˗ˏˋ 𝔀𝓸𝓸𝓯 ˎˊ˗

The more I see confusion about what words like "therian" mean, the more I resent the community's switch to using the censored phrase "identify as" to describe people's experiences.

"I identify as" is not a statement of fact, it is a statement that you purposely align yourself with a concept in social settings. I don't mind saying I identify as a therian because that's a label I opt in to, but no matter what words I use to talk about myself I am a snow leopard. It is a truth about me that does not rely on language. "Therian" is a community word for that truth.

"Identify as" was a way to soften and add deniability to "is". The community started using this phrasing because outsiders are more comfortable with the idea that you're claiming a personal label than the idea that you genuinely think you are something. If I say "I identify as a snow leopard" it carries the implication that I've simply made a semantic choice, and that someone else respecting this part of me is optional. If I say "I am a snow leopard" there is no room for uncertainty or debate, and that challenges people to see me for who I am. The trans community has pushed back against "identify as" phrasing for this exact reason.

The modern online landscape has turned the concept of "identity" into a badge of sorts. Your personal essence is expected to be displayed as a set of words and symbols that announce which groups you align with, as though the self can be distilled into a marketable aesthetic. And with this trend the difference between "identity" as in "I align myself with this label/group" and "identity" as in "this is what it feels like to be me" has gotten lost.

Who you are is not what you call yourself, it's what you see when you look inward.

it is possible to be something without identifying as it, but only if you have not recognized or established it yet. for example, i’ve always been canine, but i didn’t fully realize this as a child and so didn’t identify as canine until later in my teen years. that doesn’t mean i wasn’t canine, i just didn’t know it. if you know it, you identify as it. and you can’t really talk about it without knowing or acknowledging it.

yet, even though that is the only practical difference, i find the people who commonly focus on distinguishing the difference between ‘identify as’ and ‘is’ are the ones going “i don’t identify as my type, i am my type” as some sort of validity war against folks who do use the term identify as. the most common instance i see it in is these folks trying to establish themselves as more valid, more real, more nonhuman, and i think that is entirely unhelpful to the nonhuman community and our language.

i don’t think it’s fair to suggest that anyone who uses the term identify as is less valid and less nonhuman than those who don’t, and i think the reluctance to use the word identify, including this post, is somewhat perpetuating that narrative by suggesting that identifying as something IS softer, it IS more deniable, it IS less real. but it isn’t! they mean, realistically, the same thing! someone who ‘identifies as’ a tiger is just as much of a tiger as someone who ‘is’ a tiger. and if they are acknowledging that experience, they are BOTH identifying as a tiger AND being a tiger.

⭒ ★ · · ─ · ─ 𖦹 · · ─ ↟ · 𖠰 · ↟ ─ · · 𖦹 ─ · ─ · · ★ ⭒

🐾 this user is a wolf dog otherlink userbox

⭒ ★ · · ─ · ─ 𖦹 · · ─ ↟ · 𖠰 · ↟ ─ · · 𖦹 ─ · ─ · · ★ ⭒

🐾 this user is a red husky therian userbox