Sapiosexuality and labels!

[Teaching3bears]

I came across this word and googled and apparently it means being attracted to intelligent people.  

Why do we live in a world that increasingly needs a label for absolutely everything?  

Rant   Rant   Rant

A lot of people are attracted to intelligent people (as well as people with other characteristics).  Does this deserve a label as much as ie.  homosexuality?

So many labels.  Everything becomes a condition.  Everything goes into a category.  We are so scientific.

Will humanity lose its poetry?

 

 

[EKS]

35 minutes ago, Teaching3bears said:

So many labels.  Everything becomes a condition.  Everything goes into a category.  We are so scientific.

Will humanity lose its poetry?

I would argue that in this case the issue is with the humanities, not the sciences.

[Hyacinth]

This made me laugh. 

[catz]

No one is going to force you to use a label if you don't want.  I personally didn't have that much self awareness when I was dating but 20 years out, yes my husband's intelligence was/is very important to me.  I didn't marry until I was 29 but it's really obvious from my dating history.

I guess if a label helps someone have some self awareness and helps them figure out how they fit in the world, fine by me.  Young people may evolve their labels and thinking over time, which is a tale as old as time.  No one is coming anyone's lack of labels.  

I will say as an adult trying to find a school fit for a kid that hit the ceiling of a GT screener at a public kindergarten gave me SO much self awareness about my own childhood and experience.  That information and self awareness would have been welcome and meaningful much earlier in life and probably have led to a better educational and social path.  I'm not saying these labels are always meaningful and static, but I do think kids having categories probably helps them feel less alone and like they have a space in the world.  

[MEmama]

8 hours ago, Hyacinth said:

This made me laugh. 

 

Why?

Honestly, if you don’t understand why someone comes out publicly or uses a label you are unfamiliar with, it’s time to listen, not mock. 
 

And that tweet about “coming out as a girl” is disgusting, ignorant and sexist. If labels bother you, you'll be better served questioning your own discomfort instead of shutting down another person's truth.  

[Hyacinth]

33 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Why?

Honestly, if you don’t understand why someone comes out publicly or uses a label you are unfamiliar with, it’s time to listen, not mock. 
 

And that tweet about “coming out as a girl” is disgusting, ignorant and sexist. If labels bother you, you'll be better served questioning your own discomfort instead of shutting down another person's truth.  

Wow. I’m not bothered by labels. Nor am I plagued by discomfort. I found the comment funny because the definition of demisexual is EXACTLY how many (dare I say most?) girls the world over would describe their own sexuality. That’s all. 

[Melissa Louise]

Mass societal immaturity. 

I mean, I get it if you're a 14 yr old. Especially if you're a 14 yr old looking to opt out of sex. "Oh, I would, but I'm demi." Hopefully someone tells these teens that 'No' is a complete and adequate response. 

Why adults take these personal preference labels seriously, I do not know. 

I mean, can you imagine the kind of grown man who opines about his sapiosexuality? I can Shudder. What a massive turn-off. 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Melissa Louise
Blooming autocorrect

[marbel]

1 hour ago, Hyacinth said:

Wow. I’m not bothered by labels. Nor am I plagued by discomfort. I found the comment funny because the definition of demisexual is EXACTLY how many (dare I say most?) girls the world over would describe their own sexuality. That’s all. 

Right. Isn't this one of those "common knowledge" sorts of things, that women in general require an emotional connection in order to best enjoy sex, more than men in general do?  (Obviously there will be differences among individuals.) I think I learned this in Psych 101, and during marriage counseling, reading books on marriage counseling, talking to friends... it's very typical. So it is rather amusing to see someone "come out" as something that is so typical. 

 

 

[whitestavern]

And really, who the heck cares about any of this? I do not care one whit about your sexuality (or any other part of your life, in all honesty). Why you feel the need to shout it from the rooftops, make all sorts of public announcements, and create ridiculous labels is beyond me. Attention-seeking I guess? 

[Pawz4me]

I'm a person who is helped greatly in my self-awareness and empathy by being able to label and categorize. Even to me some of this seems to have gone too far, but (obviously) I'm not the arbiter of that. If the labeling helps someone--great. It's a small thing, and I'm not convinced that even over the top labeling hurts anyone. I suspect that it's mostly a trend or fad that will pass in time, but (again, obviously) I could be wrong. I don't see getting bent out of shape about it.

