Do you think that referring to a group of people as "self identified men" or "self identified women" is, to some degree, offensive/insulting?

“Self identified” as I understood it was a group of people who identified themselves in a certain way. Life is way too short to be worried about what terminology other people use. I couldn’t care less. For another person to use this term is, I believe, a projection of the users thoughts and values. Not the actual “group”. If someone were to call me a “self identified” woman, I’d probably pee my pants laughing. Others having a different viewpoint about gender and sexuality has no effect on me, and I see no point in trying to force my views on them as they are doing to me. They’re just spinning their wheels. This, in my view, puts them in the same category as Christians who try to enforce their standards on others.

I have to admit I never heard the term “self identified men” before so I googled it. I found this site that gives definitions of other terms and uses self-identified in those definitions. I’m guessing that it just means that they identify as such and is not meant in any way, shape, or form to say they are not “real men”.

I always use it in order to be MORE inclusive and LESS offensive. Clearly, you must have seen me use it for years since wis.dm so it’s not news to you The terminology points to the very real fact that what makes a man (gender wise) is transient and arbitrary and changes with time – therefore anyone can self-identify as a man or a woman and you have to respect that. If you don’t like the terminology, don’t place it on yourself.

As a transsexual man I suppose it could be said that I am a “self-identified man”, although the term isn’t commonly used in connection with transsexuality. Personally I don’t think it would offend me but I can see that some trans people would be offended by it. Most just prefer “man” or “woman”.

I never paid attention to it until now actually. nor have I seen it written. I’ve only heard it on the news in terms of the headlines: The man, a self identified….whatever. I’ve certainly never heard of it being applied to a group of people. I’ll have to look it up for more clarity I guess. It really doesn’t make sense to me. What is the difference between a man and a self identified man?

@Trillian Some people don’t ‘pass’ for men (as society expects them to) but self-identify as men. Point being it is not OTHER people who proclaim our gender (despite what people think) but it is that we do it for ourselves. So I self-identify as a gender non-conformist but you will most likely identify me as a woman (which would be incorrect, for me). One of my good friends is read as a man sometimes but has been self-identifying as a woman for decades. That’s why when activists for the LGBT community usually say ‘self-identified’ so that you are more sensitive to all people. I have no clue why anyone would find it offensive.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir wait, slow down, I need to read this again.

I would think it just means that the person doesn’t identify with the gender they were biologically born as, no? I can’t see how it would be offensive. In fact, to me, it seems more respectful than anything else… to acknowledge what they feel they really are inside.

Shoot, I can’t look at your answer and edit at the same time. So, when you say a self identified man, are you saying a person without male genitals but thinks and wants to be identified as a man? Pardon my not knowing the meaning of the terminology. What is the difference between passing as a man and identifying as a man? I thought it was the person speaking talking about men and being derisive. Like, “Yeah, you’re a man and act like one because society expects you to.”
What am I not getting here? I feel like I’m pissing a group of people off and I don’t know exactly why.

What @poofandmook said.

I’m lost now too. The site I linked above gives the definition as lesbian as “An self-identified woman who is romantically attracted to self-identified women.” So that’s a women that is self-identified as a women. They way a few of you have said it in turns of gender identity of a man feeling like he should really be a woman, it would be a man that is self-identified as a women. So which way does it work?

@Trillian I think anyone can use the term. I think that when they use it, they might be a bit more progressive/aware of the variety of gender identities/situations out there. A person can identify as a man but others (because they don’t necessarily alter their body or dress) will say ‘oh no that’s a woman’ or be insulting and say ‘he/she’ (people are pretty ignorant). But that person can still self-identify as a man even if no one ‘believes’ them (because it doesn’t matter if anyone else believes them). And you’re not pissing anyone off. I think you can have no issues with your gender and still self identify as a man. If you are a woman and feel that way, you are self-identifying as a woman.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I think I get it now.

@Seaofclouds Very cool. And thank you @bob_ for bringing this opportunity forward, people can learn from this question – I am sure that’s what you intended to do with it.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir But if you are a woman, and you self-identify as one, why not simply “woman”? I guess my way of thinking is that adding the “self-identified” is not assertive, that it “surrenders” the term to what society (or some in society) think.

If I’m a woman and feel what way? That I have no issues with my gender? So am I a woman or a self-identified woman? I’ve been staying away from these gender issue threads for the most part because it really is not an issue for me. But you’re right to say that I am ignorant of a whole lifestyle and culture. Well, more than one I guess.
So from what I think you’re saying, a woman can be a self identified woman, and so can a person with male genitals. Have I got that right?

@bob_ Because some people may (since this is a journey) feel that the term doesn’t belong to them even though they feel it does and so as I said above when someone uses the term ‘self-identified’ woman, it’s like a signal (this comes with knowing some queer and gender related theory) to the person that the person asking (in the case you gave, JeanPaulSartre) understands that biology isn’t destiny and that biology is separate from gender.
@Trillian yes, you have that right.

I think it’s an important way to include people. I generally just use it on certain questions that could come across as narrow if not worded properly. Depending on the group I’m talking to, I’ll make the choice to use it or not as well.

It’s a way to let those outside of the ‘gender norms’ feel included in a question or discussion. If the gender isn’t really important to my topic then I usually won’t use the phrase. Don’t know if that would be insulting or not- just my own prerogative, I suppose.

No, it doesn’t mean ‘not real’ and it is not derogatory. It just means the writer wants it known that the term is not of his making. It is also used in front of ‘witch’ so the reader will know the person call herself a witch, and the writer is not ‘name calling’.

I like @Simone_De_Beauvoir s explanation. The intent is to be more inclusive, not insulting.

I am heartened to see the positive responses to this question.