Pretty sure ‘identities’ are sometimes treated as black boxes where no further interrogation or introspection is necessary. It’s comforting, like ‘oh I’m demisexual that’s fine that’s okay that makes sense’. But it’s not really a fixed category of thing, and it’s basically just a preference rather than an identity, if you can make a distinction (not sure now I think about it)
But then again a lot of the discourse around identities is poorly thought through, even/especially by left wing people. Identities aren’t so much a mode of being or existing (i.e. people just existing as ‘demisexuals’, or working class, or BME), as a mode of living. ‘Identity’ is inculcated at the moment of a particular set of social relations being reproduced, either through interaction between actors or through auto-affection (i.e. interaction with oneself (wahey)).
Tbh I’m not really sure how valuable it is to talk about things as if they were identities, cos the word implies a specific sort of metaphysical architecture that’s essentially Platonic (about material relations and objects being representations of an ideal or form) and thus incoherent with the post-Judith Butler understanding of gender, sexuality etc etc
Idk why i’m posting this, was just thinking out loud it’s not really worth anybody else reading it.
