.png)
.png)
Phrases like “identifies as” are often used with good intentions. For many years, they were commonly used to acknowledge identities that had historically been dismissed from workplace conversations and public discourse.
But language evolves, and so does its impact. Increasingly, “identifies as” can create distance between identities that are treated as “legitimate” and ones that are not.
The issue is not necessarily the phrase itself, but how unevenly it is applied. People rarely say a cisgender man “identifies as a man.” He is simply described as a man. In contrast, transgender, non-binary, agender, racialized, disabled, and other marginalized people are far more likely to have their identities framed with additional qualifiers, caveats, or explanations.
This subtle difference in language reinforces a hierarchy, where some identities are treated as objective and unquestioned, while others are framed as subjective or exceptional.
A cisgender man, for example, is generally allowed to exist without scrutiny. Meanwhile, his agender colleague may be described to others as someone who “identifies as agender,” turning their identity into a point of discussion, clarification, or debate. In many workplaces, people experiencing marginalization are then expected to educate others, represent an entire community, or justify experiences that are deeply personal and diverse.
Both “identifies as” and “self-identified” can, at times, suggest that a person’s identity is less concrete or less valid than identities that just exist.
When some identities are treated as unquestioned and others are consistently framed with caveats, language can reinforce exclusion.
If we want to create workplaces where people feel respected, affirmed, and seen, we must pay attention to the patterns embedded in the language we use. Inclusive communication means respecting how people describe themselves and recognizing when certain phrasing may create distance or othering.
Inclusive language is not about perfection. It’s about reflecting on the assumptions built into how we speak about one another.
Language is constantly evolving, shaped by culture, lived experience, and social change. As our understanding evolves, our communication practices should evolve alongside it. That requires curiosity, reflection, and a willingness to examine which identities are treated as standard and which are treated as exceptions.
Workplaces play an important role in shaping these norms. The language used in meetings, policies, introductions, surveys, hiring processes, and everyday conversations influences whether people feel respected and understood. Rather than treating identities experiencing marginalization as deviations from a perceived norm, workplaces can move toward language that recognizes people on their own terms. People do not need to be framed as exceptions to belong. They simply are.
This blog is not meant to be a static guide, but rather a compilation and reflection of our learnings to date. Everything changes - from technologies and innovations to social norms, cultures, languages, and more. We’ll continue to update this blog with your feedback; email us at hello@feminuity.org with suggestions.
This blog was written collaboratively by members of the Feminuity team.
If you wish to reference this work, please use the following citation:
Feminuity. "Why 'Identifies As' Can Be Othering at Work"
