobody else in the world does.' (stay with me here) also, I do hope that you do actually read my response and keep an open mind because I'm not writing this to come off as morally superior and condescending, I'm just blatantly telling you that this is flat-out wrong.

You claim that micro-labels don't bring connection and pushes people away further, but the main reason why people in the queer community made these labels is because they don't connect with the standard "gay" term. In a community filled with people who are already dysphoric and feel disconnected to general society, you claiming that these labels have zero meaning just pushes the narrative itself that that queer people themselves arent worthy and should feel invalidated.

God forbid that people who have already been shamed, othered, and hated can finally find labels that make them feel validated and bring them solace.

Not only that, but you saying that these labels don't have any meaning and that you are embarrassed of your own community only makes it immensely easy and simple for homophobic people to continue to perpetuate their bigoted beliefs. The main reason why you believe that this would harm the community further is because it makes us seem like as a "joke", but people who would even consider to view the queer community as a "joke" already have a negative viewpoint of it in mind. There being extra labels won't affect what they already believe because majority of the time, homophobic pigs are opposed to any open-minded beliefs to begin with. I'd say its most likely just people being stubborn, but you can't really help if the person is willingly being ignorant and hateful and stopping people from finding euphoria certainly won't affect this either.

If homophobic people see that queers themselves have a distaste towards their own community, then it just gives them reasons to even be more hateful because: "why shouldnt I hate these people if 'insert slur''s themselves don't like them?" It's counterintuitive if anything. It makes you come off as "oh,,, I'm not one of THOSE gay people...!! I'm one of the GOOD ones!" Which, plainly just divides the community as a whole and perpetuates the belief that homophobic people have the right to feel the way they do just because you don't believe that the labels have any meaning.

I think you just generally forgot where the word 'queer,' as used in the lgbtq came from, which it's plainly obvious to find out where the initial word and meaning was derived from. It literally comes from the word "queer," which means to be 'different,' 'out of the norm,' and, well, weird. Which, is what queer people were seen as throughout history. Hence why they use the term.

The same logic can be applied as to why labels such as arosexual, asexual, and other labels similarly to those are indeed validated and should be considered part of the queer community just as any other gay person should be. Especially since being asexual means to have little to no attraction to anyone, regardless of sex and/or gender. Usually, having no sexual attraction to anyone is regarded as being "weird," hence why it fits into the "queer" term. I dunno, just wanted to bring this up since you did.

Furthermore, id also like to add the meaning of what being Demisexual is because, while you're not entirely wrong, but there's so much more to it than just 'wanting to get to know the person better.'
Demisexuals fall under the Ace/asexuality umbrella term. Demisexuality is a term used to describe individuals who rarely, or never, experience sexual attraction solely based on immediately observable characteristics. These can include physical appearance, smell, etc... Demi's can only experience attraction after developing a deep bond with someone. Which, strays from the general norm of basic lesbian or gay attraction that relies on the sexual attraction of gender and genatalia. It's obvious that you'd feel attracted to someone if you enjoy their company, beliefs, and them as a whole, but loving someone for their mind and body is different.

I'd rather have a shitton of labels and terms for specific sexualities because at the end of the day, it harms no one and only brings comfort to the individuals who already have felt horrible for expressing who they truly are. This isn't even me trying to be "progressive," I'm just blatantly stating that just because you, yourself don't feel connected towards these terms and labels doesn't mean that anyone else doesn't. There's a reason why these labels exist in the first place and why they're actively being used today by thousands of LGBTQ people.

After all, having micro-labels don't take away from the meaning of the umbrella terms such as gay, bisexuality, and even pansexuality. It's called a micro-label for a reason, so whenever someone says: "I hate that it's lgbtqwiznskwka instead of the standard lgbtq!!1!" It just comes off as hateful and uninformed to me.

Obviously, I believe that people are more than their sexual identities and shouldn't be so hyper focused on these labels, but that's how everyone thinks. Especially since throughout history we've only ever been taught to see ourselves through the sex we're born as.

Although, I won't deny that modern-day queer culture feeds off of stereotypes and makes everything aestheticized. Id actually love to have a conversation regarding this topic, but that's a whole other discussion.

Anyways, these are just my thoughts. Once again, I don't intend to come off as rude, condescending, or morally superior, so please don't respond back being rude either. I don't want you to get in trouble over a discussion as simple as this, especially since you just became unbanned.

