This is a big topic, potentially the whole reason I started this blog. My identity has changed or is changing, as is the case for many (all?) women who become mothers. A woman is a different person after she becomes a mom, at least in all of the cases of moms I’ve met. However, I’ve also been thinking about how we use identity and why we even feel the need to define it for ourselves. Can we just BE without defining WHO WE ARE in precise terms? I’m still not sure.

It’s going to take me a few posts to sort through this, but let me start by saying this. Some of this stuff is for scientists to research and psychologists to decide, I’d imagine. What I write here is my opinion, formed by what I read, my thoughts, the people I’m around and sometimes the podcasts I listen to, which at times includes psychologists or people who study things, but as in all things on the internet, this is through my lens. I don’t know why I feel the need to qualify this topic, but I want it known that my research is anecdotal, not scientific.

There are levels of identity. Right? When you first meet a person, part of their identity is like the title you’d put on their book: “This is Laura. She’s a mom and a rower.” One of those things is something I AM, and the other is something I DO. Are these different? Clearly. Is there something more important about the I AM identity statements than the I DO identity statements? Or vice versa? And identity can be intentionally built, like a brand. Ugh, I hate that I made that comparison because the idea of a “personal brand” seems so gross and disingenuous.

Once you get past the initial “This is ___, and she is ___,” you might learn a little more about a person. But that makes me wonder what it really means to know someone. Is it enough to know what they do, or is it about how they feel about something, or a step further, how they’ll react or respond to something? These could be good ways to delineate relationships. I know what an acquaintance does on the weekends, but I know how my sister will react to trying something new. Maybe. Like 50% of the time, anyway. Is knowing someone’s identity truly knowing them? No, I think not.

I think it’s fair to say that knowing someone’s identity from afar does not mean you know someone. I also think this is where people get into trouble feeling like they know famous people or idolizing celebrities. Public identities can be sculpted and curated, especially now with social media. But maybe knowing someone’s identity up close is the gateway to knowing someone. You have to know the things about them, the titles of their book and chapters, to know how they feel about and potentially see the world. Maybe that’s what identity is about – the first steps toward being known.

A big part of identity might include huge topics like sexual orientation, religious affiliations, political affiliations – big groups or categories. For some, these might be defining characteristics of a person. For others, they don’t factor in much, or at least aren’t heavily weighted by the individual. I find it fascinating that something that is a core component of one person’s identity may not even be considered necessary by another person. Each person contains multitudes, which seems like an ever-important thing for all of us to remember as we simultaneously grow more connected and less willing or able to see the other side.

I asked a bunch of questions in this, so I’ll try to investigate answers a little more deeply next time. Stay tuned!