Increasingly uncomfortable with labels

There is a sense of belonging that accompanies being in a group. Feeling safer and nurtured by likeminded people. It’s very seductive. And it’s generally the norm. It’s part of formulating our ideas of our sense of identity. This sense, encompassing our memories, experiences, relationships, and values, creates a relatively steady perception of who we are over time (Psychology Today on Identity). The group has an identity. We help in defining it as much as it defines us. It evolves. We are rooted in the stories of its past. They are our foundation. And that is also the problem. How can we criticise the group without undermining ourselves? Though this is frequently sidestepped by forming a new group it doesn’t resolve the dilemma of the group. Also there is the problem that by identifying an ‘us’ you have created a ‘them’ with all the possibilities of polarity and animosity. Where to criticise is to be a traitor. People relate to their groups with varying intensities and at different times. Why is this? Perhaps it’s the dilemma I find in my life, trying to balance the apparently conflicting needs of security and individuality. My own personal guide to such a dilemma is a mantra formulated over many years: Stability without stagnation – Change without chaos But how can that be translated to group identity? How does it resolve the possibilities of conflict? The labels that give comfort and grief are vegan, gay and humanist. Is that even the correct order? What is the hierarchy? I value using them to give a quick view of aspects of who I am. Yet at the same time I cringe when being challenged to defend people who also use these labels. This discomfort, this internal friction, speaks to the limitations inherent in any label. As Dr. Melanie Joy explores in her work on inter-group dynamics, particularly in Beyond Beliefs: A Guide to Improving Relationships and Communication for Vegans, Vegetarians, and Meat Eaters (https://carnism.org/book/beyond-beliefs/), labels can foster an “us vs. them” mentality, creating artificial divides where shared humanity should prevail. Joy’s work, while focused on dietary choices, offers profound insights into the challenges of communicating across belief systems. As she notes, “Vegans, vegetarians, and meat eaters can feel like they’re living in different worlds,” a sentiment that echoes across countless social categories. This sense of separation can make defending a label feel like defending an entire, potentially flawed, tribe. This inherent discomfort with labels is further illuminated by sociological perspectives, particularly labeling theory. This theory, a cornerstone of social constructionism, posits that societal labels, especially negative ones, can significantly influence an individual’s self-concept and behavior. When a group or individual is consistently labeled in a certain way – ‘radical vegan,’ ‘intolerant gay activist,’ or ‘dogmatic humanist’ – they may begin to internalize that label. This internalization can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, where individuals unconsciously or consciously act in ways that align with the imposed label, further reinforcing the ‘us vs. them’ dynamic. The very act of categorizing creates an ‘in-group’ and an ‘out-group,’ fostering a sense of difference and potentially animosity, as those within the label feel compelled to defend the boundaries of their identity against perceived threats from the ‘other.’ You can explore more about labeling theory on platforms like Wikipedia’s page on Labeling Theory. Another aspect of our lives is beliefs. I grew up in rural Cornwall, steeped in the Methodist tradition. This provided a framework, a community, a set of shared values that shaped my early understanding of the world and my place within it. There was a comfort in this familiarity, a sense of belonging woven into the very fabric of my upbringing. However, as an adult, my intellectual curiosity led me to explore different beliefs and traditions, expanding my understanding of human experience and the diverse ways people find meaning. These explorations, while enriching, often added to my inner conflict, particularly concerning my burgeoning understanding of being gay. The prevailing interpretations within the religious tradition of my youth often stood in stark opposition to my sexual orientation. This created a profound internal dissonance, a chasm between the acceptance I found within my faith community and the undeniable reality of my own identity. The implicit message was clear: in order to be fully accepted, to truly belong within that foundational group, I had to deny a fundamental aspect of who I was sexually. This demand for self-denial, this forced choice between two core parts of myself, highlights the exclusionary potential inherent in rigid group identities and the profound personal cost of such uncompromising boundaries. The psychological impact of such internal conflict on identity formation, the complex process of developing a clear and unique view of oneself (Wikipedia on Identity Formation), is significant. The need to reconcile conflicting aspects of the self can lead to considerable internal stress and a fractured sense of self. I wish I had become vegan sooner but I didn’t get there by someone wagging a finger at me. I became increasingly troubled by the consequences of what I was doing. I don’t want to swap that for a confrontation with the rest of society. This reluctance highlights the double-edged nature of labels. While they can offer a sense of belonging within a group, they can also create barriers and fuel antagonism with those outside it. As Joy argues, “relationship and communication breakdown among vegans, vegetarians, and meat eaters is not inevitable, and it is reversible. With the right tools, healthy connections can be cultivated, repaired, and even strengthened.” 1 This principle extends beyond dietary choices, emphasizing the need for conscious effort in bridging divides created by any form of labeling. Adding another layer to this unease is the understanding that our identities are not fixed entities but are, to a significant extent, socially constructed. This perspective, prominent in sociology, argues that our understanding of ourselves and others is shaped through social interactions, cultural norms, and historical contexts. What it means to be ‘vegan,’ ‘gay,’ or ‘humanist’ is not static but evolves over time and across different societies. This inherent fluidity of identity clashes with the often rigid and simplifying nature of labels. To be confined to a single label can feel like denying the multifaceted and ever-changing reality of who we are. Our individual experiences and interpretations of these labels will invariably differ, making the act of defending a monolithic group identity feel increasingly inauthentic. You can delve deeper into the concept of social construction of identity through resources like this overview from Easy Sociology. Another aspect of myself that I was late to accept was being gay. I tried desperately to be straight. This personal struggle underscores the point that identity is often a complex and evolving process, one that resists the rigid confines of pre-defined categories. Labels, while sometimes offering solace and recognition, can also feel like an imposition, a demand for conformity that clashes with the fluid reality of individual experience. The discomfort arises when the label, meant to simplify understanding, instead creates a cage, limiting the expression of a multifaceted self. As Joy poignantly observes, Beyond Beliefs “gently melts the bars of the cages which we erect around our beliefs,” a sentiment that resonates deeply with the struggle to reconcile personal truth with the limitations of societal categories. Understanding the psychology of labels (Psychology Tools on Labeling) reveals how these cognitive shortcuts can lead to overgeneralizations and negatively impact both self-perception and our understanding of others. Ultimately, our relationship with labels is a complex one. They can provide a much-needed sense of belonging, a quick identifier in a complex world, and a foundation for shared values and action. However, the discomfort we increasingly feel stems from a growing awareness of their limitations. Labels can oversimplify complex realities, foster division, and stifle individual expression. Moving forward, perhaps the key lies in embracing labels with a degree of mindful awareness – recognizing their utility while remaining critically aware of their potential pitfalls. We can value the sense of community they offer without demanding absolute conformity or allowing them to become barriers to understanding and empathy. The mantra of ‘stability without stagnation – change without chaos’ might then apply not just to personal identity but to our collective understanding of the categories we inhabit: allowing for evolution and individual interpretation within a framework of shared connection, without succumbing to rigid dogma or hostile divisions 1. www.veganadvocacy.org www.veganadvocacy.org

