The term “identified” is used as an insult, particularly when referring to transgender people, to imply that they aren’t really correct. I don’t think it’s appropriate to use that in the context of autism, because many of the people who do believe themselves to be autistic do go on to get professionally diagnosed. I became interested about 20 years ago in the possibility that I may be autistic, as I met all of the criteria, but only recently did I actually get the resources to pay for a diagnosis. It cost me nearly $3500.
The problem is that self-diagnosis IS valid, when it is valid, and is not valid, when it is not valid.
The term “identified” is used as an insult, particularly when referring to transgender people,
I haven’t heard that before. Is the current progressive trend to avoid using the term “identify” entirely? If so, let’s say I was completing an interview, and I needed to ask someone what ethnicity(ies) they identify with, how would I ask that?
It varies in practice. Most people I see using identify, including many trans people, are well-intentioned and think it’s the preferred polite language without thinking too hard on the implications of it.
However there are definitely anti-trans people who will use it pejoratively, which I presume is where that wording originated.
Bigots commonly insist that trans people use “I identify as” rather than “I am” when the transgender people are giving their gender, because the intention is to deny those people the ability to be seen as their preferred gender and instead give the impression that those people are impostors, implying that “identifying” is more akin to “relating” instead of categorization.
Insisting that an ostensibly autistic person use “self-identified” instead of “self-diagnosed” would have the same effect.
If you want to use a proper word that’s not “diagnosed”, “self-assessed” would be more accurate.
I don’t know about the other people involved in this discussion, as I know that obsessive interests are part of different communities, but I am someone who studies languages and word meanings.
The information that I am sharing is not my perspective. Those words do have that context in common spoken English in the year 2023.
That would not have been the case many decades ago, but the word “identify” tends to be used ironically and sarcastically and with derision. It doesn’t matter if the word is used by itself or paired with the word “self”.
I’ll point out the definitions on Urban Dictionary, to point this out(and not just on the first page, but on pages beyond that):
Insisting that people who have not been professionally diagnosed use “self-identified” will lead to even more bullying and social abuse from neurotypical people who already use that context when trying to justify their bullying and social abuse.
“Self-assessed” would be a phrase which is more exact and does not have that additional context of being tied to groups that have been targeted for bullying and social abuse.
Most of us here don’t seem to hear it that way so I don’t think it’s so cut and dry. I know, you study word meanings, but I’m a descriptivist, and if enough people take a certain meaning from it then that’s what it means to me.
The issue is not what meaning we(those of us who are autistic) take from it. The issue is that the people who will bully will use it as further justification to bully and to socially abuse people.
Maybe this is region dependant? Or maybe a thing in online spaces? Because in my experience, in real life interactions, for example, I’ve heard case workers refer to an individual as someone who identifies with a disability rather than saying a disabled person. And this is a more recent change and I actually appreciated as instead of saying something about the person it makes it about what they feel and gives them power and autonomy.
I understand and sympathize with how it can be weaponized against trans people but that’s not the universal experience and not the connotation I get from it. Agree to disagree, and I will consider your point of view in the future when using the term. Thank you.
Also, I’m not diagnosed autistic, but I’m pretty sure I’ve self-something’d it
The term “identified” is used as an insult, particularly when referring to transgender people, to imply that they aren’t really correct. I don’t think it’s appropriate to use that in the context of autism, because many of the people who do believe themselves to be autistic do go on to get professionally diagnosed. I became interested about 20 years ago in the possibility that I may be autistic, as I met all of the criteria, but only recently did I actually get the resources to pay for a diagnosis. It cost me nearly $3500.
The problem is that self-diagnosis IS valid, when it is valid, and is not valid, when it is not valid.
I haven’t heard that before. Is the current progressive trend to avoid using the term “identify” entirely? If so, let’s say I was completing an interview, and I needed to ask someone what ethnicity(ies) they identify with, how would I ask that?
It varies in practice. Most people I see using identify, including many trans people, are well-intentioned and think it’s the preferred polite language without thinking too hard on the implications of it.
However there are definitely anti-trans people who will use it pejoratively, which I presume is where that wording originated.
If it’s a minority (of people) using it that way they I don’t think they can claim it.
“What is your ethnicity?”
I’ve never once heard of it used like this. Could you provide an example please? I’m not sure I understand.
Bigots commonly insist that trans people use “I identify as” rather than “I am” when the transgender people are giving their gender, because the intention is to deny those people the ability to be seen as their preferred gender and instead give the impression that those people are impostors, implying that “identifying” is more akin to “relating” instead of categorization.
Insisting that an ostensibly autistic person use “self-identified” instead of “self-diagnosed” would have the same effect.
If you want to use a proper word that’s not “diagnosed”, “self-assessed” would be more accurate.
That’s a bit of a stretch lol
Thank you for sharing your perspective. Does the distinction between “identify” and “self-identify” make a difference to you?
I don’t know about the other people involved in this discussion, as I know that obsessive interests are part of different communities, but I am someone who studies languages and word meanings.
The information that I am sharing is not my perspective. Those words do have that context in common spoken English in the year 2023.
That would not have been the case many decades ago, but the word “identify” tends to be used ironically and sarcastically and with derision. It doesn’t matter if the word is used by itself or paired with the word “self”.
I’ll point out the definitions on Urban Dictionary, to point this out(and not just on the first page, but on pages beyond that):
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=identify
Insisting that people who have not been professionally diagnosed use “self-identified” will lead to even more bullying and social abuse from neurotypical people who already use that context when trying to justify their bullying and social abuse.
“Self-assessed” would be a phrase which is more exact and does not have that additional context of being tied to groups that have been targeted for bullying and social abuse.
Most of us here don’t seem to hear it that way so I don’t think it’s so cut and dry. I know, you study word meanings, but I’m a descriptivist, and if enough people take a certain meaning from it then that’s what it means to me.
The issue is not what meaning we(those of us who are autistic) take from it. The issue is that the people who will bully will use it as further justification to bully and to socially abuse people.
Maybe this is region dependant? Or maybe a thing in online spaces? Because in my experience, in real life interactions, for example, I’ve heard case workers refer to an individual as someone who identifies with a disability rather than saying a disabled person. And this is a more recent change and I actually appreciated as instead of saying something about the person it makes it about what they feel and gives them power and autonomy.
I understand and sympathize with how it can be weaponized against trans people but that’s not the universal experience and not the connotation I get from it. Agree to disagree, and I will consider your point of view in the future when using the term. Thank you.
Also, I’m not diagnosed autistic, but I’m pretty sure I’ve self-something’d it