Labels, Labels, Labels

Alberto Ruggieri | Getty Images

        Recently, I have noticed a certain phenomenon in today’s society—labeling.

“Oh, you say that there are only two genders? You’re homophobic.”

“Oh, you support Trump? You’re racist and xenophobic.”

“Oh, you’re *insert disagreement here*? You’re *insert pejoratives here*”

I have always been in defense of Gen Z and Millenials, saying that we are the two best and strongest generations that the human species has ever produced thus far. But in all honesty, that opinion is looking pretty dull to me as of late.

We have embraced the trendiness of being a victim and have become so quick to judge certain individual circumstances, labeling based solely on the merits of superficialities. No longer do we acknowledge the existence of nuances, gray-areas, and have become rather hasty to just slap a “Sexist, Intolerant, Xenophobic, Homophobic, Islamophobic, Racist, Bigoted” sticker on anyone we disagree with.

I only thought this existed in the sphere of the interwebs—social media if you will—but when I saw these ill-founded ideologies permeating the walls of my inner circle and the minds of those who are close to me, that was when I genuinely felt scared.

Scared because these terms being flagrantly thrown around do nothing but delineate the “Oppressors” and ostracize them—but who defines who these “Oppressors” are? And under what constitutions? Your subjective opinions that change depending on the weather?

Not only does the weaponization of these terms do nothing good for society, it actually does us more harm than good. Because if you call every single person that disagrees with you one of the “S.I.X.H.I.R.B.” acronym, it’s tantamount to inflating the currency, which then allows those who are genuine racists, bigots, and homophobes to slip by unnoticed. Also, if everything is racist, xenophobic, and bigotted—then nothing is.

Lastly, by labeling pejoratives to every single person you are in disagreement with, you inevitably cause the weakening of their definitions and allow for the constant changing of its usage. An example of this would be the word “Homophobia.”

Recently, the term homophobia has been portrayed as the extreme prejudice or hatred towards homosexuals—but this is a radically simplistic definition of the term; let us not forget the suffix phobia in the word, which quite literally means “an irrational fear of something.” So by definition, a homophobe would start hyperventilating and sweating bowling pins the moment a homosexual walks into the room.

Merriam-Webster’s dictionary coined the term as “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or gay people.” Now we must be careful by defining what it means to discriminate, as all of us discriminate in our day-to-day lives, hopefully discriminating in the sense of choosing which the best choice would be.

All of this to say that we must not be too precarious in labeling people, for do we really know the entirety of each story for us to just throw names left and right? Are those who disagree with us truly racist, homophobes, and bigots—or are they merely stating their ideas and opinions that are different from yours? What we are in genuine need of is an honest discussion between opposite ideas. And maybe, just maybe, come to a clarified conclusion without being dramatically offended.