[Aries]

@BBQboi-_

I don't have much to add since Swaggy's already said most of it, BUT. I think that you're saying all of this while identifying as a micro label yourself. You can argue it's not all you'd like, but technically you like both genders just like bisexuality the only add on is everyone. I think that by you posting this it'll only make more people be afraid to say who they actually are, especially when those from their own community don't support them either. I've known I liked girls since 10, and over the years i've struggled to label that because I did still like boys but it was mainly girls so I felt like the bisexual or the lesbian label didn't fit me. Then I discovered the term 'homoflexible' which does fit me, it shows me that i'm not alone in feeling like this even though i've hardly heard that label be talked about. Uh- yeah rant over. Also, Happy pride :3

[BBQboi-_-]

@Aries being pan objectively isnt a microlabel Because it isnt “liking both genders” (both meaning two) Becuse pansexuals like ALL genders that don’t fit with the traditional definition of men,women or nonbinary people and you watering pansexual to such shows ignorance towards the label as for your label of homoflexible,google defines it as “an individual who is primarily attracted to people of the same gender but is occasionally open to romantic or sexual connections with people of another gender. It describes a fluid sexual orientation that leaves room for curiosity without requiring a broader, 50/50 bisexual label” problem is that this is bisexual with a preference and the “50/50 bisexual label” that is referenced is a misconception within many heterosexual communities,bisexuality itself is fluid and never specifies equal attraction and many bisexuals gravitate towards men or women differently depending on their mood or even find themselves less interested in one gender aa a whole so a label that is within the definition of bisexual that just describes the feeling of unequal attraction is redundant and unneeded,it can make you feel special but that doesn’t mean that as a label it’s completely justified but just Becuse it’s existence isn’t completely logical doesn’t invalidate your feelings,people find pride in illogical labels all the time sufh as race and that doesn’t make their pride invalid at all

[BBQboi-_-]

@_Izzy_ this doesn’t really make sense since attraction in psychology is based on genital/biological attraction,gender/identity based attraction, and personal/emotional based attraction,gender is apart of all attraction

[fyodor]

@w1ckedsticky1983 no offense but i'm not reading allat

[BBQboi-_-]

@w1ckedsticky1983
Alright man let’s go, I get that this topic hits emotional for a lot of people, but you fundamentally missed the point of my post (seems kinda intentional, but I won’t throw baseless allegations). I never claimed microlabels are completely useless to every person alive—the argument was always that the vast majority don’t need to be their own standalone labels with flags and everything. Most are just niche extensions of already defined sexualities, stuff that could be summed up in two sentences. Most people aren’t gonna recognize them without googling, and that doesn’t build real connection. It fragments things and turns identity into more of an aesthetic chase than shared reality.
You keep framing it as validation for dysphoric folks who feel disconnected—cool for the ones it helps personally. But god forbid we point out how chasing every slight variation into a new label with its own aesthetic just makes the whole community look performative and convoluted to everyone else. I’ve straight up watched allies slowly shift away from support once the micro-label push ramped up. It stops feeling like a united front and starts looking like an endless trend that embarrasses even people inside it. Simplicity unites. This divides and discredits us.
On the oppression angle, let’s get real: gay people in most parts of America aren’t generally facing the heavy systemic stuff from decades ago. A lot of (especially white) queer folks are building whole identities around experiences they genuinely can’t relate to—half a century ago, if they came out with the vast majority of these microlabels, they would’ve been shot or worse in a lot of places, unlike the level of daily oppression the average Black person or Native person faced back then. That historical gap gets glossed over way too much while everyone piles on new subcategories.
Demisexual especially—you explained the definition, but psychology and basic biology back what I said. Needing an emotional bond before sexual attraction is super common, not some unique orientation. Most humans aren’t wired for instant physical hookups as the default; pair-bonding and getting to know someone first is normal for huge chunks of the population (attachment studies and evolutionary psych show this pattern across cultures). It doesn’t describe a distinct sexual or romantic identity separate enough to warrant its own spot under the LGBTQ umbrella by definition. Same with a lot of these microlabels—they’re just less clearly defined extensions of broader stuff.
Abrosexual doesn’t even pin down a consistent pattern of attraction, which is kinda the whole point of what a sexuality label is supposed to do. Fluidity happens, sure, but making “it changes all the time” into its own thing stretches the concept thin and feels pointless.
Asexual and aromantic have more actual scientific backing as low or absent attraction patterns, but folding them into the same community as same-[censored] attracted people still dilutes the original focus when you think about it long enough. The “queer = weird” etymology is interesting history, but it doesn’t mean every deviation automatically belongs in the advocacy tent.
My own sister spent years digging through microlabel lists trying to find the perfect one for feelings that fit fine under pan or bi umbrellas. That hyper-focus on identity as the main characteristic of a person, scouting for something most modern Americans would just skim over, comes off more attention-seeking than deep self-discovery (and yeah, straight folks crave validation too, it’s human). Being part of the LGBTQ scene isn’t supposed to be your whole personality.
I’ll keep it semi-professional going forward because this argument deserves some real entertainment and acknowledgment, even if it feels a bit misled. Less pure emotion, more hard facts—even on a nuanced topic like this. It seems like you’re arguing more from ego than stepping back with the superego on this one.
Not all microlabels are bad, and this isn’t about being one of the “good” gays or hating people who use them. Enough with the aestheticization. I’d rather folks just be unlabeled than chase this big conglomerate of “I’m bisexual but I like men mostly but sometimes gravitate towards women depending on the mood but not usually because I prefer masculinity”

[Gamizavier]

There’s a lot to keep track of.

[Venus]

@BBQboi-_ I honestly agree.
I'm not gonna constantly search for the most SPECIFIC label that no one's heard of.
I just like everyone but I have a HEAVY male preference.
It's so annoying sometimes but yeah :broken_heart: