Gender Identity Is Downstream From Economic Downturn
It's all... status signalling? Always has been
How do we introduce ourselves, by profession, diet or maybe sexual preference? Why do people say their sexual preference in non-dating apps? Or even on other occasions.
When you’re stating your sexual preferences in twitter bio, it alwso conveys your talking preferences. There's lower chance of you talking with people not sharing this preference.
Economic position identity - Western default
In the old days for two newly met people profession was the most important characteristic. Social clues, such as potential views, social circles, income and class relations. Now political and sexual identity serve that function (personal being (micro)political). Medieval guild system and American Golden Age (1945-1973) are good examples of this.
In the periods of economic expansion games are plus sum. Each person creates value in the big chain of value conversions. Social station is dictated by the position in the chain. See contemporary Bitcoiner identity as opposed to nocoiner.
After saturation plus-sum economic games form less of the chain. Other status games, such as virtue signalling through good works overtake.
Late capitalism is the saturation of US technoeconomical boom and subsequent civilizational decline. There is no enough spare ‘gas’ to fuel human - friendly values - job stability, housing and healthcare. No more big flows from which you can carve out some humanist precipitate. Instead there are weakly throbbing streams optimizing more and more just to survive. Capital and CEOs need to play into this, the workers pushed into Uberization. There’s no happy ending for these Americans.
2008 crisis was the end of the dream. Middle class millennials entering no longer believe in stable career prospects. On a personal level economic stability is social stability. And social stability is attachment to a given station, bleeds into personal identity. Millenials can't get stable identity from jobs. You need a role to play for longer ‘next 5 years’.
Sexual identity comes to rescue
The queer discourse of the 2010s did not resemble its predecessors. 1970s, 80s life of Foucault et al. Daring leftists operating on the outskirts of mainstream discourse. Now 2010s mainstream version - tries to be all nice, normie-like. Wherever you stand politically, my reader, you should see the relative inferiority of the vibe of the mainstreamed version.
Then appeared ‘lifestyle queer’ persons. This triggered another event. Middle class young white females started to steal the thunder. Labeling themselves as ‘trans ally’, ‘bi-curious’. Using the status enhancing keywords, while annoying many of their benefactors. Bachelorette parties in gay clubs - this sort of attention isn’t desired. They appropriate signalling value of another group without having the skin in the game. Eating the cake and having it. Mimetic parasites.
When you don’t have a stable job, industries are flatlining and inflation creeps. What's the difference between defining yourself as a member of X procession and as an individual of Y sexual preference?
Both are exclusionary group identities indicating what connections you are more interested in. Broadcasting whom you'd be interested in meeting, socially engaging with. You’d have less to talk about with those that don’t. By stating such a fact publicly, you indicate that it’s public business. You imply that there’s a wide spectrum of people that could DO STUFF with you based around that common characteristics.
In social circumstances, people signal their identity. That opinion is shared by the group to the extent that emitter is respected in it. Then the same can be applied to the relationship of the group to the society.
Public identity
You indicate some public business and your identity. What’s the difference between economic position and sexual preference? It might be the case that in the individualized, atomized world of today there’s none. I believe Tiqqun would agree on this.
That when you broadcast your sexual identity, it’s a sexual message. When a sexual message broadcast this signals availability, being-a-potential-partner. Do people indicating publicly their sexual preferences do casual sex with strangers more often?
Common knowledge hints 'yes'. The reverse case is a picture of atomization. People play ‘introduction game’ differently by class, status and gender. In our society you show what matters to you and what you think might you have in common with the interlocutor. Reading twitter bios is very interesting in that regard.
There are probably some order effects, with identites mentioned first and last being the strongest. Speaking early of a characteristic that limits social engagement you signal unwillingness to engage with the given social context .
That’s the atomization. Either you’re broadcasting a message to potential sexual partners (r strategy) or you signal it for your identity, to ‘express yourself’. In the latter you’re not optimizing for social engagement, you lower the potential number of conversations. Or at least general conversations, not echo chamber exchanges from being in the same ingroup.
>‘that’s what I’m into, that’s me and you see, I’m interesting, but there is little we could do together’
A third case is also possible. In society not only positively valent interactions happen. Controversial descriptions (‘King of Tesla’, ‘Biqueer’, ‘anime thighs admirer’) hyperstitionalize your importance proportionally to the outrage. Negative flows are a good tool to limit undesirable engagements.
>if you don’t support gay marriage, unfollow me, trash will sort itself out
Fourth case - you’re singalling sexual preference for cultural representation. Then it's not the best strategy. It isbetter to lead with example and inspire. Let them know what group you’re belonging to once they’re curious enough. Don't let them say
> but who asked?
Preachers shouting about Jesus on the streets and asking you to open heart are obnoxious.
Recap
Stressing sexual preferences in your self-presentation:
- indicates weakness of economy
- indicates your ingroup
- might suggest you’re a ‘slut’ or a snobbish self-expressive type (some will judge you for any of these)