When “Identity” Became Synonymous With “Trans”:

  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.

"Personality Disorder"

When I presented my step one on 4-2-2013, the one criticism (if I could call it that) I received, was in my using the term “Personality Disorder”.  A guy took exception, and told me that he was tracking with me until I referred to my “personality disorder”.  It actually was in the form of a compliment because he was basically saying someone with a personality disorder would not have the kind of clarity or perspective into oneself that I was evidencing by my summary.  When he first raised the question about my use of the term I asked if “personality disorder” was a technical term I was not allowed to use.  I told him I did not mean it in a technical sense.  I had never looked into “personality disorders” in the technical sense.  I have been fond of taking all sorts of assessments for personality “type indicators” which generally put personality differences in a positive light so to speak.  If there is any criticism or negative aspects of a personality it is sandwiched between all the compliments and usually takes the form of “if you want to be different” type advise on how to improve some of ones weaknesses.  While I was working step five I wrote a counseling center and was trying to ask a generic question about how they conduct the psychological intake in dealing with a condition they call “Intimacy Anorexia” because they are dealing in a field of “treatment” for a “disorder” that is not widely accepted and therefore isn't included in the DSM-5.  To formulate my question I gave a brief summary of myself.  What was interesting and somewhat confusing was the response she gave did not answer the question I was asking,  Instead of telling me how they go about diagnosing Intimacy Anorexia, she suggested based off very limited information about me, that perhaps I had Schizoid Personality Disorder.  This got me wondering why the disparity.  How could one person with basically the same limited information about me, so readily say I could not have a personality disorder and another so easily give me a diagnosis of sorts of a personality disorder.  So I found this self test online.  Of course it is a free self test found online, so like every other assessment I have ever taken, I do not know that it proves anything.*  Nevertheless it is kind of fun.  Take it yourself, if you dare.  And as always feel free to leave me a comment.

My results:

Disorder Rating Paranoid Personality Disorder: Moderate Schizoid Personality Disorder: Moderate Schizotypal Personality Disorder: High Antisocial Personality Disorder: Moderate Borderline Personality Disorder: Moderate Histrionic Personality Disorder: Low Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Moderate Avoidant Personality Disorder: High Dependent Personality Disorder: High Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: High -- Take the Personality Disorder Test -- -- Personality Disorder Info -- (*and of course comes with the disclaimer that only a trained professional can actually diagnose a personality disorder.)