It does sound like I'm just using "identify" in the same way that you're using "empathise" - the distinction I tried to draw between "what if I were him" and "if he were me" is pretty much that. I can't do characterisation without that kind of exercise and while I try not to turn the characters into me, I do necessarily make use of my own experience in trying to write them. At the least, I end up using whatever knowledge I have of different types of people to extrapolate how this character might handle a situation - but I'm also comfortable with using, e.g., my own experiences of immigration and culture shock as an entry point for thinking about what Atlantis might be like for a character like Teyla. As long as I don't drown her in myself, I don't see that as especially problematic.

But I do see your point about eliding the two words being risky. I hadn't thought of that before. I might just be too optimistic, though, in that I do see most fannish - or writerly - behaviour as cheerfully attempting as much empathy as it does identification. And I agree with Cesperanza's point about how identification - provided it doesn't swallow the whole field - can be and is a useful and pleasurable form of storytelling in itself. At the end of the day, even reading someone else's extreme Mary Sue fantasy is still teaching me something about someone other than myself - the writer. That links, in my head, somehow, with the community and sharing aspect of fandom but I'm not too clear about that.