Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Xantalos]

It amazes me that this is even an issue.  Imagine the reaction if instead of cisgender, the term was homogender.

What reaction would there be?

[palsch]

I do find the rage about the term cis fascinating.

I mean, here we have a majority being referred to by a technical term, defined by an outside group and commonly used in literature that is often critical of (elements of) the group it applies to.

It's exactly what has happened to every single minority and out-group in the world. Having their identities defined and assigned and argued over by outside groups. It's just usually the majority who make such definitions. More, these outgroup definitions often hold or held legal/administrative power, especially for trans* people. See also the DSM and GID/GD.

Comparatively the real power the term cis has is as a way to refer to non-trans* people that doesn't hold them as some norm against which trans* people are measured, just by being a little strange and unfamiliar. Actually, more than that, it offers reminders that trans* people exist for those who might prefer to just ignore that fact.

I rather like the term myself, and all the more so for its making some people uncomfortable.

[Loud Whispers]

It amazes me that this is even an issue.  Imagine the reaction if instead of cisgender, the term was homogender.

Ugh, I'd definitely be against this one. Too soft for shouting.

I rather like the term myself, and all the more so for its making some people uncomfortable.

Yeah I don't get the discomfort either. For some reason in some people it manifests some sort of power I'm just not grasping here.

[Scoops Novel]

It amazes me that this is even an issue.  Imagine the reaction if instead of cisgender, the term was homogender.

Ugh, I'd definitely be against this one. Too soft for shouting.

I rather like the term myself, and all the more so for its making some people uncomfortable.

Yeah I don't get the discomfort either. For some reason in some people it manifests some sort of power I'm just not grasping here.

At a guess, it sounds overly clinical. No one would care about homo-gender (if with some mild confusion as people are adjusted to hetero), but throw in some unconventional terminology and people will question it.

[Vector]

GUESS HOW HOMOSEXUAL USED TO SOUND

Yeah, non-Trans. There's your word. You don't need the word cis for that.

I'm going to start calling all the brunettes "non-blonde," okay?  We don't need a dedicated word for that, because what we're really trying to say is "hey dude, you're not weird, unlike those blondies over there."

[GlyphGryph]

But WHICH kind of non-blonde? How many non-blondes are there, anyway? Like, four or something?

[kingfisher1112]

GUESS HOW HOMOSEXUAL USED TO SOUND

Yeah, non-Trans. There's your word. You don't need the word cis for that.

I'm going to start calling all the brunettes "non-blonde," okay?  We don't need a dedicated word for that, because what we're really trying to say is "hey dude, you're not weird, unlike those blondies over there."

That is an absolutely terrible analogy. The thing I find a massive piss off about the word is that no other condition has a word for it. What, am I going to be called ciswheelchaired? Maybe cisalzheimers. Ooh, maybe cismultiple sclerosis! The thing is, it is a condition. It needs a term. We do not. A lack of a condition does not require a word.

[Shakerag]

Can I just fast-forward to the point where we drop all these terms because no one gives a shit anymore, and we just look at people as individuals instead of a collection of labels?

Because that would be swell.

I don't really care what you have between your legs.  I don't care what you feel you should have between your legs.  I more care whether or not you are a giant flaming asshole.  If you are not a giant flaming asshole and I am attracted to you, then I'll work with whatever is there. 

If the criteria as to whether someone could be your soulmate is hinging on what's between their legs, then I postulate that you are not looking for a partner (or partners, because fuck monogamy), but rather some genitals attached to a conveniently warm body. 

[Wiles]

If the criteria as to whether someone could be your soulmate is hinging on what's between their legs, then I postulate that you are not looking for a partner (or partners, because fuck monogamy), but rather some genitals attached to a conveniently warm body.

Everyone wants something different out of their partners and out of life in general. Just because what you want is different doesn't make what others want any less valid.  Reducing someone else's wants to nothing more than a desire for a "conveniently warm body" is a great way dehumanize people to the point where it is hard to understand and empathize with them. I understand that the narrative that heterosexual monogomous relationships are antiquated and boring is popular in some circles, but those kind of attitudes at their core are really no different than anti-gay or anti-trans attitudes.

[scriver]

GUESS HOW HOMOSEXUAL USED TO SOUND

Yeah, non-Trans. There's your word. You don't need the word cis for that.

I'm going to start calling all the brunettes "non-blonde," okay?  We don't need a dedicated word for that, because what we're really trying to say is "hey dude, you're not weird, unlike those blondies over there."

That is an absolutely terrible analogy. The thing I find a massive piss off about the word is that no other condition has a word for it. What, am I going to be called ciswheelchaired? Maybe cisalzheimers. Ooh, maybe cismultiple sclerosis! The thing is, it is a condition. It needs a term. We do not. A lack of a condition does not require a word.

The words for those is "able-bodied" for the first and "healthy" for the two others.

[ibot66]

Alternitavely to all this nonsense, we could call MTF "girls" and call FTM "boys". It would save some hassle, and allow the group in question to be treated as they enjoy.

[LordBucket]

Alternitavely to all this nonsense, we could call MTF "girls" and call FTM "boys".
It would save some hassle, and allow the group in question to be treated as they enjoy.

It's an entirely temporary problem. The issue will become irrelevant as soon as technology improves a little.

[Scoops Novel]

Alternitavely to all this nonsense, we could call MTF "girls" and call FTM "boys".
It would save some hassle, and allow the group in question to be treated as they enjoy.

It's an entirely temporary problem. The issue will become irrelevant as soon as technology improves a little.

Getting real tired of your utopian shit, LordBucket. I imagine you'd see a spike in intolerance for a while, and "a little" is a bit much.

If the criteria as to whether someone could be your soulmate is hinging on what's between their legs, then I postulate that you are not looking for a partner (or partners, because fuck monogamy), but rather some genitals attached to a conveniently warm body.

Everyone wants something different out of their partners and out of life in general. Just because what you want is different doesn't make what others want any less valid.  Reducing someone else's wants to nothing more than a desire for a "conveniently warm body" is a great way dehumanize people to the point where it is hard to understand and empathize with them. I understand that the narrative that heterosexual monogomous relationships are antiquated and boring is popular in some circles, but those kind of attitudes at their core are really no different than anti-gay or anti-trans attitudes.

I'd like to add that until neurology is no longer an issue, this is an ineffective argument for me. As a man, i find the alternative more interesting.

[palsch]

That is an absolutely terrible analogy. The thing I find a massive piss off about the word is that no other condition has a word for it. What, am I going to be called ciswheelchaired? Maybe cisalzheimers. Ooh, maybe cismultiple sclerosis! The thing is, it is a condition. It needs a term. We do not. A lack of a condition does not require a word.

Yet there are the terms able-bodied and, more relevantly, neurotypical. The latter fills pretty much the same role as cisgendered in discussions of mental function, where those with atypical neurology (especially autism) coined it to refer to those with more typical neurology. The shift to 'typical/atypical' from 'normal/abnormal' is subtle but valuable to the community.

Alternitavely to all this nonsense, we could call MTF "girls" and call FTM "boys". It would save some hassle, and allow the group in question to be treated as they enjoy.

Well, sure. Except that that is erasing all the issues that specifically arise from being trans* and all those people who don't identify with either gender.

[Dutchling]

When we talk about 'cisgendered' as a word, why use 'trans*' instead of 'trans'? Aren't we specifically talking about non transsexual people, and not about the '*' part?