I’m glad the piece gave you a twist on the usual.
I may well expand on the idea because I think there are some ways in which we can break things down further.
Personally I’m fine with labels. They’re OK. They’re shorthand. Some don’t care for em and that’s OK too. But I like them for how concise they CAN be.
Take me generally…
I’m a woman who was incorrectly labeled as male at birth. I’m a woman who is only attracted to other women. But I don’t feel sexual attraction in any case unless I have an emotional connection to the person beforehand.
Or… I’m a transgender, demisexual lesbian.
They say the same thing but with about a thousand less words. So the labels are useful as shorthand.
However, like tech, labels are only useful right up to the point they’re not anymore.
Also, labels should be descriptive, never proscriptive. So calling me a transgender demisexual lesbian tells you some pretty exact things about me very quickly. But that doesn’t mean I can’t change things or that the label tells you anymore than it does. If I find an amazing man maybe I’ll change lesbian to bisexual woman. That kind of thing is where we can limit the power of bigotry too. If we acknowledge that labels can change over our lifetimes, as do we ourselves, then it becomes harder to be absolutist about our prejudices (kinda like my being a lesbian challenges the prejudice held by some transphobes that us trans women transition purely to get men.).
Listen to me prattle on.
Thanks for the kind words, Jay.