Unexpected Grit of Doris Day’s Compassion

The Line We Crossed: Is Protest Still Possible?

This post discusses the film “The Line We Crossed,” exploring the erosion of protest rights in the UK through new laws, personal testimonies, and an interview with a UN Special Rapporteur, questioning the future of effective dissent.
Read More

North East gathering for gratitude and action

A report on the North East Summer Gathering, a powerful event focusing on gratitude and collective action amidst environmental and social challenges.
Read More

Art and cultural heritage

An exploration of art and cultural heritage, discussing its value and potential for societal impact.


Read More

Abstract representation of music, perhaps sound waves or rhythmic patterns in a vibrant setting.

Music’s emotional and social power

An essay exploring the profound emotional and social impact of music on individuals and communities.


Read More

Vibrant, inclusive imagery symbolizing Pride and human rights, perhaps a diverse group of people celebrating.

Pride as human rights assertion

An exploration of Pride as more than a celebration, emphasizing its critical role as an assertion of human rights.


Read More

Abstract image depicting cultural divides or contrasting viewpoints, representing global culture wars.

Global culture wars and UK’s role

An analysis of global culture wars and the United Kingdom’s specific involvement and perspective within them.


Read More

Digital interface morphing into real-world action, symbolizing the transition from online activism to tangible change.

Online activism to real-world change

Examines the effectiveness and limitations of online activism, focusing on how it can translate into meaningful real-world impact.


Read More

Abstract depiction of intertwined and separating lines or shapes, representing the duality of labels for belonging and division.

