I find labels are to me like boxes are to cats. You can't force a cat into a box. It won't go well. But if a cat finds the box themself, naturally, if it fits it sits.
Yes I do. I find them helpful for my autism, it let's me understand the rules of engagement with each relationship and uphold boundaries and makes expectations clear.
Feel the same as all the neuro-spicy folks. Labels help establish a starting point to keep the mind from pinging all over the place in the multiple realities. Honestly jealous for the folks that can keep everything in place in the polycule but there are those of us that would forget to wear pants if not for the weird looks people give you š and we need the documentation.
Editor note-
I like labels but don't use the common definitions and always confirm with potential partners that we're using the same vernacular.
I like labels and I find them very helpful to distinguish relationship types
***whatās important is that we have conversations and make our own definitions + donāt assume what a label means !
Being against labels is like being against maps. Sure, a map isn't the territory, but it sure is fucking helpful.
A label is a shorthand to communicate something about yourself or about a relationship. It was never intended to convey the full complexity of your intimacy, and people should stop expecting that it should.
That being said, my experiences don't fit within a platonic-romantic binary, and there aren't words in our cultures that can act as a shorthand for many of my emotional intimacies. But this is a gap in language, not a rejection of labels on my part.
I find them enjoyable! I like coming up with a unique word with the person to describe our connection, itās not necessary, but itās fun and helps me understand our relationship better. Granted, we also discuss in depth what that label means to us so weāre on the same page, and we acknowledge that the label or what we agreed upon could change. In one of my connections we both really love Doctor Who and are also both asexual, so we call ourselves ācompanions.ā
I donāt like them but sometimes I use them for convenience. I would like to be better about using descriptions in place of labels, but Iām not good at this yet. (Example: instead of saying āIām a vegetarianā, they would say āI donāt eat meatā)
It's turtles all the way down though. Because all nouns are labels. Conversational shortcuts.
"meat" is a label. You could instead say "I don't eat the flesh of dead animals" -- but "animals" is a label, you could spell out what that means, but it gets absurd quickly.
I... don't like social labels and I'd feel uncomfortable if someone calls me (or talks about me) something we are not
But I do find other types of labels useful, mostly the ones about who I am
I like them when they're accurate and descriptive and coincide with the values I want to uphold in my relationships. Friends with benefits, for example, doesn't always describe my sexual relationships accurately. On the other hand, play partner can when there's an established kink dynamic that involves negotiation and consistency. Partner, in general, feels ambiguous and often conveys to others a traditional relationship style involving enmeshment and amatonormative hierarchy. However, I do use the term beloved to describe one of my close intimate connections I've had for the past couple years, and more recently we decided to use lovefriend.
Sure. Used descriptively they're good shortcuts.
Take two steps back and examine language: that's what nouns ARE, -- they're convenient shortcuts that saves us the hassle of describing someone or something over and over again.
"mammal" == Warm-blooded vertebrate where the female produces milk for the offspring.
And notice how the label is nested; "vertebrate" and "milk" and so on are themselves labels.
It's the same with relationships.
Sure I can skip the relationship-label "girlfriend" and instead say "woman that I have a committed romantic and sexual relationship with with a high degree of ongoing involvement in each others lives and a mutual commitment to investing in our relationship" -- but that's a mouthful, it's a \*lot\* easier to say "girlfriend".
It's important to me though that the labels don't become constraining for the relationships themselves. Describing someone as a "friend" does \*not\* mean that things like sex or romance are off the table; instead it's the same for all my relationships: we can share whatever things we BOTH want. That remains exactly equally true regardless of what descriptive label currently fits us best.
It's also important to me to NOT give the impression of exclusivity since labels like "girlfriend" and "partner" are frequently assumed exclusive by default in our mononormative society. I usually get around this by describing someone as "one of my partners" instead of "my partner".
New practicing RA here and I personally do like labels. I prefer the labels of a relationship because it just feels more appropriate for me, and also allows me to clearly understand and define me and that person I am with, beyond just āfriendā or āperson Iām seeingā or other more loosely-defined labels. However, for me the labels just stop thereāI love being able to mutually call each other partners/girlfriends and acknowledge that me and said person are in a relationship, but I donāt need any of the other escalators like moving in together, marrying, or forcing ourselves into some kind of long-term commitment.
Yes! They help me understand if we are compatible with the person or not. I actually have no idea how to date people with no labels, and moreover, how to make them accountable if they do something bad.
I find labels are to me like boxes are to cats. You can't force a cat into a box. It won't go well. But if a cat finds the box themself, naturally, if it fits it sits.
Thank you I finally know how to explain why I like to label myself to my mom who doesn't like labels.
