I am...
"a Mormon"
"an Ex-Mormon"
"a post-Mormon"
"a Christian"
"a Never Mo"
"an atheist"
"a Muslim"
"Gay"
"Straight"
"Theist"
"Deist"

The list goes on and on. We apparently love to label ourselves and others. It helps us make sense of the vast sea of individuals on our planet. It gives us context during conversations. It helps us locate our allies and our enemies quickly. When we use a label what we are doing is relying on a stereotype. When we say someone is a "Mormon" we mean the stereotypical meaning of Mormon. We then attempt to adjust the stereotype by adding a "but." "She is a Mormon, but she is okay if you drink coffee around her." Why the qualifier? Because the stereotype of a self-righteous Mormon doesn't fit that individual. We are in constant need of qualifying our positions when we take or assign a label to ourselves or others. Individuals are far more complex than stereotypes, which is why they are almost always inaccurate.

We don't go around saying "Oh, Jerry isn't a Muslim, Catholic, Mormon, Jew, Buddhist, Theist, Deist, Wiccan, Hindu, Sikh, or Scientologist." We simply say "Jerry is an Atheist." We don't mean it in the sense that Jerry isn't a lamp, or a car, or a dog. We mean that Jerry's ideas, personality, and thoughts generally fall in to an atheist stereotype. It helps us understand Jerry. But don't worry, Jerry isn't one of THOSE "Atheists." He is still a nice person. So you are allowed to be friends with him.

There are days I wish I could ditch the label, yet I can't help but label away. Today I am an Ex-Mormon. Some day I hope to just simply be a human.

More than any other group that I know Mormons love the label. They like to separate themselves apart from others. In another post the poster said he is glad he is free to think and experience and feel emotions now. I can't imagine never doing those things. Mormons want their flock to be so very different than others.

My Protestant congregation could fit into any Christian (mainstream) church and no one would know or care about the fact that they were members somewhere else. I never talk about atheists by labeling them. I simply say if someone asks that they don't attend any church that I know of. Labels in politics really bug me. It is the source of so much discord. Wish there were not categories of liberals, conservatives, dems and repubs. If it were not for primaries I would never put myself in a political category.

honestone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More than any other group that I know Mormons love
> the label.

This gave me a bit of a chuckle. Your statement simply re-enforces what I was trying to say. You just used a label to re-enforce a stereotype. The label? Mormons. The stereotype? That Mormons "love the label."

Don't feel bad. We all do it. Some day maybe our species will grow out of it. For now I think it is "just the way we are." We need labels to communicate.

Maybe you don't understand that as a nevermo, like it or not, Mormons did put themselves in a clear group of elitists in my presence. I lived among them for over 4 yrs. and there is no way in H___ I could not see them as a very strange group of people. They did it to themselves due to how they treated my family while we lived in Utah. So yes, some people, make others "label" their belief system. Wish it weren't so with Mormons but it is.

Does that make labels bad ?

If "label" is another word for stereotype I think it might have the potential to be bad. Often it is indifferent. In my opinion it depends on context. Adolf Hitler calling someone a Jew carries different meaning than Woody Allen calling someone a Jew. That's because Adolf and Woody are operating from polar opposite stereotypes. That is why I think we are constantly adjusting our labels with qualifiers.

Here is an experiment: Try to describe the personality of the stereotypical Atheist from the point of view of various opposing stereotypes and tell me if there is anything bad to be found.

Now be careful here. I'm not trying to get you mad. I am only inviting you to think about it. I would expect nothing less from one of my fellow atheists (a label, arghh!). Why? Because from my point of view the stereotypical atheist will carefully consider a premise before responding. Depending on your response, we might have to qualify the label on your name: "Dave the Atheist, but ..." :=)

Consider the humor that human communication presents and try to have a little fun with it. This is simply me ranting about the reality of the way we as humans communicate, and trying to poke fun at it a little.

Many of our fellow humans dislike labels, except when they are using them to communicate. Which is often. How many times have you heard someone say: "I hate to use a label, but <name> is sooooo <label with inferred stereotype>."

Aside from using two labels, I don't think there is any such creature as you describe.

But the thing that is bad there is the stereotyping, not the label "atheist".

There is nothing wrong with labels, even our NAMES are labels.

