Why does anybody want to date strangers? Most of the guys I went on dates with were “strangers” before the day they asked me out. How the heck else was I supposed to get to know them, ask the FBI for their file?
Actually, in many past debates he’s never proven that “many” people somehow reach to find the term offensive, unless “many” equates to "an extremely tiny fraction of the population.
Stunning that I work in this area of social advocacy and no one, not even the hateful church people bused in from the sticks who threatened to hang me from a lamppost in a parking lot after my speech, has ever complained about being called “cisgender.” But hey, if you can Google and find 100 people out there, then it must be true, right? (I’ll wager I can probably find 100 people out there who find “Snuffleupagus” offensive as a word, too.)
A claim of offense over a word that is inoffensive in its roots and meaning is a tactic used to silence discussion and cast a chilling effect over a debate. Like when we as a society have had the “niggardly” discussions.
There’s also the fact that it’s not very easy for us to find dates in the first place, so of course we use the common methods that other people do. The whole subtopic is both victim-blaming and moralizing. “You shouldn’t have been wearing that short skirt/those heels/using that dating site if you didn’t want to be beaten up.”
I don’t think I can do this discussion any more. I honestly think at least one person in the thread is just trolling at this point, and it’s clear that neither side is going to budge on this issue.
Yeah, I wondered if he was just blowing smoke. I plan to keep using the word. The only problem with “cis”, imo, is that lots of people are unfamiliar with it. But if you define it once, you can use it after that. If you want to talk about gender at all, you need a word that means something like “cis”, and it’s the only one I know.
I think it’s kind of a weird sounding word, if you know what I mean. It’s kind of awkward to say. At least, that’s how I think of cisgender. Other than that, I really don’t give a rat’s ass.
(I loathe the whole “zhe/zhir” thing, though. If only because it sounds so pretentious. Or “female-bodied person”. That’s just weird.)
I dunno. I know a lot of people who want a different set of pronouns. Most use “they”, but some use “ze” or “e” or “xe”. I kinda like “ze”. It is easy to pronounce and it doesn’t mess up my understanding of the sentence like the singular “they” does. “Sam went to the mall, and they found a neat new store.”
I almost never feel a need to say something like “female bodied person”. Sometimes it’s relevant to say “people with a uterus”, when, I dunno, talking about the facilities in a restroom. Sometimes you might want to warn someone “that person who looks like a girl is actually a guy”, but then it’s about one specific person, and you’d probably say, “by the way, Sam uses masculine pronouns” or something.
I suppose it’s all less weird when you find yourself in a social group that happens to include a lot of non-binary and trans people.
Nope, not blowing smoke:
*"There are some who really do not like the word, however, and especially when it is applied to them. For some it is just a dislike of having a label applied to them that they did not choose…The use of “cis” and “cisgender” should be carefully examined. There are people who strenuously object to these words being applied to them, even if the words come from an academic background. Just as my feelings on certain subjects should be respected, so should the feelings of people who dislike these labels…When these words are used in focus groups that look at messaging on transgender issues, the responses are nearly universally negative. The conclusion of many organizations is that you should not use either “cisgender” or “cis” in any sort of public narrative.
Even inside the LGBT community the words have a very negative connotation. …It isn’t logically or ethically consistent to tell one group of people that they need to get over a word they dislike being used to describe them while strenuously objecting to a word being applied to you, even if both words can be used in a contextually neutral way. The logic cuts both directions."*
"By imposing the label “cisgendered” onto me, you do me psychological and intellectual violence. You are saying that I am the same as all the people who do accept and inhabit the normative roles attached to the social construct of “men,” “male,” or “masculine.” You are silencing my voice and rejecting my right to determine my own identity. You have put me into a binary that alienates me from gender discourse…If someone doesn’t understand why I find the term “cisgendered” offensive, why I refuse to allow someone else to define me or inscribe their ideas onto my body, then perhaps I’m not the ignorant one."
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/378511/cis-ridiculous-christine-sisto
"Do not call me cisgender. You have no right or authority to name me without my consent. . . . It does not come from us, as its origins are from a trans perspective. . . . Do not call me cisgender. That is offensive to me. I am offended that you consider that you have power over me, and can name me."
So, it’s not just me, I am not blowing smoke. You may disagree and that’s fine, but in any case many people do find that term offensive.
All other discussions aside, I believe you when you say that disclosure by transgender woman presents a significant, real, demonstrable risk to them. I absolutely believe you. What I don’t understand is why transgender woman wouldn’t make this disclosure BEFORE there is a risk?
