The term identity politics was born in 1977, when a group of Black lesbian feminists called the Combahee River Collective released a statement defining their work as self-liberation from the racism and sexism of “white male rule”:

Unlike orthodox Marxism, critical theory is concerned with language and identity more than with material conditions.

If this past year-and-change has taught us anything, it's how interconnected we all are — a bat coughs and the world gets sick. Vaccines aside, our greatest weapon for defeating Covid-19 has been the mask, an accessory I'd formerly appreciated only a symbol: masks make secret, masks hide, masks cover, in protests as in pandemics. The social value of the mask has been made clear: they're not deceptive so much as protective, of ourselves and of others too. Masking is a mutual responsibility, a symbol of common identity founded in a common hope. 

The intimate linking of users' online personas with their offline legal identity was an iniquitous squandering of liberty and technology that has resulted in today's atmosphere of accountability for the citizen and impunity for the state. Gone were the days of self-reinvention, imagination, and flexibility, and a new era emerged — a new eternal era — where our pasts were held against us. Forever.

Offline we exist by default; online we have to post our way into selfhood.

A platform like Twitter makes our asynchronous posts feel like real-time interaction by delivering them in such rapid succession, and that illusion begets another more powerful one, that we’re all actually present within the feed.

One of the more incisive comments about the gap we often see between faith and works sticks with me today: that for too many people of the Christian faith, Jesus is a “hood ornament.”

“‘Evangelical’ used to denote people who claimed the high moral ground; now, in popular usage, the word is nearly synonymous with ‘hypocrite,’” Timothy Keller, one of the most influential evangelicals in the world, wrote in The New Yorker in 2017.

“In American pop-culture parlance, ‘evangelical’ now basically means whites who consider themselves religious and who vote Republican,” according to the Baylor University historian Thomas Kidd.

Partisan, cultural, and regional identities tend to shape religious identities.

Yet books are curious objects: their strength is to be both intensely private and intensely social — and marginalia is a natural bridge between these two states.

Well, since I learned that I was living illegally in the United States, I got discriminated for that. They would call me “illegal Mexican.” So I took that as a positive thing and said, "Yes, I am," and I felt like I needed to represent that not just for myself but for a whole generation because there's a lot of people just like me whose parents took them to the United States, and they struggled through the same thing. I felt that I needed to represent them. I didn't get the tattoos until I came back to Mexico. That's how it started. I do remember in high school, most of my friends that I hung out with were all Mexican, we were all born in Mexico. I guess that's how it started, just hanging out with friends and making jokes about it.

I don't want to say that I'm Mexican or American. I am both. I'm bi-cultural. I just don't like that. I don't like what they say. I'd rather we say, "Hey, we're human. You and I are human." Yes, later on we get that, later on they tell us, "Okay, you were born in Mexico so that makes you Mexican." But since we're born, we're born as human, not even as a woman or a man. We're born as a human. Yeah. I get asked that question a lot.

Mike: Yeah. But they didn't tell us that if he wasn't from there, that it didn't apply to us. And since he's not a resident, or he's not anything, they just took it all away. But they gave me a social security card. They gave me a work permit. They gave me everything that I needed. I even got my taxes one year [Emotional]. I got $3,000 back, put my taxes on my wall, like I'm really doing it.

So the truth is that the influencer economy is just a garish accentuation of the economy writ large. As our culture continues to conflate the private and public realms—as the pandemic has transformed our homes into offices and our bedrooms into backdrops, as public institutions increasingly fall prey to the mandates of the market—we’ve become cheerfully indentured to the idea that our worth as individuals isn’t our personal integrity or sense of virtue, but our ability to advertise our relevance on the platforms of multinational tech corporations.

Getting to grips with structure means keeping your reader in mind.

You don't have to be a Welsh speaker to realise these place names make Wales different.They connect us to our history and our shared identity.

