A rant about microlabels

[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

[kyo]

@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:

[w1ckedsticky1983]

@BBQboi-_ i will give you and admit one thing; i should have said that you don't find any worth in them instead of claiming you say they don't contain any meaning. i was initially gonna go back and fix it, but was too lazy to do so, so that is on my behalf. Although, you completely missed the entire point of my response, but i apologize if i came across as missing yours as well. That was not my intention. TLDR at the end ig

However, while I understand your point of view to an extent, people not knowing what sexualities and terms mean can actually bridge into shared connections and building a strong community. Why? Because connection forms through communication, and simply explaining what those terms mean can even only take up a sentence or two because people are already familiar with the umbrella terms. Getting to know and understand someone is what helps bridges form, conformity holds people back.

And once again, you as well keep claiming that these labels make the community look 'bad' and push allies away, but if they were truly allies, why would they even drift apart from supporting queer individuals in the first place? it just comes off as them, themselves, being performative and couldn't keep up the "woke" front when things get too complicated for them to understand. Also. why should queer people have to cater toward homophobes and others who won't even bother to understand in the first place. Gestures like these only hold the queer community back from being seen and validated as what society views as "normal."

I understand this logic to an extent because I get if it's a super niche and rare sexuality that falls perfectly under and umbrella category, then yeah. You could argue that it's unnecessary. However, micro labels like these can explain certain aspects that aren't particularly seen through the umbrella labels. You even admitted yourself that your own sister was searching for a micro label that suited them, which only just goes to show that some queer people don't feel comfortable using certain labels because it doesn't suit them specifically and she's not alone on feeling this way, hence why certain labels exist.

Also, you claiming that homophobia today isn't as bad as it used to be seems just out of touch. Although, I will acknowledge that you specified in America, but that just portrays this line of thought as if queer culture only exists in America. Legalized Same-Sex marriage only became a thing in 2015, which when regarding how long Queer people have had to fight for their rights, in retrospect isn't long ago at all. In Congress, they're still actively trying to take Trans and Gay Rights away at this very moment. Hell. even gay and trans people today are being killed, there is several reported cases on it in this modern-day. Just because it isn't 'as bad as it used to be,' doesn't mean that it doesn't happen at all. Even in a plethora of other countries, gay marriage is ostracized, illegal, and can even warrant someone being killed, but I digress and won't get into specifics because you specified America.

This is a bit personal on my behalf and not a "hard fact," but it's still worthy to mention; if i came out to my parents: my mother would beat the shit out of me and my father would disown me. If it's like this for me at the moment, I know I'm not the only one. Applying my own logic here, just because I experience something, doesn't mean that everyone else does, but it still occurs.

In this hyper aestheticized society, it's only natural for people to portray the queer community as something that's ornamental, even if they do make light of the specifics. At the end of the day, it's usually a kid or someone young who's doing these actions. They don't know any better, and instead of telling an entirety of a minority in the queer community that their sexuality is baseless and has no worth, it's better to educate them. But even then, what can you really even do? You keep basing that the hyperfocus on identity is what's harming the community, but in a world where they've struggled to find that 'identity' and see themselves as being worthy of even claiming it, it's not a surprise that they do so. It can actually lead them on a journey of self-discovery.

But even then, aestheticization isn't something new or unique to the queer community. If you look anywhere and everywhere on the internet, someone will always make light of something and portray it as something to be romanticized. Whether it'd be mental health, politics, or something as simple as a type of food; it's nothing special for people to try and aestheticized something. It can even be a sort of coping mechanism, but that's a whole other discussion. I'm not fond of the way people in this generation and the way people on the internet work, but I'm not going to sit over here and pretend that it's an LGBTQ only experience.

I also won't touch upon the specifics of those aforementioned sexualities and characteristics of them because you frankly missed the entire point I made, but whatever. I'm also not trying to come off as speaking with my "ego," or anything, i just tend to talk a lot about topics I'm passionate about. Anyways, I also apologize if my wording or explanations are a bit clunky, hard to understand, contain typos, comes off as persuasive, or anything else I missed when addressing you. It's late and I've had a long day. I would like to agree-to=disagree for reasons I'll mention below. I feel like we'll end up getting nowhere since our ideologies are practically on different ends of the spectrum.

something i also wanted to add 4 whatever reason which can also work as a TLDR: people blaming microlabels and neopronouns as well as claiming that it's a large reason for homophobia is a just idiotic, it's such a small percentage of people in the community, and oppressing these ways of self expression is literally the opposite of what we work towards as a whole within queer spaces. The only thing that makes us get taken "less seriously" is the transphobic rhetoric that gets spread around by those outsiders/homophobes. These people will hate us no matter what, why do you want to tear down parts of your own community just to accommodate for them?

Side tangent:

Spoiler

Gonna keep this short and whatever, but I think the main reason we disagree here is because my point of view is to just 'live life the way you wanna, unapologetically, and [censored] whatever other people believe,' while you have a more generalized and actually care what society views you as to an extent. This is obviously me reaching and inferring here, but I just wanted to add this little tidbit. Could be completely wrong, don't fight me for this🥹