Do you think being alone with a man and about to become intimate is the BEST time for a transgender woman to tell a man that she is a transgender woman? I would think that would be the WORST time, alone with a horny man who might hurt her or worse after she tells him.
And here again is your opinion that there is bias. Do you mean bias in the “anti-trans” sense, or just bias against people who do not anatomically conform to a partner you are looking for?
I just love when the majority takes on the injured mantle of the oppressed minority, mostly in order to keep the oppressed minority from acting like there’s nothing “wrong” with them.
“YOU’RE the disordered ones! Don’t try to label MEEEE!”
DrDeth, your first quote is the only one that send relevant. The second appears to be a person saying he rejects the gender binary and he, personally, doesn’t identify with “cis”. That’s fine, there are lots of non-binary people and others who don’t fit nearly into buckets. The existence of bisexuals doesn’t make the word “straight” offensive, even if it might be offensive to call a bisexual straight.
As for the third, that’s just silly. I am cisgender. Indeed, the word does come from us, certainly in this list it does, and more and more cisgender people are learning the word and applying it to themselves all the time.
If you, personally, find it offensive, I will try not to apply it to you. I’m still going to apply it to me, and to people like me who haven’t stated an objection. I don’t feel any need to describe your gender (I don’t even know you) but if you have a deception you’d like me to use, I will try to remember that. Warning, it will sit, in my memory, right next to where I try to remember people’s preferred pronouns, so I may mess up. But I’ll try.
manson1972, I believe you are missing some of the risks of a trans person coming out. You do a good job of describing the risks of coming out to a potential sexual partner, but you miss the risks of coming out to an employer or neighbor. If you post “I’m trans” in a dating profile, you may be doing that.
I imagine the safest time to come out as trans is after connecting with a potential date, but before being alone with them. So, maybe during the texting setting stuff up, or maybe over coffee at the first date, in a public place, like a coffee shop. But I’m not going to dictate to people how to run their romantic affairs.
I agree. I can see the risk. But your helpful suggestion of “after connecting with a potential date, but before being alone with them” seems to be a huge no-no and is grouped under the heading of “Why should she tell her date?” outrage. That is my question.
So I guess one who objects to being called “cisgendered” (including me) might appreciate why others also object to being called “faggot” or “dyke,” and for many of the same reasons. “I am offended that you consider you have power over me, and you can name me.” A bit of irony there.
Pretty ridiculous comparison. I never chose to be labelled transgender either, it just is what it is and doesn’t bother me. Doesn’t mean I can’t be offended if someone calls me a “tranny.” There’s a difference between a label meant to categorize, as in, “something is this but not that,” versus a label that is intended to be derogatory and insulting.
There’s no reason to use “faggot” or “dyke” when there are other neutral words for someone’s sexual orientation. As far as I know, there’s no derogatory or insulting version of “cisgender,” it’s just a description.
Your provocative unsupported statements are quite chortle-worthy.
When an “oppressed minority” is trying to force the normal majority to adopt the minority’s disordered reality, that tends to make normal people skittish.
There are x and y chromosomes that determine gender. When everything is operating normally, that gives us men and women. Any other results are malfunctions that we should try to heal. Certainly society shouldn’t change as a result.
Do you actually have anything new to add? Just askin’.
No there aren’t. They don’t even determine sex, much less gender. Your next sentence even shows that you know those chromosomes don’t even determine sex, which makes the whole post fallacious.
You’re conflating “gender” and “sex”. Psychology and medicine have considered these separate issues for quite some time now; if you won’t keep up with the cutting edge of medical science, you could at least keep up with the stuff that was cutting edge before my parents met.
I know! And why don’t women weed out date rapists before they go on dates? I know some people will go around raping women anyway, but I suspect there is a population of people who would be put off if they knew in advance the woman didn’t want to have sex with them but might get all rapey if they found out after they started to get sexually aroused by how sexy their date looked.
Same here.
I’m not convinced this is correct; much of that apparent conflation has been driven by your initial omission of "“pre-op” in reference to reluctance to date transwomen.
People are often surprised to learn that “normal” isn’t as normal as they think it is.
In related news - I know this was a month ago but I only just heard about it this morning: well-known bleeding-heart-liberal and UK Prime Minister Theresa May has proposed amendments to the Gender Recognition Act on the basis that “being trans is not an illness and it should not be treated as such”. Note that the current regulation requires a medical diagnosis of “gender dysphoria”, which is one of the elements proposed for removal from the act.
And the reason I just heard of it is that Scotland is revising their Gender Recognition Act to include recognition of non-binary people (ahead of the UK review). And then there’s Ireland…
As I said, “normal” ain’t so normal…