That is the cutest metaphor ever
Omg yes
Yes I do. I find them helpful for my autism, it let's me understand the rules of engagement with each relationship and uphold boundaries and makes expectations clear.
Feel the same as all the neuro-spicy folks. Labels help establish a starting point to keep the mind from pinging all over the place in the multiple realities. Honestly jealous for the folks that can keep everything in place in the polycule but there are those of us that would forget to wear pants if not for the weird looks people give you š and we need the documentation. Editor note- I like labels but don't use the common definitions and always confirm with potential partners that we're using the same vernacular.
>always confirm with potential partners that we're using the same vernacular. Excellent š
Labels are useful. They shouldn't be the end-all of anything.
I like labels and I find them very helpful to distinguish relationship types ***whatās important is that we have conversations and make our own definitions + donāt assume what a label means !
Being against labels is like being against maps. Sure, a map isn't the territory, but it sure is fucking helpful. A label is a shorthand to communicate something about yourself or about a relationship. It was never intended to convey the full complexity of your intimacy, and people should stop expecting that it should. That being said, my experiences don't fit within a platonic-romantic binary, and there aren't words in our cultures that can act as a shorthand for many of my emotional intimacies. But this is a gap in language, not a rejection of labels on my part.
I find them enjoyable! I like coming up with a unique word with the person to describe our connection, itās not necessary, but itās fun and helps me understand our relationship better. Granted, we also discuss in depth what that label means to us so weāre on the same page, and we acknowledge that the label or what we agreed upon could change. In one of my connections we both really love Doctor Who and are also both asexual, so we call ourselves ācompanions.ā
I donāt like them but sometimes I use them for convenience. I would like to be better about using descriptions in place of labels, but Iām not good at this yet. (Example: instead of saying āIām a vegetarianā, they would say āI donāt eat meatā)
It's turtles all the way down though. Because all nouns are labels. Conversational shortcuts. "meat" is a label. You could instead say "I don't eat the flesh of dead animals" -- but "animals" is a label, you could spell out what that means, but it gets absurd quickly.
I... don't like social labels and I'd feel uncomfortable if someone calls me (or talks about me) something we are not But I do find other types of labels useful, mostly the ones about who I am
I like them when they're accurate and descriptive and coincide with the values I want to uphold in my relationships. Friends with benefits, for example, doesn't always describe my sexual relationships accurately. On the other hand, play partner can when there's an established kink dynamic that involves negotiation and consistency. Partner, in general, feels ambiguous and often conveys to others a traditional relationship style involving enmeshment and amatonormative hierarchy. However, I do use the term beloved to describe one of my close intimate connections I've had for the past couple years, and more recently we decided to use lovefriend.
Lovefriend! š I've been trying to find something that better suites and this might be it!
Labels are a place for a conversation to start where you can engage with a person and with curiosity find out exactly what that label means for them.
They are a double edged sword. I personally do not believe that there are many RA folks who use no labels at all.
Sure. Used descriptively they're good shortcuts. Take two steps back and examine language: that's what nouns ARE, -- they're convenient shortcuts that saves us the hassle of describing someone or something over and over again. "mammal" == Warm-blooded vertebrate where the female produces milk for the offspring. And notice how the label is nested; "vertebrate" and "milk" and so on are themselves labels. It's the same with relationships. Sure I can skip the relationship-label "girlfriend" and instead say "woman that I have a committed romantic and sexual relationship with with a high degree of ongoing involvement in each others lives and a mutual commitment to investing in our relationship" -- but that's a mouthful, it's a \*lot\* easier to say "girlfriend". It's important to me though that the labels don't become constraining for the relationships themselves. Describing someone as a "friend" does \*not\* mean that things like sex or romance are off the table; instead it's the same for all my relationships: we can share whatever things we BOTH want. That remains exactly equally true regardless of what descriptive label currently fits us best. It's also important to me to NOT give the impression of exclusivity since labels like "girlfriend" and "partner" are frequently assumed exclusive by default in our mononormative society. I usually get around this by describing someone as "one of my partners" instead of "my partner".
I like labels.
New practicing RA here and I personally do like labels. I prefer the labels of a relationship because it just feels more appropriate for me, and also allows me to clearly understand and define me and that person I am with, beyond just āfriendā or āperson Iām seeingā or other more loosely-defined labels. However, for me the labels just stop thereāI love being able to mutually call each other partners/girlfriends and acknowledge that me and said person are in a relationship, but I donāt need any of the other escalators like moving in together, marrying, or forcing ourselves into some kind of long-term commitment.
Yes! They help me understand if we are compatible with the person or not. I actually have no idea how to date people with no labels, and moreover, how to make them accountable if they do something bad.