Society expects you to pick a specific label to accurately describe your sexual orientation. This ideology invalidates those who either prefer not to disclose their sexual orientation, are unsure, or simply do not want to assert themselves in a preconceived box. This social norm of categorizing individuals reinforces the idea that everyone should fit into a certain category.
Invasive questions about someone's sexuality have been normalized when someone can’t accurately describe their sexual orientation within the labels we are used to. People often seek a more explicit response when someone is perceived or known to be non-heteronormative but does not identify with labels such as lesbian, bisexual, or pansexual. What gender have you most recently dated, or what gender have you most often been with? These questions create pressure on an individual to disclose their sexual behaviour or explain their background in order to be fully accepted.
All of these labels help us to understand ourselves better, but not everyone identifies with, knows or does not want to label themselves. What then? Why do most people outside and within the queer community expect you to group yourself into a box? You should be able to just live freely without the immense societal pressure to label yourself. You should be able to date, like, love whoever you want without any questions. Labeling your sexuality based on a specific pattern of your past partner's gender shouldn’t be the norm it is right now. Labels place pressure to know your whole future relations especially at a young age. Sexuality is a spectrum, and it should work as such. You don't have to specify anything, you just have to live your own life and enjoy the current moment. Having a label is amazing and fully understandable, but not having one should be normal as well. I don’t want to unnormalize labels, since the deep historical meaning behind them is crucial to the queer community. Understanding your own sexuality and connecting with others who feel the same way is also an important part of individualistic freedom, which is yet another reason why labels help us. My wish is simply to normalize not having a label for yourself and for others to accept that without further questioning.
It is also crucial to note that I acknowledge my own privilege in not needing a label, since the country I reside in allows me to be relatively at peace with any gender I date. With the majority of the people I'm surrounded by accepting non-heteronormative relations allows me to freely explore my sexuality beyond labels. I don't need a certain label since I'm fortunate enough to be surrounded by straight and queer people who support me regardless of a specific identity. Unfortunately, this is not the case for most LGBTQ+ individuals.
"The everyday gendered goods that underpin the representation of heteronormativity and performativity of feminine/masculine and female/male dichotomies; the gender segregated public bathrooms that enforce binary perceptions of gender and silence queer and trans identities." (Intersectional Perspectives on Design, Politics and Power, School of Arts and Communication, Malmö University, November 14–15, 2016). As explained above, the issue of labeling is integrated deep into our everyday lives. When something doesn't directly affect us, we rarely notice it. For instance, if you identify with your birth assigned gender, using public restrooms seems like a straightforward task, right? The norm of labeling sexual orientation as a way to categorize people is an intersectional issue since it affects individuals differently based on overlapping aspects of their identity, such as gender, race, culture, and socioeconomic background. People experience the world from multiple different angles and individualistic viewpoints. For some people, labels don't capture their identity or feel comfortable, since sexuality is a wide spread spectrum that can change over time and experiences. Labels relating to sexual orientation can also come with certain expectations related to gender roles. This puts pressure on individuals and can negatively affect their emotional well-being. People can face internal or external conflicts about aligning with a particular label. Everyone's experience and emotions regarding this topic are different, which is why there needs to be space for everyone, regardless of a specific box.
The visual narration of labeling people shows itself distinctively in society. We have color-coded practices for different sexual orientations. Sexual orientations are represented by distinct colors and flags. Even if you aren't part of the queer community, you can easily spot the color combinations that are used to represent the bisexual flag (pink, purple and blue) and the lesbian flag (orange, white and pink). These commonly used color schemes serve as a visual shortcut for various orientations and are generally recognized. They are empowering and safe for some but simultaneously reinforce the idea that everyone should have their “own flag” that they fully identify with. Apart from colorful flags, we also use checkboxes and forms when discussing sexual orientations. These boxes often only have a few options to choose from that often limit sexuality to either straight, gay or lesbian. In some cases, you might find the “other” option where it is still asked to specify your sexuality. These visuals limit your freedom and suggest you choose a label for yourself.
Every year when we move closer to June, you can spot various pride merchandise that brands and companies use to signalize their support for the queer community. Often, this is mostly rainbow washing and these companies only profit from their merchandise on behalf of LGBTQ+ people while still consciously supporting political parties that continuously work against queer rights. But that is not the problem I want to talk about right now. This merchandise, along with social media icons incorporates distinct LGBTQ+ symbols and flags to help with the visibility of queer people, yet furthers the idea that sexual orientations need a specific “stamp” in order to be fully seen. “The mass media have a tradition of visual simplification in order to isolate their messages to attract attention. Such simplification denies the complexity of life's experience, for while simple statements, familiar and repeated imagery sell the product and the idea most efficiently, they also reinforce restricting separations.” (This passage was derived from lecture notes first presented at Hunter College in the fall of 1972. The ideas about design and its relationship to feminism are influenced by sources such as C. Wright Mills, Power, Politics and People (New York: Ballantine Books, 1962); Amos Rapoport and Robert E. Kantor, "Complexity and Ambiguity in Environmental Design," American Institute of Planners Journal, July 1967; Juliet Mitchell, Women's Estate (New York: Pantheon Books, 1971); and Robert Boguslaw, The New Utopians: A Study of System Design and Social Change (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1965)). This simplification dismisses the unlabeled queer people in the community furthering their invisibility in our society.
Labels can be both a comfort and a cage. For others they offer connection and belonging but for some they feel restrictive. In a world where labels often define visibility, we must honour the freedom to exist outside of them without owing anyone an explanation.
Aligning our identities with other people's expectations shouldn't be the norm for functioning in our society. True freedom within oneself is found by embracing your own journey as a moving spectrum rather than a static box. Our experiences, identities and ways of seeing the world around us are deeply personal. Only through open-mindedness and mutual understanding can we create a world that honours this complexity of the human experience.