Labels: belonging vs. division

An insightful exploration into the complex nature of identity labels, and how they can both foster a sense of belonging and create societal divisions.


Read More

Doris Day, embodying compassion, perhaps with a subtle artistic nod to animal advocacy or a serene, thoughtful expression.

Unexpected Grit of Doris Day’s Compassion

Beyond her cheerful Hollywood persona, Doris Day’s life was profoundly changed by witnessing animal suffering in Marrakesh. This pivotal encounter ignited a lifelong crusade for animal welfare, revealing her unexpected inner strength and compassion that led to the establishment of the Doris Day Animal Foundation.


Read More

The Line We Crossed: Is Protest Still Possible?

I am indebted to Climate Action Newcastle for making me aware of the crucial screening of The Line We Crossed at The Star and Shadow, Newcastle. This film presents a potent British story of dissent, drawn from the frontlines of climate resistance, and through the experiences of those who stood in defiance, it also traces the quiet unraveling of our protest rights.

The film challenges audiences to deeply question what truly makes dissent effective and where the line of acceptability is drawn in a democratic society. The right to nonviolent protest is, after all, a fundamental pillar of democracy and enshrined in many international laws to which the UK government are signatories. Yet, as the film starkly portrays, the right to protest in the UK has come under increasing threat. Environmental defenders, in particular, are being targeted, facing silencing in court, criminalisation, and disproportionate punishments for nonviolent protest. The film notably includes powerful clips from an interview with Michel Forst, the UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention, lending an international human rights perspective to the issues being highlighted.

As Liz Smith, the film-maker, powerfully writes:

“In the UK, over the last two years we have steadily been losing our right to protest. While environmental defenders have been the main target of these anti-protest laws, those law changes affect us all: if your cause falls out of favour with the authorities they can clamp down on you too now.

For the last two days there has been a mass appeal taking place at The Royal Courts Of Justice in London reviewing the excessive sentences that have been handed out in recent months to climate activists. Today, over a thousand people gathered together and sat quietly in the main road outside the court. They were allowed to remain there for the full 90 minutes of their action. The Police tried to encourage them to move to the pavement. They told them there was a chance of arrest if they did not, but the people sat there quietly and did not move.” (Links as per https://lizsmithpage75.substack.com/p/a-lesson-in-solidarity)

This clampdown, heavily influenced by recent legislative changes, forms the backdrop against which the film portrays the actions of the Just Stop Oil campaign. The government has progressively tightened laws restricting protest, building upon the Public Order Act 1986. This framework has been significantly reinforced by two major pieces of legislation:

  • The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act 2022 notably expanded police powers, broadened the definition of “serious disruption,” removed distinctions between static and moving protests, and increased penalties for certain offences.
  • This was followed by the Public Order Act 2023, which introduced new criminal offenses like “locking-on,” “tunnelling,” obstructing transport, and interfering with national infrastructure. It also enabled Serious Disruption Prevention Orders (SDPOs) and lowered the threshold for police intervention, making it easier to curtail protests.
  • Further Criminal Justice Bill amendments have targeted specific actions, including powers to arrest protesters wearing face coverings or using pyrotechnics, and critically, the removal of “reasonable excuse” defences for certain disruptive acts.

These legislative changes are highly controversial. Critics, including human rights organizations, argue that the combined measures will have a “chilling effect” on the right to protest, discouraging legitimate peaceful demonstration due to the increased risk of arrest and disproportionate penalties. The broad framing of new offenses and the lowered threshold for “serious disruption” are seen as open to misuse and potentially criminalizing ordinary protest tactics. The government, conversely, asserts these measures are necessary to protect the public and businesses from the “unacceptable actions” of a minority of protestors.

The Just Stop Oil campaign, the focus of the film, is one of personal stories of bravery and passionate motivation set against this unyielding state. One such powerful account comes from Sam Griffiths, who wrote on November 9, 2023:

“I was remanded to Wandsworth Prison because I walked slowly in the road with about 40 other supporters of Just Stop Oil and we were there for a maximum of 20 minutes. I will be in here at least until my court date of November 30th. 28 days in total. Apparently we breached section 7 of the new public order act. I am shocked at how willing the police and the courts are to embrace this authoritarian and repressive legislation. Where is their moral backbone? Who are they serving? And who do they protect? It’s clear that they still believe we can arrest our way out of the climate crisis without actually taking any positive action to address the underlying issue.”