You should have a right to present different aspects of your identity in different contexts. If you visit a site for medical information, you might trust it with information about your health, but there’s no reason it needs to know what your politics are. Likewise, if you visit a retail website, it shouldn’t need to know whether you’ve recently read up on treatment for depression. FLoC erodes this separation of contexts, and instead presents the same behavioral summary to everyone you interact with.

from SenorG’s comment that began with the caveat “Allow me to push back a bit here,” and which inspired four replies from three other annotators, to actualham’s observation

The question, 'What is library and information science?' does not elicit responses of the same internal conceptual coherence as similar inquiries as to the nature of other fields, e.g., 'What is chemistry?', 'What is economics?', 'What is medicine?' Each of those fields, though broad in scope, has clear ties to basic concerns of their field. [...] Neither LIS theory nor practice is perceived to be monolithic nor unified by a common literature or set of professional skills. Occasionally, LIS scholars (many of whom do not self-identify as members of an interreading LIS community, or prefer names other than LIS), attempt, but are unable, to find core concepts in common

He is seriously concerned – as many of us are – about the destructive repercussions of identity politics, the censorship of dissenting opinion, and the rewriting of American history.

An important part of being an academic researcher is remembering that you are an author.

When I’m writing on non-housing topics is that “academic blogging”? Or just an academic blogging?

Identity is always about groups, and group formation is always about identity formation, and both are processes of learning.

As high quality content and effective brand strategy move down the long tail, “community” has become an important concept for every post-Web 2.0 player. Crypto token holders, influencer fanbases, DTC brand customers, creator audiences, and new social networks are all often referred to as communities, and each has a stake in developing community for itself.

And really, this stems from the fact that buildings aren't designed by the community that uses them anymore. The community barely factors into the design, even. Buildings were designed to serve a specific purpose, dictated by the higher-ups with the money to purchase the land and fund the development of the building. Again, quoting the article, Unless they are an uber-wealthy client, users of buildings rarely have much input into the design process. Students do not get to say what kind of school they would like, office workers do not get to say whether they would prefer to work in a glass tower or in a leafy complex of wifi-enabled wooden pagodas. ... But that rupture means that architecture becomes something imposed upon people. It isn’t participatory, and it doesn’t adapt in response to their needs. It’s prefabricated, assembled beforehand off-site and then dumped on the unwitting populace. We are not meant to live in modern buildings; they are made for people who do not poop.

Plus, also, this website? It's like my home, on the internet. I have this online, virtual space that I can decorate any which way I want. I can add all sorts of things for people to read, talk all day about the things that interest me, make it any color, any pattern, any font, any layout. I keep it simple, yes, but it's my space. And there's Park City, the "netgroup" I admin as well, which is like a communal webspace for me and my friends. It's just, I feel such a sense of ownership over my homepage, such a sense of freedom, and I love it. If there's anything this pandemic has taught me, it's that I need this space to express myself. For the vast majority of the pandemic I essentialy did not have a life outside the digital world, besides the bare minimum like eating and sleeping and such. Most places outdoors right now are too dangerous, and I do not feel any sense of ownership at all in my current living space. The computer is all I have. It's all a lot of people right now have.

It costs money to paint my walls, not that I even can considering I rent my room. It costs money to get a different desk, not that I even have a car to transport it in. But the computer? Right click, Personalize.

As we all know, people are less awful when they are not anonymous. I believe that the most undervalued real estate on the internet is Twitter profiles.

it’s important not to get the claim that such terms latch on to initially hidden characteristics muddled up with some other highly controversial philosophical claims lurking in the vicinity.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) puts it: ‘Experience teaches us that a thing is so and so, but not that it cannot be otherwise.’

Another term that seems not to function in a Kripkean way is ‘weed’. We use ‘weed’ to refer to the various different plants that we prefer not to see in our gardens (because of their unattractiveness, destructiveness, etc). And we don’t assume that there’s some underlying biological feature common and peculiar to all weeds, as there is (arguably) to all roses or all tigers.

