Puzzle Pieces

In response to Brandon's post "Intersectionality" (12/2/2012):

The idea of identifying as a 'humanist' is intriguing and, I believe, wise.  However, are all smaller-category labels harmful?  I would argue that they are not.  Labels such as feminism and masculism have two components - firstly, they apply to a certain issue (gender inequality) and secondly, they take up a certain side on that issue (women's rights or men's rights, respectively).  The second part is, I think, most definitely a problem, because it excludes people.  Masculism, by focusing only on men's rights, ignores women, and feminism does the reverse.  One cannot benefit from both, since (currently) society recognizes each person as only a man or only a woman.

The first part, on the other hand, does not seem problematic.  Gender inequality effects all people because all people have a gender orientation - even agendered people are distinguishable by their lack of gender.  By addressing the issue of gender equality, one is not excluding anyone, although one might well be ignoring various other issues.  I think that choosing labels for different issues can help people by breaking down the vast conglomeration of social ills facing today's society into manageable chunks without excluding anyone.  While the ideal social activist is aware of all inequalities and works to right them, in reality it is very difficult for someone to effectively advocate for everything at once.  Instead, people usually specialise, supporting the rights of all people but putting the majority of their efforts into eliminating inequality based on one factor.  Thus, while I promote the extinction of exclusive labels, like feminism and masculism, or gay rights and queer rights, I support the existence of inclusive but issue-specific labels, such as gender egalitarianism or non-discrimination regarding sexuality.  I also like the idea of an umbrella label, like human rights, to increase awareness of the multitude of issues while not forcing anyone to attempt to spread their effort out too thinly.