Labels

Finally, at long last, my belated commentary on the June episode of Life, the Universe, and Everything Else. When I first heard this podcast I thought I would skip the commentary... couldn't really think of anything to add. Events of the past four weeks have proved me wrong, though, as over and over I've thought of something new to say.

I'll try to avoid giving away the whole episode, but there's a few things I should cover before getting into the telling omissions.

So the episode was all about labels... the labels people get stuck with, the ones they claim for themselves, and a few that get incorporated into their identities. Right off the bat they talk about labels people technically have but dislike. One panelist, Ashlyn, hates the label Egalitarian… her reasons aren’t really given. I suspect it’s because of the unfortunate associations it’s developed in recent years. These days, when people say “I’m an Egalitarian”, it usually comes right after they say “I’m not a Feminist”. There’s no reason someone couldn’t say “I’m a Feminist and an Egalitarian”, or even “I’m a Feminist because I’m an Egalitarian”. But that’s not the context I’ve seen it in, and I suspect it’s the same for Ashlyn.

If you’ll forgive me plagiarising myself, this observation of mine from last week is too good not to reuse:

“I probably should have thought of this yesterday, but... do you know what 'egalitarian' sounds like to me now? "Black ALL Lives Matter".”

Another panelist, Gem, qualifies as a Humanist by any definition. He doesn’t normally call himself that, and isn’t really sure why. I wouldn’t want to put words in his mouth, but it would be understandable if he avoided it for the same reason I avoid Egalitarian. In the time following the Great Rift of 2011 (the elevator thing) it became something of a trend for feminist atheists to be told to butt out, leave atheism to the misogynists, and just go be Humanists. Even if you agree with Humanism it’s not easy to take when it means abandoning something else.

Also… can I just say that the American Humanist Association’s “Sounds Like Humanism” campaign is a little creepy? They have quotes from these famous people espousing some humanist value or another, and then say “Sounds Like Humanism”. Some of those people might have considered themselves Humanists, others came before the philosophy was developed but likely would have agreed if they were still alive. But the campaign also included people like Martin Luthor King and the Dalai Lama… you can’t just go appropriating those people to your cause. It’s like the Mormons posthumously baptising Anne Frank. Imposing your labels on other people without their consent is not good.

Another panelist, Laura, doesn’t call herself a nutritionist. Any schmuck can call themselves a nutritionist, she’s a Registered Dietician. Sometimes you avoid a label because you’ve surpassed it.

They (mostly Lauren, I think?) talk about one of the dangers of labels, the risk that you might get stuck with it when you don’t want it, and the risk that it will negatively affect how people treat you, with psychiatric diagnosis and learning disabilities as the main example. I’d like to add in another downside. When you internalize a label, you start rationalizing away things that conflict with that. How many times have you heard “That thing I said can’t be misogynist, I’m a feminist”.

Near the end of the show they start talking about games they like to play… none of them calls themselves a Gamer. Who would touch that label these days?

There were a few things they left out, and I think it’s telling to consider why they were left out. Nationality, for one. I was a little surprised not to hear “Canadian” mentioned as a label. Perhaps that’s not as important to the panel, but I suspect it’s just because it’s a label they all share, so it’s less useful in this context.

I’m pretty sure none of them mentioned ethnicity or race, either. I don’t know if the whole panel was white - I haven't met all of them - but in any case it’s something that people in the majority tend to forget about. Or have the luxury to forget about, I guess. In much the same way as people might self-identify more as Gay or Trans than Straight or Cis… Cis people often have the luxury of ignoring the issue entirely, so they don't use the label.

There are some positives to labels, though. They can be very useful for establishing identities and building communities. I don’t remember which panelist it was, but I heard the phrase “I didn’t know there was a word for it” said with a lot of relief. It can be the only way to find like-minded people.

And labels can be critical when you want to say something without writing a weighty tome to explain it. Or a multi-page blog post.