[marbel]

My concern is the pressure young people may be feeling to "announce" their sexuality. And perhaps at younger and younger ages. 

And... this is a sincere question, no snark, no mocking... I'm curious exactly how this level of labeling is helpful to people. What good does the label do anyone? Again, not snarky, just wondering - how is it helpful?

As people mature, generally most start feeling like they want to partner up; they meet other people and figure out what they like/dislike in a person. They figure out what attracts them and what turns them off. They can figure out the difference between "finding someone attractive" and "being attracted to someone." That is self-awareness, right? 

(Silly anecdote. once while out with a male friend of mine, engaging in some people-watching, I commented that a woman was really attractive. My friend looked at me in shock and commented that he didn't know I was attracted to women. I said that I was not attracted to women; I can find someone attractive without being attracted to them. Just as I can see the way some men look in their Levi's and work boots, and find that attractive... doesn't mean I want to have sex with them.)

Sometimes we make mistakes but overall I think people figure out what they like, the type of people they are attracted to, the type of people they might want to have a long-term relationship with.. and then they embark on a relationship. Or not... but in any case, what does the label mean?  Thinking about my own history, I seem to be most attracted to men who have a sort of absent-minded professor vibe... smart but sort of scattered... what is that called? Does it have a label? Does it need to have a label?  

When I thought my kid had some learning disabilities, I sought a label so we could find the best help for his issues. So I understand the that here are uses for labels.  I'm trying to figure out the purpose of "micro-labeling" (for lack of a better word) and then announcing sexuality to the level of exactly the conditions of attraction and/or type of person they are attracted to. 

[Alicia64]

Re: being attracted to intelligent people. Does anyone remember Margaret Hoolihan from MASH?  When her boyfriend/doctor -- Frank -- would talk surgery to her she'd respond with passion, "Oh Frank!" (Totally confusing him.)

[Farrar]

I've only ever seen people use the term sapiosexual with a bit of a purposeful cheek or pretentiousness to it. Like, I've totally used it as a joke many times. It's not an identity to me the way that being bi is.

But, hey, maybe it is for someone. Who cares. If it's not hurting you, maybe just move on.

[theelfqueen]

My concern with the obsessive labeling is - once you have "defined yourself" by a label and said "this is who I am!" It can be hard to backpedal and say "I've grown to realize that I am more complicated than the label I defined myself by as an immature person"... when someone sexually immature decides to define themselves by a sexuality that they haven't grown into they can really struggle when it turns out that is not the extent of who they are.

[LucyStoner]

Societal navel gazing.  I think it’s mostly harmless but that doesn’t stop me from thinking it can definitely get a bit ridiculous.  One of my friends has a child who claims to be “star gender”. Okay.  

I’ve never seen anyone who was announcing their sapiosexuality be in a relationship with a physically unattractive genius.  All of the people I’ve observed doing this are young men who date young women who are very physically attractive.  

[regentrude]

I don't see what's wrong with it. Some people are primarily attracted and aroused by physical attributes, other people by person's brain. Some people think a body is hot, other people think a mind is. 

I have never felt attracted by the physical characteristics of a person. Never felt my body responding to "man, this person looks hot" (whatever that is for people - big boobs, toned muscles, sensual mouth). However, I find a genius mind very sexy and have always fallen in love with a person's brain first. So now there's a word for that, nice. 

I can see this be helpful for a human who feels a sense of lack because they do not respond to physicality. Who may question why that does not register for them. If a label helps them normalize that, why not? Having a vocabulary to articulate one's feelings is empowering and not something one should mock.

And of course it is in no way comparable to same sex attraction. 

