A Misreading That Reveals a Bigger Linguistic (and Cultural) Shift
While watching a YouTube critique of a message purported to be directly from God about who killed Charlie Kirk, it caught my attention immediately when the reviewer automatically interpreted the word identity in the original speaker’s sentence as referring only to trans‑identity. The original line was simply,
“I love him and those like him who are going through similar struggles with their identity.”
Clearly not the main point of the critique, and although I agree with the overall criticism or "take-down" of the original video’s claims, the reviewer was wrong to assume that identity automatically equals trans. I admit the possibility that Troy, in his fake prophecy regarding who killed Charlie Kirk, was probably conflating the accused and his alleged trans lover, but he didn't claim the killer was trans. Troy said the killer struggled with his identity. This is known as semantic narrowing, and in this particular case is indicative of a culture war that has been brewing for the past fifteen years or so.
There are a myriad of ways one could struggle with identity, that doesn't mean trans. If the official story is true, the shooter was potentially a gay kid in Mormon Utah. Identity refers to the overall sense of self, not specifically gender identity. Reports say the accused is dating a trans furry woman in Utah! His roommate is supposedly his lover, in other words. They could be married for all I know.
Is the accused killer gay or is he straight? Is his lover a boy or a girl? Is a trans girl a real girl? I would be more interested in knowing how he defines hate? Nevertheless, maybe he struggled with how he saw himself so he became an assassin.
Why the Misreading Matters
- Clarity of communication – When identity is automatically read or heard as trans, speakers who mean 'personal struggles,' 'cultural background,' or 'professional role' risk being misunderstood.
- Polarization – The shortcut can turn a neutral statement into a flashpoint, especially in comment sections where nuance is scarce.
- Erasure of other identities – Reducing the term to one facet marginalizes the many ways people experience and define themselves.
It's Anecdotal but...
Nobody in the whole wide world thought identity meant trans thirty years ago. Look how far we've come. Not only were trans not a threat when I was in high school, the concept didn't even exist in our psyche. We certainly didn't have furry. An identity crisis didn't mean unsure about gender or sex or species . Imagine that!
I never saw any trans being bullied because I never knew it was a thing. Sure SNL made fun of people that were confused about Pat's gender, Pat didn't seem to mind. Sure Hollywood thought black men pretending to be women was funny, but the men didn't think they were women. Or a father pretending to be an old woman housekeeper to be with his kids after a divorce. (I think the point was "love will prevail" or something not "respect men that feel like old housekeepers"—Even if you catch them peeing standing up). Just didn't seem to be a big problem.
If I saw a man pretending to be a woman go into a female bathroom, I might worry he might be a threat. But they would probably be fine if they just never do anything creepy. If they use the toilet and leave no one would ever know. I promise you I have never once examined any dude in a bathroom and found them wanting, so to speak. Put a 1 in the comments if you have, The 1's are the ones I will hopefully avoid!
My whole damn life, everyone seemed to know their own gender and everyone else seemed to believe them. Sure kids made fun of each other for their clothes or having unpopular hobbies. Perhaps even about being stupid, smelly, short, ugly...Stuff like that. I don't remember a single time a kid was upset for being misgendered. Being misgendered was when a kid thought a guy was a girl because their hair was too long or something stereo-typically girl like or vice versa, Then they would apologize.
It wasn't about calling out the fakes after them demanding we respect that they tell us they are fakes all the time.
As far as I actually know 90% of every kid I actually knew were actually the opposite sex from what I thought they were, They must have been good at pretending. We didn't have a word like trans — so we would know that it is fake while having to pretend it is real.
We also didn't have men in girl sports because we didn't have girl sports. We had girls in sports, and they sucked, but we put up with it. They didn't seem to know they sucked, or they were having fun and didn't care. No I am just kidding there was softball —boys didn't play that.
Of course I am joking ladies (if you are out there). I know there are millions of amazing female athletes just none were ever on my teams. They may have gotten better. Isn't it sad I felt I had to explain that?
The point is identity doesn't mean trans exclusively or automatically. Also I am making a linguistic not an emotional argument about what the word trans actually means. The word trans functions as a qualifier— In English, a modifier usually narrows or specifies
the noun. Contrarily the word trans tells us a persons identity is the opposite of their biology. This is why it is confusing and people get it wrong all the time. To illustrate this I suppose I could have used the word showcasing or exhibiting instead of fake but there is no guarantee this would actually be less offensive.
And of course trans people existed for thousands of years.
I know because l just looked it up. I was just living under a rock my whole life, which obviously explains why I never heard of it until 10 years ago maybe. I did hear of identity though.
Here is a cursory break down—Identity = Trans
Where the Assumption Appears to Come From
A Recent Timeline (≈ 2000 – present)
| Period | How “identity” was used | What changed |
|---|---|---|
| Pre‑2000 | Psychological and sociological literature spoke of personal or cultural identity. | Gender‑diversity topics were largely confined to niche activist circles and academic journals. |
| Early‑2000s → 2010 | Online forums (e.g., early Reddit, Tumblr) begin to discuss gender identity as a distinct concept. | The phrase 'gender identity' gains traction; the word identity starts appearing in headlines about trans rights. |
| ~2010‑2020 | Hashtags like #GenderIdentity trend; mainstream media covers trans‑related legislation. | Identity becomes a convenient shorthand for 'gender identity' in many news pieces and social‑media posts. |
| 2020‑present | Corporate DEI policies, school curricula, and viral videos embed the shorthand. | The conflation feels pervasive, leading some to claim it’s a long‑standing cultural norm. |
Takeaway: The linguistic shift is relatively recent, not a timeless truth.
Why It Feels Ancient
- Retroactive labeling – Scholars sometimes apply modern terms to older texts (“they were talking about gender identity”), creating the illusion that the concept has always existed under that name.
- Cultural memory lag – Discussions that were once limited to small communities can take a decade or more to reach mainstream awareness.
- Media amplification – Headlines love “centuries‑old debate” framing; a single quote from an academic can be stripped of nuance and turned into a sweeping claim.
The way in which the critic leapt to trans illustrates how quickly a word can be narrowed by cultural habit. Yet the evidence shows that this narrowing is a development of the past two decades, not a millennia-old tradition. By keeping the term identity broad, we protect clear communication and honor the many ways people define themselves. After all, the struggles we face—whether around faith, profession, ethnicity, or personal growth—are all part of the same tapestry we call identity. And when labels matter more than motives, language becomes a smokescreen. In cases like "Who murdered Charlie Kirk?", the better question isn’t “Were they trans?” but “Why did they think killing made sense?”
“Have you noticed similar shifts in language? How do you handle them in your own interactions?
No comments:
Post a Comment