Labels

On a private forum (that shall remain anonymous) I read "... the more firmly someone applies a label to her/himself, the less likely to be able to be polyamorous in any practical sense. If that label has a capital letter at the beginning, the likelihood of "thinking for oneself" drops a bit further."

Sounds extremist to me, particularly considering how wide-ranging a generalization it is. After all isn't referring to yourself as "polyamorous", in itself, an act of applying a label? Isn't your own name a capitalized label? And there are many other identifying labels that you own i.e. your species, ethnicity, nationality, and heritage affiliation, to name just a few.

Some of these labels we choose, others are applied to us, and though we have no practical choice about their application (can't tell people what to think or say), we may deny our ownership of them. However, what purpose would it serve for me to deny that I am all of the adjective labels that describe or identify who I am? It wouldn't change the fact if the adjective is accurate. The quoted statement implies that by choosing other labels for myself i.e. husband, friend, lover, atheist, liberal, etc., I am somehow alienating myself from another chosen label (polyamorous in this case)? No, the quote is a flamboyant generalization.

Labels (whether applied to us or made by choice) are tools of identification. Identity is a fundamental concept of communication, consequently so are labels. Attempting to relegate or otherwise classify the act of “labeling” as something impractical or inane is itself a ridiculous and self-defeating. We need labels to communicate effectively. True some labels do not adequately communicate their intended use, and may be quite general in utility. That’s why we have so many of them – to drill down to the specifics – to gain an understanding of that which we are trying to identify.