I have started to hate the term “identify as”

'If they tell you they are a unicorn then take that with a pinch of salt.'

A pinch of salt LOL!

If they were a child having fun with their imagination, that is one thing.

If they were an adult and not taking the piss, but saying that because they truly believe it, I would wonder if they were having a psychotic break.

At least now we know, be courteous is the new be kind.

This poster can accuse me of lazy thinking, but they are wrong. Plus mammals still can't change sex, so however kind or courteous I am, I'm still not going to believe a blatant lie.

"For a lot of people in our world being able to tell us how they identify can make the world a little easier for them to navigate"

I don't think any reasonable person would object to the idea that people should be able to tell others how they identify. The issue arises in relation to what is subsequently expected from others in relation to the sharing of an identity.

Someone who tells you they identify as male, though to you they look female, perhaps do them the common courtesy of believing them

I may be able to believe they identify as male ( though in the one case I came across of this, even they kept forgetting they were not a woman, so I didn’t believe they really did identify as male) . I can’t believe they are male.

I agree.

If you identify as something then, by definition, you are not that thing.

If you are something, you simply are it.

So men could ‘identify’ as women as they are not women.

People starting to use ‘identify’ for things they objectively are just makes their meaning unclear. Like the ‘identify with ADHD’ example above.

Lots of very interesting insights on this thread, thank you.

On the point about identifying as having ADHD or a disability, I think for the purposes of employment forms this has always or for a very long time been self-ID, and no formal diagnosis was needed. I think (but someone more knowledgable may be able to confirm) this was so that an employer had notice in order to make reasonable adjustments, or anticipate any issues that may arise. I remember having a long chat with a colleague who was signed off with stress about whether or not she should have put on her new joiner form (or job application form, I can't remember which) that she had had anxiety in the past, whether it would have made any difference to our boss's expectations, and whether if enough people put 'mental health' on their forms any of the employer's processes would change. (We were both working in a high-pressure sector and being paid appropriately so my thoughts were, bluntly, if you can't take it, don't be here.)

So part of me wonders if the disability self-ID approach assisted in normalising all these other 'identify as' statements.

I've started to hear 'pretend to be' whenever someone says 'identify as'

Do you know what? I feel more than a little disappointed in this thread.
Has the word "identified" been bandied about and used in the wrong context by people who don't truly understand the meaning? Absolutely, that has been happening since time immemorial. Humans have always wanted to jump on societal bandwagons, unfortunately it's how we are.
But that really doesn't give anyone the right to decide because someone says they "identify" as something to decide that they are a liar or just following a trend. Some people might be but you can at least wait to make that decision after they have finished speaking.
For a lot of people in our world being able to tell us how they identify can make the world a little easier for them to navigate. Someone who tells you they identify as male, though to you they look female, perhaps do them the common courtesy of believing them. You have no idea of the person your eyes are beholding. If they tell you they are a unicorn then take that with a pinch of salt.
You can hate the word all you want but keep your snap judgements and lazy thinking to yourselves.
Also, when my wheelchair bound mother was asked of she identified as disabled they meant whether she identified with the word. She didn't, she preferred "differently abled" not everyone's cup of tea but fuck it, it was no ones choice but hers what's words made her feel more like herself. Same thing here.

The strangest "identify as" I've seen is an "asexual" female who campaigns on "asexual" rights". If course I wondered "what rights do you already not have?".

Social identity theory suggests that part of our identity (sense of self) is formed by our sense of belonging to certain social groups. The idea being that humans are social beings and not only want to belong to a group, they want this belonging to make them feel good about themselves as a result of this membership. The theory highlights the tendency to hold beliefs about the attributes of people in each group (including ourselves).

The theory highlights why people might be heavily invested in policing/ maintaining clear boundaries about the defining features of membership to the group. We need to feel we belong and want the groups we belong to reinforce to ourselves and others that we are the 'type of person' who belongs in this group.

The shift from 'I am a ........' to 'I identify as ......' give much less room for objection and policing of boundaries. You can easily challenge membership based on objective criteria relating to characteristics (observable ones anyway) but not subjective experience.

The question that arises is what relevance does someone's identity have to any given situation. Actually, the same can be said for objective characteristics. This is context dependent.

A lot of the irritation of the highlighting of identity arises when the given identity is of no relevance to the context and probably of no interest to the person this is being shared with. When shared in this context, it is usually a subtext for communicating something else- which the listener has to try and work out.

