Believe it or not, it can be implied with your original comment. As soon as you put labels on something, you’re saying “of course it’s a white male cisgender CEO” - but if it were, for example, a black trans person, would you suddenly go “of course it’s a black trans CEO”? By labelling something, you’re suddenly saying that everything that you didn’t explicitly label is somehow different - somehow, a non-white, non-male, non-cis CEO is different than a white male cis CEO.
As another user said, it’s an unnecessary label for the context at hand that serves, at best, to make people like me go “ok, unnecessary for the labels but go for it”, and at worst it divides people because people are stupid and will get hung up on culture and identity in contexts where neither are needed.
Poggervania@kbin.social 1 year ago
Believe it or not, it can be implied with your original comment. As soon as you put labels on something, you’re saying “of course it’s a white male cisgender CEO” - but if it were, for example, a black trans person, would you suddenly go “of course it’s a black trans CEO”? By labelling something, you’re suddenly saying that everything that you didn’t explicitly label is somehow different - somehow, a non-white, non-male, non-cis CEO is different than a white male cis CEO.
As another user said, it’s an unnecessary label for the context at hand that serves, at best, to make people like me go “ok, unnecessary for the labels but go for it”, and at worst it divides people because people are stupid and will get hung up on culture and identity in contexts where neither are needed.
Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Just call a spade a spade, they’re a bigot.