Blogger Widgets Ender-Chan's Thoughts: Labels Define Me

Thursday, October 22, 2015

Labels Define Me

77% Choleric, 38% Sanguine, 69% Supine, 85% Melancholy, 8% Phlegmatic
Your temperament blend may be Melancholic-Choleric.

Dominance: 45%, Influence: 7%, Steadiness, 15% and Compliance: 33%

Extroverted 8% Intuitive 71% Thinking 71% Judging 28% Turbulent 15%
Introverted 12% Intuitive 79% Thinking 60% Judging 31% Turbulent 9%

Sanguine: 3 ( Strengths 0 Weaknesses 3) Choleric: 13 (Strengths: 7 Weaknesses: 6) Melancholy: 19 (Strenghts: 9 Weaknesses: 10) Phlegmatic: 5 (Strengths: 4 Weaknesses: 1)

My overblown obsession with temperament tests is most likely an autism symptom of mine. I scour the Internet endlessly for temperament tests and quizzes. Being this temperament zealot that I am, I take the same test multiple times to ensure the most accurate results. When taking the temperament test on Fighunter, I got the melancholic-sanguine result the most often after five trials, but got melancholic-choleric the most often after twenty trials. Sometimes, I got melancholic-phlegmatic as a result, which I found odd because I score comparatively very low on phlegmatic traits when compared with other traits.

I have wondered why "Don't let labels define you" and "Labels don't define me" have become common iterations in the disability community. Such statements I find illogical and misleading because, ultimately, labels define everyone and everything. Avoiding labels will not make them define me any less; I outright and actively pursue them in an effort to understand myself and others more clearly. The phrase "Labels are for soup cans" is an example of denying the importance of labels, but I will use it to explain their importance. Most consumers look at the label when purchasing soup to verify the can's contents and choose their soup accordingly. Likewise, if I can "read" someone's labels, I have useful information about why they act the way they do so I can adapt accordingly.

When I first started blogging, I tried to adopt the Keirsey Idealist style I have seen in many disability bloggers. I increased in popularity, but I felt unauthentic and purposeless. It felt as if I were a mirror for other people's opinions rather than someone sharing their own perspective. My five temperaments series was the biggest risk I have ever taken while blogging. It was the first post I truly felt was mine, not just my echoing other opinions.

It was then that I embraced my love for labels.

My love for labels alienates me from others who condemn their use. They say people are too unique to shove into categories and that labels are evil. While some people are forced to fit every parameter of a label or given the wrong ones and, thus, are harmed, correctly-used labels help to create understanding of the individual. One label cannot define a person, but the sum of every one will.

I am not autistic before I am a Keirsey Mastermind. Neither am I a Keirsey Mastermind before I am autistic. The two define me equally. Likewise, my ADHD is not any less of an integral part of me than my supine tendencies or ambiversion. I will not be any less autistic, ambiverted, or I/ENTJ if I chose to disown these classifications rather than embrace them. I would still have labels like forceful, blunt, sensitive, weird, and musical to describe me, but they would not help me to come to the understandings that temperament and disability labels did.

Labels are my main source of pride. If you were to ask me "Do labels define you?" to my face, I would say in true forthright choleric fashion, "Of course they do. How else can I explain my individuality?" In a world without labels, I wouldn't be able to function. I would not be able to adapt to someone else's quirks and foibles if I could not guess their temperament and act accordingly. I would expect everyone to operate by my system and act hostilely towards those who do not understand me. Without labels, I would accidentally hurt my sanguine friends expecting them to be melancholic like myself. However, because I know they are sanguine, I can adapt to meet their needs and better infer the way they perceive the world.

Labels are what we make of them. It is ultimately up to the individual if they are destructive or constructive, harmful or beneficial, significant or trivial, or anything else. I have made them badges of pride and individuality that I proudly display to everyone, no matter how they perceive labels. I never understood the label aversion due to my obsession with them. The labels others see as scarlet letters I will see as badges of pride. The sum of every label defines the individual and it all boils down to one common label: myself.

Links to the Tests In Order That They Appear as Pictures: 


  1. I sometimes like labels because they help me learn about myself and how I can best survive in the world. However, I'd rather have the labels I choose for myself than the labels that others force upon me! Maybe you could post links to where people can take those temperament quizzes.

    1. I don't have any more choice over my labels than I have over the parts I am made of. However, I can choose how I receive them. I can take them up as my armor and arsenal so they cannot hurt me or I can let them be the weapons that pierce me.

  2. I think that it is up to each person how they deal with labels, if they embrace them or ignore them. It's a personal thing, whatever you do is fine. I own my label of having hearing loss but at the same time I don't want it to be my single defining characteristic. The problem with labels occurs when non disabled people try to police disabled people's use of labels.

    1. Most of your statements are my sentiments exactly.

  3. You have much to be proud about. I have never been against labels because, as you pointed out they help us to understand each other and get/provide the proper treatments and therapies!

    1. That's another important point Schools don't exactly dole out IEPs and 504s willy-nilly. A label can be the key to needed assistance and it often is.


Comment! I won't know what you have to say unless you say it.