Edited July 7, 2021 by regentrude

[marbel]

Never mind; don't want to argue

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by marbel

[Amy in NH]

I'm going to venture a guess that many (if not most) of us here in this discussion dated and met our partners/spouses before internet-dating became the norm.  From what I understand, dating is an entirely different ballgame now, and not pleasant for many people.  If you are trying to meet a potential mate online, particularly through written profiles and messaging platforms, then you need words to describe yourself so that you're not wasting time meeting people with whom you are incompatible.  Moreover, many young adults have claimed their sexuality and are unafraid to hook-up if what they are seeking is purely physical gratification.  It is important to be self-aware and able to express what it is you are seeking - particularly to differentiate yourself on the gender and sexuality spectrum when the activity choices could be anything from ons, fwb, demi, and ace.  If someone identifies themself as being a sapiosexual, their prospective partner will know that this person will likely want a relationship that includes a lot of intellectual stimulation.  Yes, many people will (should?) continue to explore and evolve, but having some sort of baseline is a good place to start.

Young people announcing on social media that they have figured out a small part of themselves is just par for the course now - sorta like posting a picture of your delicious meal.  It also encourages others who may feel marginalized, or alone in their otherness, that we are all different and still worthy humans.  Many people nowadays don't find the topic of sexuality to be private or taboo, and those who are overtly offended by such chat can come across as puritanical and curmudgeonly.  If you are upset by it, just keep scrolling.  Or reflect on why it upsets you, join the conversation, and maybe you'll find that you have also grown and evolved, or maybe just understand yourself better for it.

Edited July 7, 2021 by Amy in NH

[Moonhawk]

It's a little weird to me, because by giving these labels to "better explain" or "identify" themselves, it seems they have to ignore the complexity of themselves. So, to deny in order to fit a label. I guess it's helpful to weed out potential partners with a word, but it seems limiting when the whole idea is to be able to be your "true" sexuality, so I don't understand why this has caught on.

I mean, I guess I'm a sapiosexual, as I've only twice in my life seen a physical body as attractive before I spoke to the person, and I definitely choose guys who are brain-heavy. But, I'm not usually sexually interested without an emotional connection, so I could see being called a demisexual. Also, I tend to go for the artistic or creative types, where it's not really about their smarts but more about their perceptions and producing of things, but Google tells me this isn't a thing I can identify as (I feel minimized!), it's probably just sapiosexual. But also, I really do tend to have a physical type -- or maybe a physical type tends to like me?, because all of my relationships the guys are 5'11-6'0, slender build, similar coloring, similar ethnicities, but I wasn't attracted to them (especially the first 2) until I got to know them, at least consciously. And a "criteria" that seems to be there is that they enjoy cooking; once I find out a guy can cook (or not), it instantly shifts my interest in them.  

So through my navel gazing, I am a hetero-creato-sapio-demi-subconscious[ethnicity]-slender-cook-sexual.

But this doesn't really capture the full picture, especially as a potential romantic partner, and I don't know who else would be interested in this label other than potential romantic partners.  --> Far more useful would be to tell about myself, not my turn-ons. Like a business card to give in a bar when meeting people, "Hi, I'm a hetero-introverto-smartish-creato-partner with a minor-subset of gluttony-movie-hiking traits." But maybe this is old-fashioned, in advertising myself instead of putting up a "Please Only Apply If..." sign.

Anyway. I don't mind if people find it's useful to them. I will mind if my kids are forced to pigeonhole themselves as they grow older, but I guess in every society you choose some label or another. If I'm going to be bothered by labels and names, I'll keep my ire for "Latinx" honestly, but that's a different story altogether. 

[regentrude]

11 minutes ago, Moonhawk said:

It's a little weird to me, because by giving these labels to "better explain" or "identify" themselves, it seems they have to ignore the complexity of themselves. 

I don't find that labels necessarily ignore complexity. They describe a part of the person, not the whole. Just to give a different example of what I mean:
Until I was in my early 30s, I had never taken a personality test and had never heard of extroverts vs introverts. I made some observations about myself and others for which I had no explanation. When I took my first Myers-Briggs and realized I am topping out the extrovert scale, a lot of things suddenly made sense and fell into place. Knowing this is a "thing" and labeling myself "extrovert" was incredibly helpful for me to understand myself. Of course "extrovert" describes only a small part of who I am. I am many more things. But giving this important part a name was very powerful and helpful.

I view terms like "sapiosexual" in the same vein. Finding terminology for facets of a person's personality, IMO, helps with self-awareness. I find that the young generation is far ahead in that department, much more than I was at the same age.

