>>40929253
I think gay is an entirely valid tribal self identity; straight, not so much. I have often told them to their face that the definition of a straight is a neurotic heterosexual, because it is.

But as a term of innate being, I think all these labels are worthless and pseudo-science. For real fun, start getting conversations about what is a 'bisexual'.

I just sort of got out of the label thing eons ago and let people call me whatever based on their own views just because I got tired of everyone, bis, gays and straights, using some reference to my personal history as a platform to launch an often inappropriate discussion about who is what. It wouldn't have been so bad except the point always seems to be to convince me of what I "am" or to educate them as if I had any authority to speak for anyone but myself. Its one thing to discuss views, its another to dictate terms to and for others.

When it comes to language, I get a bit more militant. I am much more aggressive on the topic of such labels when there is a discussion about ideas, because words are meant to both define an idea as well as being hijacked to promote an idea. So when people engage in promoting an idea using the terms, I get a lot more rigid, because the labels get used in sophistry, and therein lies the breakdown of reason, which is simply dangerous.

Taken to its absurd extreme, thats how you end up with so-called professionals telling children that boys can be girls and vice versa. That is simply a pathological and dangerous misuse of language.