Print

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

[smjjames]

Isn't Cis latin for trans(itioning)? Like cis-alpine? Not that I want to start a semantics argument here, heh. Or maybe an etymology argument.

[NullForceOmega]

cis

/sis/

adjective
Chemistry

adjective: cis

denoting or relating to a molecular structure in which two particular atoms or groups lie on the same side of a given plane in the molecule, in particular denoting an isomer in which substituents at opposite ends of a carbon–carbon double bond are on the same side of the bond.

This is the actual, accepted definition of cis, the other (very recent and clearly derogatory) usage in English is flatly incorrect.

[Reelya]

Isn't Cis latin for trans(itioning)? Like cis-alpine? Not that I want to start a semantics argument here, heh. Or maybe an etymology argument.

Cis is latin for "on the same side of". Cisalpine Gaul was the Gallish territories south of the alps, e.g. on the same side as the Romans. Transalpine means "beyond the alps" / e.g. on the other side. One name for the gaul lands north of the alps was "Gallia Transalpina", to distinguish it from "Gallia Cisalpina":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisalpine_Gaul
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallia_Narbonensis

So cis and trans are actually opposites, and transgender / cisgender are grammatically correct for the exact same reason transalpine / cisalpine are grammatically correct.

[Neonivek]

Hell, your own statement can be easily construed as claiming that heterosexuals are 'abnormal' because they need a modifier attached to them.

You know, why do we need a word for Christian? Shouldn't it just be "Normal"?

[NullForceOmega]

You REALLY want to go down this road neo?

What a group chooses to call themselves isn't an issue, what they call another group is.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I want to remind everybody that you are getting in a semantic argument with Neonivek. Turn back while you still can.

[Neonivek]

You REALLY want to go down this road neo?

Yes, fairly sure I do. I have enough friends who are not "Normal" to actually care about this.

Normal works if there is a state at which one can be abnormal. Personalities can have extreme normal personalities and abnormal personalities.

I want to remind everybody that you are getting in a semantic argument with Neonivek. Turn back while you still can.

It isn't a semantic argument. It isn't about "Technicalities" but rather whether or not the term cis should be applied based on societal norms.

I only demonstrate how the connotation changes once there is a "normal".

[NullForceOmega]

Again, I absolutely don't give a damn what a group wants to call themselves, but the second they start slapping labels on others, they have officially earned my ire.  'Cis' is every bit as much an insult to my ears as certain words I will not use are insults to others, such as your 'different' friends.  Take your damned labeling directly to hell, where it belongs.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

That is in all meaningful terms a semantic ar-

No!

You won't take me too! By will alone I set my mind in motion! Begone, Shaytan!

[Neonivek]

Again, I absolutely don't give a damn what a group wants to call themselves, but the second they start slapping labels on others, they have officially earned my ire.  'Cis' is every bit as much an insult to my ears as certain words I will not use are insults to others, such as your 'different' friends.  Take your damned labeling directly to hell, where it belongs.

You already labeled yourself with "normal" and everyone else with "Abnormal".

So when it comes to which part is being the most offensive, I think it is the one that is basically going "Everyone who isn't like me isn't a normal person" as opposed to the one who went "You know what, perhaps we should come up with a name for this"

So yeah don't be a hypocrite, especially when cis isn't even an insult or has negative connotations beyond what say "White" has.

In fact the reason why people say "Cis" as an insult has more to do with the sort of "Assimilate! Those who do not bare our likenesses shall be expunged" attitude that comes from the masses.

[NullForceOmega]

I did not label myself as normal, and I don't appreciate you putting someone else's words in my mouth.  I don't believe in normal, and I don't need to slap a label on anyone.

And I find 'cis' to be offensive, hateful, and blatantly derogatory, and so I don't give a damn how you think it's used, to me it is an insult.

[smjjames]

Lets drop the subject or move it to the sexuality thread, I'm sorry for elevating the subject.

Locking for a few to nip the heat in the bud.

Okay, should have been long enough to get peoples attention and stop the flame cycle. NullForce did apologize, but that's okay as it was partially my fault because I kind of elevated the subject.

[Starver]

Cis

Why not just say "normal"?

What is "normal"?

And by what metric?  Was he of normal wealth, or education, or, or, or..?

Cis is clearly indicative as the opposite of Trans, a minority condition, to indicate the untransitioned who are not 'in' that particular 'out culture', but then pointedly becomes used to deal with the opposing minority condition of hyperheterosexuality in thought, association and deed as it takes a derogatory meaning in the form of the best-defence-is-an-offence counterstrike by the self-identifying LGBTQ+ crowd.  Since then, it has been rereclaimed by sympathetic hetero supporters who are forgiving of the militant out-crowd they support and their counter-interolerance of anyone not actually out-and-proud (in addition the anti-bi prejudices).

It's more complex even than that, and would depend on which stage of the evolving cultural/countercultural maturity one has invested interest in.  I have seen "cis" as a venomous insult of all non-queers (by those who have claimed "queer" as a badge of pride, and it is in that spirit I refer to it here), but also all the way through to the more forgiving 'our esteemed and honoured allied heteros'.

In context, used here it seems to indicate that we're definitely not talking about a woman in a man's world (let alone in the manner of Alan L Hart or Buck Angel) as a direct contrast to Hillary who is, but a full on misogynist man's-man (but not a "men-man") of the insecure type. Or such is my own take-home...  And I don't think that deserves to be condidered any form of normalcy.

[Neonivek]

But smjjames, did you apologize?

Apologize to AMERICA?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[smjjames]

Starver, come on, I said either drop it or move to the sexuality thread.