Labels can apply to anyone but they don’t show you what the person is like for being themselves

  • fakir@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    All labels create division, intended or not. There is oneness in all living beings, we know this when we are born, but by the age of 5, we develop our own identity, we see the you & I as separate, the haves & the have nots, & suddenly we have two-ness. Early Eastern religions also taught this.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I think people should learn to recognize their own feelings instead of reporting whatever feeling is predicted by their mental model of their self.

  • SavvyWolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Similar to the labels quote, the phrase “Nothing about us, without us” has been popular in marginalised groups.

    • x4740N@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I had never heard of this phrase before but I like it because it summarises the issue of people of marginalised groups not being involved in decision making and I hate that issue because only the people of those marginalised groups know what they need best but they aren’t given an opportunity to be involved

  • aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Here are some similar aphorisms:

    • It is what it is.
    • Patience is a virtue.
    • Success breeds success.
    • You must be a friend to get a friend.
    • Life isn’t fair.

    Statements like these are truisms. They are widely accepted and often broad enough that they can easily be turned against their intended purpose. For instance, you could use “no labels” to say that people shouldn’t be racist. But you can also use it when people are pointing out or trying to correct racism, because correcting racism necessarily involves pointing out the racializing labels that are applied to people. They can also be used by dominant groups to say “don’t label me as a member of the dominant group” in order to mask the material benefits they are receiving as members of said group.

    • x4740N@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      They are widely accepted and often broad enough that they can easily be turned against their intended purpose.

      I understand that can happen, racists and bigots like to take whatever they can and twist its meaning and I don’t intend to mean anything negative with my post

      A bigot is still a bigot even if they don’t like to call themself one and everyone can see that they are a bigot with their childish bigoted attitudes

      • SavvyWolf@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not everyone can see whether someone else is a bigot or not. Especially with things that are culturally ingrained or relatively obscure.

        There’s a difference between someone who makes a mistake but is willing to learn from it and those that make a mistake but aren’t willing to accept it.

  • Brewchin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Withholding judgement on someone’s words until you see their actions is an important one to me. As is the flip-side to that - if someone shows you who they are: believe them.

    Public figures are good practice for fine-tuning your response to both of these.

    Call yourself what you like, declare your position this way or that, fine, but Actions > Words.