This personal testimony exemplifies the very concerns raised by critics regarding the escalating laws. The rhetorical question posed in the film, “Why did the Government relentlessly pursue a retired social worker on the charge of contempt of court?”, resonates deeply within this context, highlighting the severity and perceived disproportionate application of these new legal tools against individuals engaging in protest. Liz Smith uses clips from some of the footage she shot for the documentary film “The Environmental Defenders” and talks with Jolyon Maughan, founder of Good Law Project, and Trudi Warner. 

Sam Griffiths, Graphic Designer, Reckless and Culpable Conduct, 16 months sentence

The significance of this screening in Newcastle was amplified by its status as the public premiere, attended by Liz Smith (the film’s author), Trudi Warner (featured in the film), and Sam Griffiths’ mother, who proudly represented Sam as he himself was unable to attend. These three stayed for a powerful Q&A session after the screening, engaging directly with the audience on a range of critical topics.

Discussions touched upon the need to defend our jurors and protect their independence. Michel Forst, in the film’s interview, expressed deep concern that judges in the UK would “ask the jury to leave the room and to discuss with the defendant,” preventing protestors from presenting their full defence and explaining their motivations to the jury – a practice he finds “difficult to understand how a democracy would not be able to allow the defendant to present the events properly.” He also expressed shock at the arrests for holding signs near courts stating “juries have the right to hear the whole truth,” noting he had “not seen that in other countries in fact.” 

 

Sam’s mother spoke of a forthcoming book, written from the perspective of him answering the questions from fellow prisoners, offering a unique, powerful and personal impact of these escalating laws.

The controversial “terrorist” label sometimes applied to climate activists was a key point of discussion. Forst noted politicians, including those in the UK, using terms like “eco-zealots” or “eco-terrorists,” stating this aims to “vilify the cause” itself, not just the individuals.

The role of the Climate Media Coalition in countering mainstream narratives was also explored. Forst highlighted his concerns about the increasing number of journalists being arrested while covering protests, like the film’s author, and the rise of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) targeting journalists who uncover corporate or government collusion.

Concerns were raised about informing disinformation and the government’s irresponsible approach to these issues. Forst noted a clear disparity in how protests are policed, citing examples of farmers in other European countries blocking roads for days with no arrests, while climate activists using similar tactics face severe repression. He emphasized that international law, specifically the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Article 21 and Human Rights Committee General Comment 37, explicitly covers civil disobedience and accepts disruption as part of legitimate protest, provided it is non-violent. He stated that the UK “apparently is not fulfilling all the obligations” under the treaties it has ratified. Furthermore, he revealed that the UK government had failed to reply to his official “Letters of Allegation” regarding complaints from UK environmental defenders, leading him to issue a public statement and consider referring the cases to the Aarhus Convention’s Compliance Committee, which could have further political implications for the UK at the UN.

Participants explored the potential of alternative media and alternative democracy models. The environmental and political activist group Youth Demand and their urgent call for action. The discussion also covered the challenges of censorship, noting that no one wanted to touch the film so Page75 Productions had to self-distribute, and the need for robust checks and balances in alternative media. The conversation broadened to include the human rights hypocrisy observed in the UK’s stance, the alarming trend of escalating laws, and the collective sentiment that “this isn’t okay.” Ultimately, the dialogue consistently returned to the importance of defending justice, with a clear recognition that “the hammer is coming down hard because protest is working,” implying that the state’s aggressive response is a sign that protest is indeed effective and therefore perceived as a threat.

This event serves as a potent reminder that the fight for climate justice is inextricably linked to the fight for fundamental democratic rights. It urges us all to understand the evolving legal landscape, to support those on the frontlines of dissent, and to actively participate in shaping a future where the right to voice concern remains unassailable.

Find out more about the film at : https://www.thelinewecrossed.com

Truth: Speaking Out for further reading

Where next? Use the links below:

About: Our mission: From Awareness To Action

My Blog: Events and Commentary

Web of Power: Book 1 of a trilogy – Understanding Power

Grasp the Nettle: Book 2 of a trilogy – Embracing Power

Forward Futures: Book 3 of a trilogy – Using Power

Facebook: Our community space and new content information

Mailing List: Online Form