[Moonhawk]

4 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I don't find that labels necessarily ignore complexity. They describe a part of the person, not the whole. 

....
I view terms like "sapiosexual" in the same vein. Finding terminology for facets of a person's personality, IMO, helps with self-awareness. I find that the young generation is far ahead in that department, much more than I was at the same age.

This makes sense to me. I guess for the few people in my life who I know use these labels, they don't treat it as a part of their personality, but AS their personality. It could be the new-convert zeal though: like when you find something you really like or just fits, you have to tell everyone about it and kind of obsess for a bit. As time goes on maybe it will become more balanced and just a part of their sexual (or whole) identity. 

Like I said, tho, I don't mind if they find it helpful. I just hope it's a help and not a limitation in understanding themselves longterm.

[Idalou]

The popularity with labeling these days remunds me of the Meyers Briggs craze from several years ago. It was everywhere, all over the internet people were declaring what they were, etc. I think I encountered it on every forum I was on, from gardening to teaching to pet-care. It seems like humans have a need to label and identify. Couple that with youth and young  adult experiences and expectations and here we are. It's not a big deal, unless you're trying to foment another silly outrage and gather others to your "side". It may also mean a lot of us are just too old and crabby to remember how it feels to be not old and crabby!

Edited July 7, 2021 by Idalou

[Farrar]

Labels - whether for gender, sexuality, mental illness, neurodivergence, hobbies, fandoms... Seriously, these can be very useful in understanding yourself, finding friends, finding community... Not having a label can hold people back, make them feel alone. Am I the only one who feels this way? Am I a weirdo? And that's true for if you're experiencing a learning disability or a sexual preference or a true love of knitting. But thank goodness, there's psych/ed testing to label your learning issue, labels to describe every sexual preference under the sun at this point, and Ravelry.

If you don't want a label, then don't label.

In my experience, young people are totally beyond fine changing their labels. They don't see it the same way you do.

[theelfqueen]

My amusement with "sapiosexuaity" is that most people think of themselves as intelligent (whether an outside observer/potential mate would agree or not) ... so if you say you're attracted to intelligent people - that crazy, dude-hold-my-beer dude will think himself still in the running. And the highly educated, clearly intelligent but self deprecating lady may not. 

Even in the "anti-intellectual" circles the idea is "I am very intelligent,  I don't need to read books or study or be conversant, that stuff doesn't make you smart - it makes you a snob".. so still in the running in thier own mind and maybe determined to prove you and your desire to discuss philosophy wrong. 

Dudes gonna dude. (Sex/gender irrelevant to Dude status.) 

 

Mate seeking is a fraught business. 

[Melissa Louise]

4 hours ago, Idalou said:

The popularity with labeling these days remunds me of the Meyers Briggs craze from several years ago. It was everywhere, all over the internet people were declaring what they were, etc. I think I encountered it on every forum I was on, from gardening to teaching to pet-care. It seems like humans have a need to label and identify. Couple that with youth and young  adult experiences and expectations and here we are. It's not a big deal, unless you're trying to foment another silly outrage and gather others to your "side". It may also mean a lot of us are just too old and crabby to remember how it feels to be not old and crabby!

I definitely resemble that remark!

 

[Melissa Louise]

It is personal branding. From convos with ds' friends I know they experience intense pressure to create and maintain a personal brand. 

I think it's very sad. As if identity is just one more consumable item in a capitalist society. 

I encourage my kids to establish their 'brand' through what they do, not what label they use. 

 

[pinball]

In terms of the demisexual label...this is the opposite of demisexual

i remember reading “Fear of Flying” sometime in my middle teen years and learning about the zipless f*+k and it totally rocked my world. Girls didn’t want *that* in the circle I ran in or if they did, they weren’t talking about. Maybe girls who had been dating a long time (months and months) would go to 3rd base, but no one talked about wanting to or wanting to have sex, especially with someone they just met!

As an adult, I am sure a lot of us (back then) were keeping pure physical attraction and any “activity” unrelated to emotional connection/dating to ourselves. 

[Teaching3bears]

This thread has given me a lot to think about.

One of my concerns with labels is that they can be so often used against someone or given to someone with ill intentions, used to separate people and even discriminate.  