he most famous illustration of how the name of a substance is supposed to function in this way is provided not by Kripke, but by Putnam, another leading proponent of the ‘theory of direct reference’. Putnam asks us to imagine a Twin Earth – just like our Earth – which contains doppelgängers of us humans. The only difference between the two Earths is that on Twin Earth the clear, thirst-quenching, etc liquid that fills the oceans, lakes and rivers is not the chemical substance H2O, but another substance – XYZ. Suppose it’s 1750, before the chemical composition of water was discovered. On both Earths, the inhabitants call their liquid ‘water’. And, because it’s 1750, they associate the same mental checklist with that term: both think of ‘water’ as the substance that’s clear, thirst-quenching, boils at 100°C and so on. Now suppose a glass of XYZ is brought from Twin Earth to Earth and presented to Locke. Locke would believe it’s water, because it would tick his mental checklist. But would it be water? Not according to Putnam. Intuitively, that’s merely water-like stuff in the glass, not water. Putnam concludes that, while the term ‘water’ is associated with the same descriptions on Earth and Twin Earth, it has different meanings and picks out different chemical kinds. It is, and was, a necessary condition of something being water that it be H2O, despite this condition not being known back in 1750.

the name ‘Aristotle’ can’t just mean ‘the pupil of Plato and teacher of Alexander’. For then it would be a trivial truth, not a potentially contestable historical fact, that Aristotle was taught by Plato and taught Alexander.

In the mid-20th century, Kripke, along with a number of other philosophers including Ruth Barcan Marcus, Hilary Putnam and David Kaplan, overthrew this consensus, arguing that many terms refer, not by way of things fitting some associated mental checklist, but directly.

I’ll also provide one illustration of how Kripke’s ideas can have relevance outside philosophy – to heated political debates about identity, ‘biological essentialism’, and how terms such as ‘woman’ and ‘white person’ function (do such terms latch on to hidden genetic and/or other biological features, as some maintain?)

shared identity

Every time you click a reaction button on Facebook, an algorithm records it, and sharpens its portrait of who you are.

Our team is building open source community tools and Svelte fits our identity as an independent labor of love with an organic community.

And then there was what Lanier calls “data dignity”; he once wrote a book about it, called Who Owns the Future? The idea is simple: What you create, or what you contribute to the digital ether, you own.

Roman came to dominate the Greek world this influence spread much more widely, but it was also contrasted with Roman contempt for Greek governance and the cultural habits which made the Greeks seem 'untrustworthy' and 'unreliable' to Romans who saw themselves as more honest, straightforward and manly.

Romans did a much more thorough job assimilating the peoples they conquered. Non-Romans could and did become citizens, even from very early times.

Many non-Greeks adopted Gteek lifestyles, language and habits after the age of Alexander, but the cross-pollination was more frequently cultural than political.

he armies of Republican Rome were strongly rooted in the Italian peasantry. Rome's political reach was broader than comparable Greek states and military service obligations extended farther down the social scale.

he Romans assimilated far more people into their institutional lives.

soldiering became a lifelong career instead of a short-service civic duty.

dominating its neighbors and then assimilating them into its institutions

Rome, on the other hand, maintained a far more continuous tradition of governance with far fewer interruptions.

Greece was a very contentious place;

butcher’s daughter

Nothing represents you like your name. It’s been your brand since you were born. So when you’re online, you want your identity to match who you are in the real world.

anonymous imageboard

Smart had to say that if sensation X is identical to brain process Y then if Y is between my ears and is straight or circular (absurdly to oversimplify) then the sensation X is between my ears and is straight or circular.

The new Isabel

Self-concept also differs from self-esteem: self-concept is a cognitive or descriptive component of one's self (e.g. "I am a fast runner"), while self-esteem is evaluative and opinionated (e.g. "I feel good about being a fast runner").

Self-concept is distinguishable from self-awareness, which refers to the extent to which self-knowledge is defined, consistent, and currently applicable to one's attitudes and dispositions.

Subgroups of the computer underground with different attitudes and motives use different terms to demarcate themselves from each other. These classifications are also used to exclude specific groups with whom they do not agree.

According to the endurantist view, material objects are persisting three-dimensional individuals wholly present at every moment of their existence

The perdurantist view is that an individual has distinct temporal parts throughout its existence.

THE ILLUSION OF COMMUNICATION

Could I also use Indie Web tools for a persona, or is that not in keeping with the community?

In fact, these platforms have become inseparable from their data: we use “Facebook” to refer to both the application and the data that drives that application. The result is that nearly every Web app today tries to ask you for more and more data again and again, leading to dangling data on duplicate and inconsistent profiles we can no longer manage. And of course, this comes with significant privacy concerns.

