Labels are great. We
all use them and, for better or worse, they are necessary. The purpose of labels as we all know is
generalization. The trouble with
generalizations is that they are always bad for everyone. See what I did there? I made a genera... um... yeah.. I'm sorry.
Aaaanyway, Certain types of labels are usually safe. Those that are, for lack of a better term set
in stone (i.e.: a ball is a ball, a tree is a tree and that is that). A bit more difficult are the ones describing belief
or ideology. The trouble starts when the label used becomes more important than
the person being described. When it
becomes more important that Barbra is a republican than that she is an
individual person, that is when the labels start to hurt us. When we decide that we know everything about
a person by the label we give them. It is encapsulated by that label we don't
feel the need to examine any
further. Why would we? She is a republican. We all have a general idea what that is, so
why bother. Unfortunately or fortunately
(I am leaning toward the latter) people are just not that simple and the social
belief systems they subscribe to is certainly not. So why to we have this tendency to do
this? That is easy, we, as a species,
tend to be lazy. Aaaand, there is
another one of those generalizations, humans equal lazy.
So, Barbra is a republican.
Republicans are against abortions.
I am pro-choice. I don't like
people who try to control others so, therefore I don't like Barbra and I don't
have to think about her, she is a republican, not a person. But wait, did you ever ask her if that is
what she believes? Not all republicans
are against abortion. I have met more
than a few people who are pro-choice and still consider themselves
republican. But, Logan , you may be thinking, doesn't someone
have to believe in A, B, and C. Well,
yes and no. One has to subscribe to A,
B, and C but who decides what exactly A, B, and C are? If you ask ten different people to describe
what exactly makes someone a whatever you are liable to get ten different
answers some wildly so. Sure there are
core beliefs held by this group or that group but that is not all people are. People are never just one thing. Every person's mental landscape (personality,
thought processes, history, whatnot) consist of many things. Even the most boring of us (why are you
staring at me when I say that) is made up of innumerable thoughts. But, in all honesty, it is much easier to
just look at the label and call it a day.
Doing that, however is unfair to both of us. It judges her unfairly and deprives me of
meeting a richly nuanced and unique individual.
Here's another example, I consider myself a liberal
person. I have a buddy who's opinions on
certain things radically differ from mine.
If pressed, I would say he is a conservative, but that is nowhere near
all he is. He has thoughts and dreams
that have nothing to do with that label just as I do. There are quite a few issues that we can agree on. Had I judged him by just that label, or he by
mine, we both would have missed out on a strong and rewarding friendship, and,
let's be honest, those are really hard to come by.
Sure, dealing with labels are easier than dealing with people
but the cost of doing so is very high.
It tends to allow us to remain smaller and more judgmental. While easier to do, that prevents us from
growing as a people. In my opinion the
cost far outstrips the benefit.
Rant over... for now.
No comments:
Post a Comment