 

[Farrar]

12 minutes ago, Teaching3bears said:

This thread has given me a lot to think about.

One of my concerns with labels is that they can be so often used against someone or given to someone with ill intentions, used to separate people and even discriminate.  

 

They can. But I would argue the problem is the discrimination, not the labels.

Labels of all kinds can box people in and getting boxed in can be a problem. But again, the goal would be that we should all let people grow and be individuals, not that we should deny them their labels or mock them.

[MEmama]

44 minutes ago, Farrar said:

They can. But I would argue the problem is the discrimination, not the labels.

Labels of all kinds can box people in and getting boxed in can be a problem. But again, the goal would be that we should all let people grow and be individuals, not that we should deny them their labels or mock them.

Right. And saying people shouldn't use labels for themselves because they might get used against them isn't much different than saying a girl shouldn’t wear a short skirt because boys might lose control. 
 

Better than worry is to educate oneself and be an ally, even if you don’t fully understand. 

[pinball]

59 minutes ago, MEmama said:

Right. And saying people shouldn't use labels for themselves because they might get used against them isn't much different than saying a girl shouldn’t wear a short skirt because boys might lose control. 
 

Better than worry is to educate oneself and be an ally, even if you don’t fully understand. 

An ally to what?

any sexual label someone wants to give themselves?

That’s a slippery slope...

[Farrar]

I'm not sure what the slippery slope is other than a logical fallacy. People have been using the whole "but if we allow the gays to get married, they'll make pedophilia/bestiality/incest" legal next argument for ages and it's always bigoted, illogical, and incorrect. 

Labels are about one's self. They are never about forcing anyone (or any animals) into sexual acts. So what's the slippery slope? What's the label that somehow threatens others on this supposed slippery slope?

The young people like their labels. They like using them as ways to figure out their identities. It does not threaten you. All that's required of you is that you not discriminate or mock them openly. Some of them may seem a little odd or incomprehensible. Trust me, I have absolutely heard about some self-chosen labels that I think are absolutely not things I will ever understand. But it's not hurting me to just respect that person. 

But again, I'll just reiterate that I'm pretty sure this word is just a shorthand for "I'm into smart people" just like people say all the time "I'm into athletes or muscles" or "I like someone in a uniform." I've heard and used this word for years and I've never heard anyone declare it as a thing where they're coming out as sapiosexual. Like, chill, everyone.

[BusyMom5]

I think its weird. I've got one kid who likes to try on these labels.  I'm pretty sure when she told me about this one, my response was something along the lines of "Oh, I'm so glad you aren't attracted to dumb people."  Because seriously,  part of attraction is being able to talk, you would naturally want someone you can Converse with.  So many of these labels just seem like natural attraction- which is way more complicated than just a few labels.   I think its healthy to recognize the things you value in a partner- as in listing those qualities.   I find it weird to assign labels to each part of attraction. 

[pinball]

2 hours ago, Farrar said:

I'm not sure what the slippery slope is other than a logical fallacy. People have been using the whole "but if we allow the gays to get married, they'll make pedophilia/bestiality/incest" legal next argument for ages and it's always bigoted, illogical, and incorrect. 

Labels are about one's self. They are never about forcing anyone (or any animals) into sexual acts. So what's the slippery slope? What's the label that somehow threatens others on this supposed slippery slope?

The young people like their labels. They like using them as ways to figure out their identities. It does not threaten you. All that's required of you is that you not discriminate or mock them openly. Some of them may seem a little odd or incomprehensible. Trust me, I have absolutely heard about some self-chosen labels that I think are absolutely not things I will ever understand. But it's not hurting me to just respect that person. 

But again, I'll just reiterate that I'm pretty sure this word is just a shorthand for "I'm into smart people" just like people say all the time "I'm into athletes or muscles" or "I like someone in a uniform." I've heard and used this word for years and I've never heard anyone declare it as a thing where they're coming out as sapiosexual. Like, chill, everyone.

Nope, I asked: “what should people be an ally to...

Any sexual label that someone wants to give themselves?”

it’s pretty simple question, based on the thread topic.

[Amy in NH]

1 hour ago, pinball said:

Nope, I asked: “what should people be an ally to...