Lauren Michele Jackson is a contributing writer at The New Yorker and an assistant professor of English at Northwestern University.

Wouldn’t it be important to distinguish people who ultimately don’t want differences to matter, like the people involved in #MeToo and Black Lives Matter, from people who ultimately do want them to matter, like ISIS militants, Brexit voters, or separatist nationalists? And what about people who are neither Mexican nor immigrants and who feel indignation at the treatment of Mexican immigrants? Black Americans risked their lives for civil rights, but so did white Americans. How would Socrates classify that behavior? Borrowed thymos?

Fukuyama concedes that people need a sense of national identity, whether ethnic or creedal, but otherwise he remains an assimilationist and a universalist.

He wants to iron out differences, not protect them. He suggests measures like a mandatory national-service requirement and a more meaningful path to citizenship for immigrants.

Public writing became a venue for retaining parts of myself that I would not submit to institutional transformation.

It's the part of your garden that you might actively show people when they come round to visit, that you're most proud of.

Clark based his book selection framework on a social justice curriculum, and it consists of four components: identity, respect, justice, and action, which build on each other. “When we were evaluating books, we would try to find books that fell into one of those four categories,” he said, noting that the majority of considered titles landed in the identity group “because we want young people to develop a sense of who they are and to see themselves.” According to Clark, “if young people have a strong sense of who they are, then respect enters in, meaning that they respect other people and they respect different perspectives and points of view. And when you have identity and respect, children are better able to identify instances of injustice, thereby wanting to see justice.” And lastly, “action,” the fourth element of the framework, Clark said, “gives young people suggestions or examples of things that they can do to take action when they see injustice.”

But we don’t just want people to read our work. We want people to spread our work — to be so moved by what we wrote or said that they log on to Facebook and share it with their friends or head over to Reddit and try to tell the world. That’s how you get those dots to multiply. But people don’t share quiet voices. They share loud voices. They share work that moves them, that helps them express to their friends who they are and how they feel. Social platforms are about curating and expressing a public-facing identity. They’re about saying, “I’m a person who cares about this, likes that, and loathes this other thing.” They are about signaling the groups you belong to and, just as important, the groups you don’t belong to.

Yet even before Clubhouse launches, it has encountered issues that larger social media companies struggle with. On Sunday, the entrepreneur Sriram Krishnan changed his name on the app to Tim Cook, Apple’s chief executive, as a prank. More than 100 people immediately joined the room.Hours later, someone impersonated Mr. Musk, the Tesla chief. That led MC Hammer, a Clubhouse user, to publicly call on the company to institute a real name policy. “Real identity !!! Be accountable for your words and opinions,” he tweeted.

The prevalent practice of damaging images of the human form—and the anxiety surrounding the desecration—dates to the beginnings of Egyptian history. Intentionally damaged mummies from the prehistoric period, for example, speak to a “very basic cultural belief that damaging the image damages the person represented,” Bleiberg said. Likewise, how-to hieroglyphics provided instructions for warriors about to enter battle: Make a wax effigy of the enemy, then destroy it. Series of texts describe the anxiety of your own image becoming damaged, and pharaohs regularly issued decrees with terrible punishments for anyone who would dare threaten their likeness.

“Imagery in public space is a reflection of who has the power to tell the story of what happened and what should be remembered,” Bleiberg said. “We are witnessing the empowerment of many groups of people with different opinions of what the proper narrative is.” Perhaps we can learn from the pharaohs; how we choose to rewrite our national stories might just take a few acts of iconoclasm.

Social media has come to define an era in which we annotate texts every day, we easily share this commentary across contexts, and in doing so we iteratively define who we are.

The internet is place for working out who you are

Think of this essay as a series of strongly held hypotheses; without access to the types of data which i’m not even sure exists, it’s difficult to be definitive. As ever, my wise readers will add or push back as they always do.

Incidentally, teens and twenty-somethings, more so than the middle-aged and elderly, tend to juggle more identities. In middle and high school, kids have to maintain an identity among classmates at school, then another identity at home with family. Twenty-somethings craft one identity among coworkers during the day, then another among their friends outside of work. Often those spheres have differing status games, and there is some penalty to merging those identities. Anyone who has ever sent a text meant for their schoolmates to their parents, or emailed a boss or coworker something meant for their happy hour crew knows the treacherous nature of context collapse.

