If I wore a pink shirt to a Barbie movie and then posted a picture of me wearing it on Facebook then yeah that would be me doing some identity politics. It would especially be me doing some identity politics if I was with someone else who also had a pink shirt on.

If I just wore a pink shirt (which I do have one) then it wouldn't be anything.

None of this is too hard you guys just want to play dumb here for some weird reason.

Can you explain what you mean by “doing identity politics” or why it’s so meaningful to you? All I see is Trudeau & son wearing pink to the famously pink-themed Barbie movie.

Let's come at this from a different angle. Do you think Trudeau posting this picture on social media is objectionable or somehow divisive?

No.

Is it your opinion that it needs to be objectionable or divisive for him to be doing some IP?

Doing identity politics can be any sort of act of identity politics.

Why what is meaningful to me? Not much of this is.

The term "identity politics" almost always is used as a pejorative.

But if your definition (or my definition) of identity politics doesn't imply anything about whether the behavior is objectionable or divisive, then who cares whether the behavior falls within the outer edges of the definition. That is my point.

It’s okay to admit you don’t have an answer.

If there was some Muslim themed movie where everyone was wearing green to it (that is their color for those who don't know) and Trudeau and his son wore green and posted a pic on Twitter, that would also be doing an act of identity politics.

Why should anyone care whether this fits into your apparently benign definition of identity politics?

I have no idea what identity politics is or why it's bad, but best I can glean from this thread is identity politics is when a politician attempts to ingratiate him/herself with a particular demographic. Is that not just... politics?

They should care so that don't look dumb on the Internet trying to argue that stuff like this isn't identity politics.

identity politics: (while at t shirts)

wear green t shirt wherever you go (as a president of a nation! lol)

wear green means you want to do war? Does it mean you are friends with the weapons industry?

The Zelensky style is to try to look like you're always coming off the front lines. Propaganda but definitely not identity politics.

Is wearing pants identity politics? Am I doing the identity politics right now??!?

Can anyone explain this to me? I'm not trolling (for once).

The serious answer is that "identity politics" means there are prominent women and/or minorities in a thing.

Neither true nor serious

So if I were writing a dictionary I’d just directly state that identity policts is a pejorative term used by social conservatives. So a politician posing with his son in a pink sweatshirt would be likely flagged as identity politics where as nutjob politicians posing with their kids and a bunch of guns for a christmas card would not be.

I think I'm more confused than before, but eda's answer does kinda make sense as well.

Luckbox apparently believes that identity politics includes any expression of empathy or support for any cognizable group, however modest or justified that expression may be, is identity politics. As you point out, that definition is as broad as the outdoors, so broad as to be effectively inconsequential.

Hand out food to the homeless? That's identity politics.
Attend a service for fallen soldiers on Memorial Day? That's identity politics.
Write an OpEd questioning the adequacy of funding for Social Security? That's identity politics.
Propose to extend voting rights to felons? That's identity politics.

No none of those are.

Why?

The homeless, fallen soldiers, social security receipents, and felons aren't identity groups-- those are more akin to special interest groups although ss receipents is so board it wouldn't even be that.

Identity groups are based on "race", "gender", sexuality, religion, nationality, ethnicity, and perhaps a couple others like age or handicap status.

In order for something to be identity politics, it has to deal with an identity group. Special interest groups and identity groups can have some overlap but they aren't the same. Gun owners for example is a special interest group that might share some overlap with an identity group (white male Christians maybe), but it wouldn't be an identity group

Ok, so based on those definitions, why is identity politics bad and "special interest politics" good (or neutral)?

Those aren't arguments that have been made in this thread, at least not from me.