Is there "Label Autonomy?"

Is it really ever about personal identity or personal choice?

Theresa Scovil has a Patreon with all their inspiring cartoons!

First Personal

I have been given labels throughout my life that I didn’t see how they related.

I did get the generic r*tard, stupid, lazy, broken. I knew I was different, but didn’t see how any of those terms applied.

I got the rude, condescending, agressive, angry and other terms relating to communications mismatches where Allistic people were making false assumptions as to my emotions and motivations for asking clarifying questions.

I was also told I wasn’t masculine enough, and that “all men” like sports, competition, etc. Again, I knew I was different, and didn’t understand how those terms related.

I now accept that I’m Autistic. Unfortunately it isn’t yet a label that is well understood, and I still have to spend quite a bit of time helping people move past misconceptions. It is, however, still far better language than the other labels that were applied to me.

I openly disclose I’m Autistic, and wear a neurodiversity pin in public to open discussions.

Then Systems

One of my current special interests is Systems theory applied to Individualism.

I've noticed that those who self-identify as "progressive" are the first to say we should not label ourselves. They claim that these labels are divisive.

They then believe that labels are part of a "personal identity", and push this focus on individuals in their part of identity politics.

Identity is often of a group.

A peoples being Indigenous is a group identity and has more ties to citizenship/nationality, culture, ethnicity, religion, etc than anything biological. It is a group that is highly racialized by the Canadian state. Being Indigenous is not about what you claim about yourself, but who claims you. Blood quantum attributed to an individual is a colonial/racist construct that has been imposed on Indigenous peoples by settler-colonial governments that manufacture scarcity.

If you read the Genocide Convention, it is largely discussing group identities and rights of that collective.

“In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”

Race isn't something you are (personal identity, biology, etc) but is something that is systemically done to you (a social construct that imposes a social hierarchy). Racialization may sometimes manifest itself as individuals being rude, but that isn't what racism is and being individually polite doesn't reduce racism.

Neurotype has a biological basis, but the current assessment process is primarily focused on what the dominant culture observes and dislikes/pathologizes. It is still a label for what is done to us, and not yet a description of that key part of who we are.

There are so many group identities I’m aware of where a narrow focus on individualism blocks people from understanding what brings these groups together, but also understanding intersectionality in how the treatment of groups intersect within any specific individual.