<p>Legal scholars, privacy advocates and major tech corporations all coalesce around one single idea. Data should be considered property. Legal analysts point to the ability of governments to regulate property, privacy advocates argue that personal rights would be better protected through a property model, and large tech companies want to claim ownership over data as a proprietary trade secret. I argue that the tendency to view data as property is a result of the long legacy of enlightenment philosophy surrounding property. In particular, John Locke has a special hold on the public imaginary, and his twin concepts of self-ownership and the labor theory of accumulation lead us to conceptualize data as a special form of property. However, the property model of data has significant drawbacks. By commodifying data, we commodify ourselves and allow for colonial theories of enclosure to dominate the discourse. Instead, I propose an alternative framing of data, drawn from the work of Judith Butler, whose ideas allow us to see data as an extension of the performance of identity. Drawing on both <i>Gender Trouble</i> and <i>Bodies that Matter</i> I argue that viewing data as part of the performance of identity allows us to mitigate the harms of a property model and reconsider our relationship with our data.</p>