Let's first be clear about a few things.
The intent to commit Art is noble. It ought be encouraged at every turn.
By definition, what Art is depends on all sorts of factors. Today's garbage is tomorrows Genius -- & vice versa.
However, there is some garbage that's destined to forever maintain its status with little question.
Now, I've been a struggling writer for 30 years. I've had a million words published, & been paid for most of it.
I don't think that "being a writer" is a binary event. To split it into "Intent + Act + Result" is at least a little better, demonstrating it as a progression, & implying forward progression of some sort, rather than "it's all in the title."
Let me do it this way:
I've been playing guitar for almost 35 years. I've worked with Paul Westerberg & hung out with Jonny Lang & Grant Hart. One thing or another always seems to interefere with me "going pro" full-time. I'm not flashy, but I'm rock-solid (in a career field packed with flakes). I own about five guitars at any given time & generally have another dozen instruments. If pressed, I shy away from guitarist & call myself "a guitar player" -- which you may notice doesn't have anything parallel for those who'd even want to dodge status as "a writer." If it came down to rank, I might claim to be "semi-pro."
My folks bought the guitar for my brother. I pulled it out of the closet, wiped off the dust, went & bought some decent strings for it, & taught myself to play.
These days, a lot of my brother's friends are semi-pro guitarists. He actually has very good taste, & can tell the difference between audience-pleasing flash & actual artistry. If you were to talk with him, you'd find that he knows a lot more about the instrument than many players.
You'll also find that he wants to play. For three decades, he's been intending to learn. He's never owned an instrument, & rarely even touches one at open jams.
I don't think I'm being arrogant by saying that I'm as far beyond him as Jonny Lang is beyond me. If my brother buys a guitar (or 20), he's still not become a guitarist. If he spends a year taking lessons, ditto. When he begins to play obsessively in his free moments, when ideas begin to haunt him, even wake him from a sound sleep... well, then we can begin to compare notes.
None of you is going to convince me that "being a guitarist" is adequately met by wanting to play... or knowing a lot of trivia... or reading a lot about playing... or enjoying a lot of examples of performance... or convincing dozens or hundreds of people who've never actually heard you play... or owning the means... or being able to plunk out a tune or two.
And nobody's setting these standards. It's just the way it is.
Notice that nobody's requiring that I play for cash, much less regularly or often, & far less release a CD.
Writing is inherently solitary. When I'm hacking out a tune on guitar, you could participate; when I'm writing, I'm mostly locked in my own head with little outward show of what's happening. When I've got a tune learned, I can perform it for a roomful; writing can be read by one (okay, maybe three) person per copy -- no, reading it aloud doesn't count, because you could just as well be reading someone else's words; this is declamation, or perhaps storytelling, but presentation is not writing.
Where I get ticked about the "I'm a writer" thing is when this assumed status is used to make pronunciamentos about others -- speaking for all others, so that we've got the spectacle of someone who barely knows which end of a pencil points downward gassing away on the finer mechanics of Stephen King.
Most of you will fortunately never encounter workshops where the instructors between them probably have less experience (& often far less common sense!) than the average student they're "teaching." Even that might be okay, since sometimes simply getting the hopefuls & noobs to loosen up or maybe even talk to each other & become a self-teching group is a good thing... but it's dismaying how often the leaders merely propogate their own insecurities.
For all I care, everyone ought to write stuff. I don't agree that this automatically makes you "a writer" any more than hiring a vanity press makes you "an author."
I think it's much more honest, not to mention defogging, to explain what sort of writer you feel yourself to be. Are you a weekender? do you write for the local Shopper weekly? are you a blogger? a sometimes poet? in your 17th year of that darned first novel? publishing a zine that's older than your kids? It doesn't take more than a few words to clear this up, & paints you as honest enough to differentiate yourself from (say) Saul Bellow.
But I'll also say that, if you've really got the faintest glimmer of what it takes to actually become a writer, you won't be worrying about it much in the first place -- those who get most torqued in demanding the God-Given Right to simply glom the title like a limpet tend to be those who (a) want to be instantly & uncritically adored for what drivel they actually churn out, & (b) want to pronounce upon others' efforts.
I think that separating oneself along a continuum like apprentice, journeyman, master is valuable -- to oneself, to the audience, to others on the same path.
IMNSHO.