In fact, I’d argue this blog has been largely a collection of writings concentrated on me working through the thoughts of my own digital identity and the tools that help shape it. The whole bit is highly meta.

Facebook’s use of “ethnic affinity” as a proxy for race is a prime example. The platform’s interface does not offer users a way to self-identify according to race, but advertisers can nonetheless target people based on Facebook’s ascription of an “affinity” along racial lines. In other words. race is deployed as an externally assigned category for purposes of commercial exploitation and social control, not part of self-generated identity for reasons of personal expression. The ability to define one’s self and tell one’s own stories is central to being human and how one relates to others; platforms’ ascribing identity through data undermines both.

Facebook’s use of “ethnic affinity” as a proxy for race is a prime example. The platform’s interface does not offer users a way to self-identify according to race, but advertisers can nonetheless target people based on Facebook’s ascription of an “affinity” along racial lines. In other words, race is deployed as an externally assigned category for purposes of commercial exploitation and social control, not part of self-generated identity for reasons of personal expression. The ability to define one’s self and tell one’s own stories is central to being human and how one relates to others; platforms’ ascribing identity through data undermines both.

why encourage posting before you’ve even read the thing? Because, at least my hope is, it’ll prevent posting a link from becoming an endorsement for the content at the other end of that link. There’s a natural tendency to curate what we associate with our online profiles and I think that’s, in large part, because we’ve spent a lot of time equating a user’s profile page with a user’s identity and, consequently, their beliefs. But I consume a wealth of content that I don’t necessarily agree with, and that helps to inform me, to shape my opinions, as much as the content that I agree with wholeheartedly.

In the past, I have written and talked about the need to create one canonical URL (address) for yourself online. The need to connect the dots to link together these disparate parts of your digital identity. I’ve been wondering over the last year or so whether that guidance was misguided.

By default, in order to allow inline fat-arrow validation functions, the field will not rerender if you change your validation function to an alternate function that has a different behavior. If you need your field to rerender with a new validation function, you will need to update another prop on the Field, such as key

functions present a problem again because there is no reliable way to compare two functions to see if they are semantically equivalent.

For example, a parent or guardian could be asked to make a payment of€0,01 to the controller via a banktransaction, including a brief confirmation in the description line of the transaction that the bank account holderis a holder of parental responsibility over the user. Where appropriate, an alternative method of verificationshould be provided to prevent undue discriminatory treatment of persons that do nothave a bank account.

The EDPBacknowledges that there may be cases where verification is challenging (for example wherechildren providing their own consent have not yet established an ‘identity footprint’, or where parentalresponsibility is not easily checked.

If the user states that he/she is below the age of digital consent then the controller can accept thisstatement without further checks, but will need to go on to obtain parental authorisation and verifythat the person providingthat consent is a holder of parental responsibility.

It is not unusual for one individual to possess several dozen different usernames and passwords.

A digital identity is made up of the sum total of digital traces relating to an individual or a community

the indexable nature of human beings themselves via the traces they consciously or unconsciously leave on the network, that is to say the question of their digital identity.

Furries are in the perilous position of having their interests form an integral part of their identity while simultaneously experiencing stigmatization from the world around them. For many, the fandom is their only source of social interaction and social support.

A small subset of furries, called “therians,” go beyond the interest in developing a fursona and believe they are spiritually connected to animals, are less than 100 per-cent human, are an animal trapped in a human body, or were an animal in a former life (Gerbasi et al., 2008).

She states that furry participants might identify as less than 100% human for reasons that she felt included, “not the least having a hangover from furry drinks the night before.” While it may be an attempt at humor, we find this comment to be egregiously offensive, derogatory, and insulting to the furry fandom and our participants. Ironically, this remark illustrates her subscription to the very stereotypes we were empirically testing and con-firms the necessity of our research.

Her focus on gender identity disorder misses the main point of the study, which was that it was the first empirical study to collect data scientifically and report find-ings on the furry fandom, an often misrepresented subculture.