What's the difference between 'is' and 'identifies as'?

MamaD. You said what I meant much better

candid. I would have been very tempted to stand in the middle alone and say I don’t identify as I AM

autumncrow that’s how I see it too

Or Is = a fact
Identifies as = is not a fact but rather a belief

We had "diversity and equality" training at work. At one point they asked us to split into two groups "those who identify as women" and "those who identify as men". Of course this was the women and the men in old money. The said it was more "inclusive" to describe it that way. I was the o lt one who complained

Is = reality
Identifies as = make believe

Actually I dont hear 'i want to be', I hear 'I am not' and I prepare for resentment.

Am with the poster above. When people say they identify as something I hear 'I want to be that'. Identity when its real is attached to something real. When your identity is just something you want other people to see in you you will go to extreme lengths to protect any illusion you have created, clearly. Identity and attachment are linked, formed through actual relationships, actual life and development of actual attachments.
The rest is just desire presented as reality. We have an entire academia, media, and policy making culture who have been wrapping this shit round delusions and its shaping policy and everything.

Fashion. I think in the 70s similar people would have said things like 'nonconfrontational EST adherent' or whatever. It's a signal that she's in the in-crowd.

So, I have a friend who is autistic. He has a diagnosis and is quite clearly 'on the spectrum'. He just is autistic.

I have another friend who identifies as autistic. He is very tiresome. He won't go for a diagnosis because, frankly, he knows he won't get one. For some reason, he quite likes the idea of being autistic. He has a couple of personality traits that loosely resemble autistic traits and he uses the language of autism to talk about these. Endlessly. He has also 'constructed' a couple of autistic traits and goes to great lengths to maintain these - he draws attention to them all the time because, if he doesn't, then people might not notice his 'autistic traits'. In fact, he uses the language of autism to describe pretty much everthing about himself because what is more important than anything is that people 'read' him as autistic. Furthermore, he has told me privately that he knows he is not autistic.

is = is

identifies as = is pretending to be

I am a 39 year old with a mummy tummy.

I identify as a 19 year old super model.

It's common parlance regards disability as far as I'm aware

Yes - that's true, and it's a pity that the way 'identify' is bandied around is now sometimes causing confusion to the understanding of this.

when an assessment of an individual is entirely or largely subjective, it's a statement of that individual's assessment of themselves. It doesn't speak for how other people would assess them.

That should be the case.,, but proponents of 'gender identity' demand that their subjective 'identity' is given precedence over other people's objective assessment of sex. Therein lies the rub.

Also "and if you rudely insist on reminding me of the existence of objective reality I will scream and scream like a toddler who's just been told they can't have ice cream before dinner".

I identify as means I refuse to accept definitions for objective concepts because it prevents me from exploiting some contrived advantage.

It means "I make stuff up and you can't stop me"

The difference is reality. It's irritating that journalists are being trained to describe people this way even if the people themselves don't.

It's inclusive to people pretending to be that characteristic. It blurs the distinctions, "queers the boundaries".

It's common parlance regards disability as far as I'm aware. So "I identify as autistic" is often in place of a formal diagnosis - as they take so bloody long to come by-- not "I am autistic", or "I have M.E. but I don't identify as disabled" are other examples of the same language. As someone said uptgread it's to do with either a lack of categoric assessment as being that thing or a reflection that assessment is subjective; and that when an assessment of an individual is entirely or largely subjective, it's a statement of that individual's assessment of themselves. It doesn't speak for how other people would assess them.

A friend of mine has a condition that others might consider a disability. She doesn't identify as disabled. That statement means she isn't speaking for other people's assessment of her, but for how she assesses herself. And how we see ourselves is important. At least as important as how other people see us, either objectively or subjectively. I'm interested to know how people identify versus how I might identify them.

I'm tending to find that is = is, and identifies as = isn't.

This. Who would you be more confident to perform root canal treatment, someone who is a dentist, or someone who identifies as a dentist?

Yep. It's for woke points. Nothing more, nothing less.

I suppose you can identify as (claim you are) something you are not.

You can’t be something you are not.

As in the Spanish
Soy - I am and is fixed, ie. born in Spain

Estoy - changeable - I am happy, next minute note

Autumn Crow nails it.

I tend to use 'identifies as' in front of the word transgender for the same reason.

Why would someone not just say "Visage is heterosexual, married with two children".
Attention-seeking?

This person is either
A- male, or
B- painfully woke.

I'd say she's just trying to sound more interesting than she actually is. Not many woke cookies in being a boring old het woman and mother.

I think she is just signifying that she is a believer in the genderist religion.