Identity is formed through various factors, this being personal experiences, affiliation to groups, organizations, family, residence in movements etc. Identity formation is the core of what makes each of us, us. This largely being how we see ourselves and how we choose to see other people, being the result of every individual coming up with the reason as to why we are who we are. The formation of identity is both complicated and simplistic, as it is made up of the collective and the individual. Identity is what we take from every person we meet, everyone we walk passed, every experience we have, shaping both the collective and personal identities. Hardships frame us for who we become, while easy times allow us to express our identity to its fullest. The argument for the personal and collective identity is how you perceive the labels assigned, as the labels represent the collective while the experience represents the personal identity. As identity is based on the perceptions of yourself and others, this is when the collective through the use of labels becomes both constraining and liberating depending on the person and their personhood.
Within the framing of collective identities, this is how we relate to a larger group of people who are more likely to be exposed to similar circumstances as us. Culture and cultural ties is a large way in which how people perceive their identity in relation to other people [collective identity] as this is both tied to family and friends. Within many indigenous communities the idea of being two-spirit is largely a cultural identity that only indigenous individuals can use, this being the “self-identifier that an individual embodies multi-gendered spirits; underscoring a belief that, while each new life is at least imprinted by the combination of the energies that united to create it, in some people the diversely-gendered attributes of all these energies are more wholly manifested” (Ellasante, 1519). While two-spiritedness is largely framed as having both feminine and masculine spirits it provides ties to both indeneous culture and queerness. This largely taking up the bases of a collective identity as all lives live within one individual, this being the collective on the spiritual level, as well as defining someone's personal identity. As the identity of queerness is added in this is then assigned a generalized experiences through the label of queer. Ellasante continues and states "Two-spirit identity is about circling back to where we belong, reclaiming, reinventing, and redefining our beginnings, our roots, our communities, our support systems, and our collective and individual selves'' (Ellasante, 1521). This being further defined as a collective cultural identity as Ellasante largely defines the two-spirit identity through the connecting words of “our”. The idea of identifying and labeling a whole group assigns a collective identity for every individual that uses those labels. This being the “stereotypical” or perceived experience of what it means to be x. Though each person has a different experience within the label of being two-spirit, it is largely recognized through its label which represents the collective.
Through the topic of queerness, there is an understanding that the label of queerness is the collective while the experience is what frames the personal identity. Through Lesnevich’s pieces “How do I define my Gender when Nobodys Looking” and “Body Language '' Lesnevich does a great job at defining their own experiences within the labels of gender. Within their piece, Lesnevich states "I'm butch. I need to be with a femme... Two butches together wouldn't be right. It would be like two femmes. That doesn't make sense. The masculine and the feminine together, that's how it should be” (Lesnevich). This highlights how the label affects how the individual changes and conforms themselves in order to be recognizable within the collective. Evidently meaning personal identity in many forms is a branch of collective identity. This comes into the parallel idea that the authentic person is composed of the ideas of other people which is how perspective changes experience. Lesnevich continues in their piece to describe how they felt trapped by both the labels of girl and boy, this being the collective identity that they felt trapped in, while their personal identity did not align with either side of the binary. What is hard for people to hear is the idea that the gender binary does not fit nor include everyone. This then goes into the idea that the body itself does not produce two sexes (Lesnevich, 7), thus defining even more how gender is a social construct that finds its way into becoming a defining identity.
Within the labels of gender, it becomes apparent that gender has to do with how other people see us and how they treat us. This is brought up in the article with the idea of the peer gaze. Lesnevich goes into how COVID and being on zoom allowed for more control in how the peer gaze can be implemented; ‘“the peer gaze isn’t entirely gone” — but now it can be controlled. “It removes that feeling that someone sitting in the row behind me might be snickering or looking at what I’m wearing”’ (Lesnevich, 2). Lesnevich speaks on the social aspect of identity, thus being what people perceive you to be, they continue to state how the removal or limiting of the peer gaze has allowed many individuals to experiment more with their gender and expression and thus personal identity away from the collective identity as the individual is excluded from society as a result of covid. This is being highlighted more and more through social media as the exposure and globalization within society have allowed communities to come together through the comfort of privacy, and anonymity. This is the community that is formed through the label of “defining” identity.
As identity is a multi faceted phenomenon that is influenced by every thing that results in the unique personhood of every individual it is a double edged sword as the dichotomy between the personal and collective find their existence. The relationship between the two identities is both simplistic and complex as it is unique to each individual.