Any sexual label that someone wants to give themselves?”

it’s pretty simple question, based on the thread topic.

Yes.  Be an ally to any sexual label that someone wants to give themselves, unless it involves nonconsent of others.

And you did say:

4 hours ago, pinball said:

That’s a slippery slope...

Which it really is not.

[pinball]

19 minutes ago, Amy in NH said:

Yes.  Be an ally to any sexual label that someone wants to give themselves, unless it involves nonconsent of others.

And you did say:

Which it really is not.

It is a slippery slope,,.my “nope” was to her non-answer to my question...

[Catwoman]

23 minutes ago, Amy in NH said:

Yes.  Be an ally to any sexual label that someone wants to give themselves, unless it involves nonconsent of others.

I have an honest question about this, but I’m afraid I’m going to come across as snarky, and that’s not my intention.

Why do I have to “be an ally to any sexual label that someone wants to give to themselves?”

I can agree that I should be polite about it, and that I shouldn’t mock anyone — that’s just common decency and polite behavior — but I get the impression that some people would consider me to be a terrible person if I don’t publicly stand up as an “ally.” 

I’m not going to lie. I think some of these labels are ridiculous and self-absorbed, and I don’t really think the current obsession with self-labeling for every little thing is necessarily as healthy as others seem to believe it is... so why should I be made to feel badly if I don’t come out in support and encouragement of it? I don’t care what other people decide to do, and if they want to spend their time and energy thinking up labels for themselves and announcing it to the world, it doesn’t hurt me, and I won’t say they don’t have the right to do it because it’s none of my business, but I don’t think that counts as being an ally.

 

[Catwoman]

On 7/7/2021 at 9:50 AM, Pawz4me said:

I'm a person who is helped greatly in my self-awareness and empathy by being able to label and categorize. Even to me some of this seems to have gone too far, but (obviously) I'm not the arbiter of that. If the labeling helps someone--great. It's a small thing, and I'm not convinced that even over the top labeling hurts anyone. I suspect that it's mostly a trend or fad that will pass in time, but (again, obviously) I could be wrong. I don't see getting bent out of shape about it.

This makes sense to me. I don’t see getting bent out of shape about it. People can do what they want to do. It’s the concept that I have to also “be an ally” that bothers me a little.

I can accept something without necessarily thinking it’s a great idea. I can accept it without actively supporting it. But I feel like some people are saying that I have to do more than just be politely accepting about it.

[Danae]

What exactly does someone who identifies as demi-sexual or sapiosexual need an ally for?  Is there housing discrimination?  Are people losing their jobs when their bosses find out they got to know their partners before sleeping with them?  Is anyone refusing to bake a wedding cake for two smart people marrying each other?  
 

I can see where having a label is useful, but I don’t see why these particular labels are being used in ally and advocacy type discussions.  Or does “ally” here just mean reacting to the information with “cool, good to know, I won’t try to set you up with anyone who doesn’t meet your criteria”?

[MEmama]

A big part of being an ally is listening and learning. It’s being okay with getting uncomfortable in an effort to understand a different perspective or another person's truth. No one is saying you have to march at a Pride parade or whatever, but the more we open ourselves and learn, the more we tend to support others. And when we understand others, we are usually more comfortable speaking up on their behalf or otherwise showing our support. Quiet acceptance works too, though, if that’s all you can muster.

[whitestavern]

I don't mind the labels, it's more the public announcements that I don't understand. I feel like these labels are things that one learns about people as they get to know them. For instance, I'm a female married to a male, so therefore I'm heterosexual. I live in a 280 year old tavern filled with antiques, so I like old things. I have a big organic garden and make all my meals from scratch, which indicates I like gardening and am health-oriented. Based on the way I dress and my lack of makeup, I'm not a girly-girl. I enjoy getting to know people, the questions and answers and learning what they're all about. Why do some people feel a need to label? Is it a screening mechanism? Like I don't want people to reject me so therefore I'll label myself and know that those that don't mind those labels are potential candidates for romance or friendship? Or is it just a new fad they want to try out? 

