-their own gender

-the genders that the feel most “drawn” to, or the genders they would want their future partners to have

-the genders of their past partners

-the genders of the people they’re attracted to

-the “sex characteristics” to which they are attracted (e.g. breasts, testes)

-the sexes and sex characteristics of past partners

-their own sex/sex characteristics

-THEIR EXPERIENCE OF PRIVILEGE

-the community they identify with

-the terms most commonly used around them

-the terms most commonly used by the community/communities that they most identify with, regardless of how often they actually hear or read these terms on a daily basis

-the terms they’ve historically used to describe themselves

-the pronouns they imagine using for a future, hypothetical partner

-their pattern or “distribution” of sexual attraction (how fluid their sexuality is, whether or not they only experience attraction after developing strong feelings, etc.)

-the definitions they attach to certain labels (for example, someone with a very low instance of sexual attraction may or may not call themselves “asexual” depending on how they’ve heard the term used before)

-their relationship history with people of a certain sex or gender

-the aspects of gender presentation they’re most attracted to (e.g. femininity, androgyny, gender non-conformance in general)

-the community/subcultural affiliations that they prefer their partners to have

This list is kind of awkwardly worded, but my point is that trying to essentialize what someone means when they describe themselves as “lesbian” or “bisexual” or “pansexual” is all kinds of over-simplifying. Not everyone who is attracted to people of varying genders is necessarily going to be bisexual or polysexual—they might just be a straight person with straight privilege who happens to be attracted more to certain sex characteristics and certain gender presentations than to actual gender identities. In fact, some people don’t even take their potential partners’ genders into account, but they might still have some other experience or preference or community-based identity that leads them to identify with a different label than “pansexual.”

And the fact is that this essentializing and  I-get-the-last-word-on-your-self-identification nonsense happens in ways that are usually misogynistic and strongly anti-queer. Overwhelmingly, women (or people who’re perceived as such) are the ones being yelled at about “being lesbian means you can only ever be attracted to girls ever ever ever!!!!”, and non-straight people in general are the ones whose identities are constantly being mis-represented or arbitrarily declared to be inappropriate. Rarely do we have discussions about straight people who—we all agree—should not be identifying as straight when we would rather they use a word more to our liking!

As a community, I think that a lot of queer people have internalized the idea that none of us really have the right to self-determinism in what we call ourselves or the personal histories, associations, and affiliations that we chose to honor. Just like the dominant culture is endlessly entitled to tell us “what we really are,” we feel like we can use that same negativity and dogma against one another. And that’s really sad. We need to start making a real effort to understand what one of our own is saying—and the personal or political context to go along with it—instead of focusing exclusively on the words that they have available to them to use.