It is how people use labels that is bad. Stereotype and label are not interchangeable.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Stereotype and label are not interchangeable.

Let me say that I agree with you. I wish this wasn't devolving in to a completely off-topic discussion because I would love to continue to probe your noggin to understand your reasoning behind the above quote.

I was trying to keep the topic on religious labels generally and labels used often on RfM specifically... but the thread is all shot to pieces now. :)

When I use the LABEL human, I include all humans regardless of if they are STEREOTYPICAL humans or NON-STEREOTYPICAL humans.

While all stereotypical humans are humans, not all humans are stereotypical humans.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/10/2011 05:17AM by MJ.

I've been recovering from severe abuse in my past, as well as recovering, with my children, from the Mormon cult. This has left me with a weak self-image.

I feel that when I left Mormonism, that I lost most of my identity, if you know what I mean. I'm not a Mormon, not an organist, not a Sunday school teacher. Also, I'm not someone who obeys, not a follower, not clueless to the truth. I'm also not a victim, not a second-class citizen, not a disappointment. I am not an apostate, because I did not leave a legitimate church--I left a cult. I'm not a Christian, either, because a cult baptism is not considered a Christian baptism. Instead, if pressed, I say that I occasionally go to a Christian church, or I say that I try to follow the teachings of Christ.

So, as an invisible, shunned, marginalized minority in a hugely Mormon family and neighborhood, I attempt to establish my identity by defining what I am NOT.

I am NOT a Mormon.

Saying I'm an ex-Mormon feels confrontational to me, like I'm challenging someone to ask me about my history, so I can talk about it. For the rest of my life, I want to keep my religious beliefs PRIVATE. The reason for this, is that I believe that religion should not be important in relationships, or in the work place, or anywhere but at church.

I'm also an ex-Republican--do I want to talk about that? I like being a divorcee, rather than an ex-wife. Labels like ex-whatever highlight the focus on the whatever. My life does not center around my husband anymore, so I don't want to label myself as an ex-wife. Likewise, my life isn't ruled by the Mormon cult anymore, so ex-Mormon will not apply, once I'm fully recovered.

We are ex-teenagers, ex-students, ex-bug-collectors, or whatever--it just depends on what we're focused on. We could use labels to brag that we're an ex-studentbody president, an ex-athlete, an ex-Mercedes owner.

I think it would be ideal to meet people and meet life fresh with each new day, with no baggage and no labels. (Well, maybe the necessary training titles, university degrees, and licenses that qualify us for our jobs.)

Mormons use their label for advertising. Their image is extremely important to their PR. I agree that Mormons use labels and titles way too much, socially.

Oh how I wish to be an ex-Mormon. Just one more school year. One more school year(woohoo!)

I yam what I yam
And that's all what I yam;
I yam Popeye the Sailor Man.

I was 26 when I started college after eight years in the Navy, Vietnam era. People had trouble finding the right label:

College student? you must be Radical.
Veteran? you must be a Bitter psychopath
Engineering student? You must be Socially inept.
Conservative? you must Hate gay people, ethnic minorities.

... and so on.

I love my new labels--I don't call myself exmormon. I call myself apostate and I call myself an adulteress. I was trying to think of a third "A" to call myself.

I guess I'm an aspostate agnostic adulteress. I wear the badge with pride here in Utah.

I see this everywhere. What in the world is an adulteress?

I have video. Only $19.95 + S&H. :)

Ron

... that there was funny. I don't care who you are!

Timothy

cl2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I love my new labels--I don't call myself
> exmormon. I call myself apostate and I call myself
> an adulteress. I was trying to think of a third
> "A" to call myself.
>

How about "amazing?"

:)

I'm a "LIMB". (Lesbian in Man's Body)


From now and throughout all eternity, I shall be "LIMB".

Ron

It's used in careers -- lots of labels for job descriptions.
It won't go away. Labels are identifiers. They are necessary. So are initials after a person's name. Those are necessary in many careers also.

I think it's all just fine. I don't mind at all.

I am a lamp unto the feet of nevermos to teach them Mormons wear secret underwear. My car has Anti-mormon material in it and some local Mormons near where I live who had to answer to the police I sent on them, and trolls on this board, must think I am a dirty dog.

Pay Lay Alol