[Catwoman]

3 minutes ago, MEmama said:

A big part of being an ally is listening and learning. It’s being okay with getting uncomfortable in an effort to understand a different perspective or another person's truth. No one is saying you have to march at a Pride parade or whatever, but the more we open ourselves and learn, the more we tend to support others. And when we understand others, we are usually more comfortable speaking up on their behalf or otherwise showing our support. Quiet acceptance works too, though, if that’s all you can muster.

See, I would have no problem marching in a Pride parade, because I do view myself as being an ally, and I do want to see an end to discrimination against LGBTQ people. 

What I'm wondering is why I would have to be an ally to someone who calls herself something like a sapiosexual. She can go ahead and be attracted to whomever she wants, but I’m not going to stand by the sidelines and cheer her on, because I respect her right to date intelligent guys (or whatever,) but I don’t think that’s anything she needs an ally to support, and really, I don’t need her to announce it to me, either, because it’s none of my business and I just don’t care. Maybe that sounds mean, but I don’t have the time or the energy to keep track of all this stuff for everyone I know. If someone wants to tell me she’s sapiosexual, I’ll be polite about it, but I’m probably not going to laud her for her decision (and if enough people start telling me this stuff, I might not even remember who said what.)

I’m probably not making sense. I know what I mean, but I can’t seem to explain it. I hope I’m not being offensive.

[MEmama]

1 minute ago, Catwoman said:

See, I would have no problem marching in a Pride parade, because I do view myself as being an ally, and I do want to see an end to discrimination against LGBTQ people. 

What I'm wondering is why I would have to be an ally to someone who calls herself something like a sapiosexual. She can go ahead and be attracted to whomever she wants, but I’m not going to stand by the sidelines and cheer her on, because I respect her right to date intelligent guys (or whatever,) but I don’t think that’s anything she needs an ally to support, and really, I don’t need her to announce it to me, either, because it’s none of my business and I just don’t care. Maybe that sounds mean, but I don’t have the time or the energy to keep track of all this stuff for everyone I know. If someone wants to tell me she’s sapiosexual, I’ll be polite about it, but I’m probably not going to laud her for her decision (and if enough people start telling me this stuff, I might not even remember who said what.)

I’m probably not making sense. I know what I mean, but I can’t seem to explain it. I hope I’m not being offensive.

And that’s fine. It’s okay to nod politely and move on. I don’t think anyone would say otherwise. 
 

What isn’t okay—and you aren’t doing this but lots of people do— is gaslight, victim blame, mock, laugh or outright reject someone for using a label you (again, not you Cat) don’t understand. 

[Catwoman]

Just now, MEmama said:

And that’s fine. It’s okay to nod politely and move on. I don’t think anyone would say otherwise. 
 

What isn’t okay—and you aren’t doing this but lots of people do— is gaslight, victim blame, mock, laugh or outright reject someone for using a label you (again, not you Cat) don’t understand. 

Thanks! That makes sense to me. I wouldn’t want to make anyone feel badly about using their labels. I wouldn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings, so even if I secretly thought a particular label was silly, I would never actually tell the person what I thought. What good could that possibly accomplish? I would just be nice about it. 

Nodding politely and moving on is what I wanted to do, but I felt like maybe some people might be thinking more along the lines of that not being enough, and if you’re not an ally, you’re an enemy (or something like that.)

 

[pinball]

1 minute ago, Catwoman said:

Thanks! That makes sense to me. I wouldn’t want to make anyone feel badly about using their labels. I wouldn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings, so even if I secretly thought a particular label was silly, I would never actually tell the person what I thought. What good could that possibly accomplish? I would just be nice about it. 

Nodding politely and moving on is what I wanted to do, but I felt like maybe some people might be thinking more along the lines of that not being enough, and if you’re not an ally, you’re an enemy (or something like that.)

 

I don’t think your line of thinking is unreasonable.

especially bc now it is no longer enough to simply not be a racist...you now have to be an anti-racist.

also... “Silence is Violence” 

thats pretty clear that it is no longer acceptable to sit on the sidelines quietly 

[Catwoman]

Just now, pinball said:

I don’t think your line of thinking is unreasonable.

especially bc now it is no longer enough to simply not be a racist...you now have to be an anti-racist.

also... “Silence is Violence” 

thats pretty clear that it is no longer acceptable to sit on the sidelines quietly 

Sometimes, I don’t think it’s so terrible to sit on the sidelines quietly.