Because to close the loop that all this "monitoring" creates, you have to "do something" the other end. Otherwise it would be revealed as the total fucking waste of time it is.

Here's a parable:
When I was very little [checks anonymity of username, as this is an awful confession] there was an orphanage near where we lived - yes they still had orphanages then. There was a lovely playground - brightly-coloured swings, slides, roundabouts, all sorts. I used to watch the children playing on them and felt madly jealous - I didn't have swings, slides etc in our little garden. I even expressed my jealousy to my mother - 'how come THEY have all those lovely things and I don't? 'Snot faaaiiirrr'
She of course explained to me that they were in fact very unfortunate little children because they had no mammies and daddies - I remained unconvinced.

In other words, I perceived an effort to mitigate the negative situation of a disadvantaged social group as entitlements that I was being unfairly denied.
I'd have happily identified as an orphan to have a go on those swings.

When I see people 'identifying as' queer or disabled or whatever, I think of my 4-year-old self and that playground...

This is a big thing with ND conditions. I feel (as Mum to autistic ds) conflicted by it in a way I don’t with other ‘indentify as’ statements. Part of me thinks you can’t identify as autistic or having ADHD anymore than you can identify as someone with diabetes but the waiting times for assessment is so long across the country I can see why people say it.

I do like your suggestion of saying I have x traits.

Sorry for derail just something I think about a fair amount!

But otherwise, yes “identify as…” makes my teeth itch!

AHH thank you, that's very helpful.

I'd hate to be the cause of an exploding brain. They don't go around saying "I am a positionality, you are a positionality" and so on. But a question like "Does this cater for all positionalities?" or saying "These positionalities should be prioritised/ included/ demarginalised".

One question on my son's secondary school (academy) parent survey asked "How do you identify....male, female, other etc"

I ticked other and told them I didn't identify as female, I am female and that biological sex cannot be changed. I will see if it is changed next year.

No proof but I suppose if I went out and about with you for long enough your attraction to both sexes might be observable. LG &B don't expect to invade the safe spaces of the opposite sex. That's a bit different from the expectation of entitlement that seems to be the case for many trans individuals.

LG and B are not identities, they are states of being.
T and all the + things are identities that are chosen.

I wish people would stop lumping them together.

If everyone is special, then no one is special.

I think this is the nail on the head to be honest.

Although I also think being LGBT+ is an identity, as they are not externally observable traits.

I'm bi. What proof do you have that I am? None, you'll just have to take my word for it that I'm attracted to both men and women. I won't lose any sleep or any of my rights if you don't believe me. I have previously identified as straight before I found that I was attracted to women, and the way dating men is going I'm not ruling out deciding that I'm a women-only club.

I can say that I identify as a Turkey, that doesn't mean you are compelled to agree that Bernard Matthews is my daddy.

The kids have been led to believe that it's cool to have a special identity, that they can identify as something that is demonstrably factually untrue, and that people not falling over themselves to agree with the kid's own special identity is "literal violence". That is why we are in this mess.

"There is a clip on twitter from Elliot Page saying ‘30% of young people identify as LGBTQ+’ which shows how ridiculous the statement is. From my limited understanding LGB is around 5-10% of a population. So who are the other 20%? People who just claim to be part of the ‘community’ to feel special."

OP, you admit that you have limited understanding, so why don't you try listening and improving your understanding before making snap judgements based on little knowledge?

My brain is going to explode. It would be really helpful if you could please share a sentence using 'positionalities' in its correct context.

Waiting with trepidation.

I'm feeling quite sad at the moment.
A young woman (late-20s at a guess), an explorer, an adventurer, a passionate and energetic leader, who's brave, strong, healthy, creative and interesting, who cares about the planet, who seems to be in a stable and supportive lesbian relationship, and whose expedition stories I sometimes follow on social media (>60K Youtube followers), wrote a post last night saying that she now 'identifies as trans non binary' with they/them pronouns and had top surgery a couple of weeks ago.
I'd always thought of her as a brilliant role model and she's gone and done this. I hope she doesn't live to regret it and I know it was her choice but . . . And what on earth is 'trans non binary'? I'd love to permanently ban the phrase 'top surgery' too and replace it, in this sort of case, with something a bit more accurate like 'breast amputation'.

You can also 'identify' as having had trauma apparently, does rather seem to minimise those who actually did. I guess I could identify out if it then? Might be easier than all the therapy I've needed!

I dislike it. A lot.