If I feel strongly about something, I’ll express it, but if it’s something like someone announcing they are sapiosexual... well... good for them, but I’m not going to make a fuss about it. I don’t have the time or the energy to get worked up over every little thing. I’d rather wait until it’s something that really matters to me.

[Amy in NH]

23 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

Sometimes, I don’t think it’s so terrible to sit on the sidelines quietly.

If I feel strongly about something, I’ll express it, but if it’s something like someone announcing they are sapiosexual... well... good for them, but I’m not going to make a fuss about it. I don’t have the time or the energy to get worked up over every little thing. I’d rather wait until it’s something that really matters to me.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that anyone should get worked up or make a fuss because someone announces they are a sapiosexual.  I guess the test of your integrity comes in what you do if you see that someone being persecuted or discriminated as a result of their sapiosexuality.  That's where allyship comes in.  I really doubt that anyone expressing their sapiosexuality needs an ally, but "common decency" and "polite behavior" seem to have gone out the window in some places and been derided as "political correctness" and "special snowflake" behavior by people who do persecute and discriminate against otherness.

Edited July 9, 2021 by Amy in NH

[LucyStoner]

4 hours ago, MEmama said:

A big part of being an ally is listening and learning. It’s being okay with getting uncomfortable in an effort to understand a different perspective or another person's truth. No one is saying you have to march at a Pride parade or whatever, but the more we open ourselves and learn, the more we tend to support others. And when we understand others, we are usually more comfortable speaking up on their behalf or otherwise showing our support. Quiet acceptance works too, though, if that’s all you can muster.

A lot of the labels people are using are being conflated with LGBT but simply don’t come with the history of oppression and risk of violence.  Sorry, sapiosexuals, demisexuals and those espousing to be star gendered do not face bashing, housing or employment discrimination or arrest (in the recent past or to this day in parts of the world). They simply do not.  

I know a number of people (gay, lesbians and trans) who feel like many straight people are claiming an LGBTQIA+ identity for themselves by redefining T, Q and adding whatever other letters they feel like adding.   To many of the people I know, it feels appropriative and invasive. Pride started as a riot/protest for a reason. Turning it into a corporate street fair for any and all people isn’t actually something that some LGBT people feel well served by.  

Edited July 10, 2021 by LucyStoner

[Melissa Louise]

1 hour ago, MEmama said:

A big part of being an ally is listening and learning. It’s being okay with getting uncomfortable in an effort to understand a different perspective or another person's truth. No one is saying you have to march at a Pride parade or whatever, but the more we open ourselves and learn, the more we tend to support others. And when we understand others, we are usually more comfortable speaking up on their behalf or otherwise showing our support. Quiet acceptance works too, though, if that’s all you can muster.

I've spent my whole life listening to 'sapiosexuals' at poetry readings. They didn't call themselves that, of course, just male geniuses. Trust me, they don't need allies. A kick up the bottom on occasion ? Sure. 

This is nonsense. People attracted solely to other smart people don't need allies. It's a personal preference. Just like people who don't like to read, or people who like to get up early don't need allies. 

This kind of language makes an absolute mockery of the concept of solidarity.

[bibiche]

1 hour ago, Melissa Louise said:

I've spent my whole life listening to 'sapiosexuals' at poetry readings. They didn't call themselves that, of course, just male geniuses. Trust me, they don't need allies. A kick up the bottom on occasion ? Sure. 

This is nonsense. People attracted solely to other smart people don't need allies. It's a personal preference. Just like people who don't like to read, or people who like to get up early don't need allies. 

This kind of language makes an absolute mockery of the concept of solidarity.

I translate “ally” in this instance as someone who doesn’t mock them (even if they may want to). I don’t think anyone is arguing that these people need advocates beyond those who will advocate that others stop making fun of people. I think a lot of kids try on identities and labels. I know I was often navel-gazey and self-absorbed, but no one felt the need to Rant Rant Rant about it. They indulged or ignored me and everyone moved on unscathed. There have always been young people absorbed in figuring out themselves and their place in the world, they just didn’t have as much of an audience as kids today.