Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Here’s my two cents.
For a while black and African American were pretty interchangeable but personally I don’t like the label African American, because many of us have zero connection to African life or culture in any way. Maybe that would be different if I was the child of immigrants that might be different (incidentally my dad is an immigrant but not from Africa).
So for those of us that prefer not to use cis as a term of classification, I don’t really see the issue about wanting to self ID that way. I think people take more offense at being locked into using the terminology as this poll does. And, sure, you could maybe assign political implications but that’s already too much assumption for my liking.
I don’t really want to be classified by someone else in a way I don’t want to be, even if the language is a technicality. I would hope that people advocating for inclusivity and kindness would also consider that as well. Believe it it nor there are people that don’t think about this wt all, or make it a part of their daily lives (in terms of whether or not it’s something that gets talked about or thought about)
Here’s my two cents.
For a while black and African American were pretty interchangeable but personally I don’t like the label African American, because many of us have zero connection to African life or culture in any way. Maybe that would be different if I was the child of immigrants that might be different (incidentally my dad is an immigrant but not from Africa).
So for those of us that prefer not to use cis as a term of classification, I don’t really see the issue about wanting to self ID that way. I think people take more offense at being locked into using the terminology as this poll does. And, sure, you could maybe assign political implications but that’s already too much assumption for my liking.
I don’t really want to be classified by someone else in a way I don’t want to be, even if the language is a technicality. I would hope that people advocating for inclusivity and kindness would also consider that as well. Believe it it nor there are people that don’t think about this wt all, or make it a part of their daily lives (in terms of whether or not it’s something that gets talked about or thought about)
This.
The same goes for a large portion of "Native American" people still preferring to be referred to as "Indian." There is an ideology in the original post that not everyone subscribes to, and not everyone who doesn't subscribe to it is a villain.
> > "Attacked"? Yeah, no hyperbole there. 😂 > > You elected to exclude "men" and "women" from YOUR poll. That's your privilege granted by the forum admin, but don't try to play innocent little victim here. This reply is not an attack on you - you're just being intellectually dishonest.
For the final time, man and woman are included. This isn't an issue of inclusion, it's an issue of logic, of definitions. 'All bachelors are unmarried men' is true by definition. All non-trans men are cis men, by definition. There is literally nothing wrong with being cis. At all. And considering that you are a man and, I am guessing, that you are not trans, you would be a cis man, by definition.
I made this poll because I wanted to know how many people were trans and not trans on this site to satisfy my own (and possibly others') curiosity. There is no ideology, no motivation to malign, marginalize, or reprimand anyone for their beliefs or identity.
And yeah, people have said get this BS off of here, calling it woke or accusing me of having main character syndrome. So yeah, I'd say that's attacked! To impugn my character for using widely accepted terminology is, in my estimation, an extreme overreaction. Why is everyone so upset? They're just words. If you don't like it, just stop commenting and go to literally anywhere else on this site. No one is forcing you to be here.
I'm not everyone, I'm one person. If the term was not included, then the term was either omitted or excluded. You're arguing "they're the same" "by definition" and yet you cannot really claim "they're the same" "by general use and acceptance". And again, no one is saying you CAN'T phrase things however you want, but you also can't hide your hands after typing something and claim you dindu nuthin'. Your dogged insistence that other-this = this goes exactly to the single charge I've made regarding Main Character Syndrome. You get credit for that! Others of all stripes get to exist and be the stars of their own shows.
As for definitions, whew...
According to Merriam-Webster, "cis man" is not a term. "Cis" as a prefix means "on this side", but does "on this side man" make any sense? "Cis" is also short for "cisgender", which means "of, relating to, or being a person whose gender identity corresponds with the sex the person had or was identified as having at birth"...without ever defining the "correspondence". Wait, what? How did....nah, couldn't be.
There is only Man and Woman. Gender and Sex are the same. Stop deluding yourselves if you think otherwise!
Sex is male and female. Gender is a social construct and has a full spectrum of variety. You just can't stop the wind with your bare hands.
You just can't stop the wind with your bare hands.
this is the kind of phrasing that is either intentional to rile people up, or intentionally ignorant.
for all the talk of things being a binary or not, things being on a spectrum or not, what I hear from the back half of your post is "you're wrong, I'm right, get used to it." when maybe the reality is there are people that believe or don't believe, wholesale, and a majority of the people in between the poles have different levels of acceptance?
Agree with the guys above, this gender ideology crap has no place in GWM.
"This gender ideology crap" you mean yours? Lol
There are definitely people with varying levels of acceptance towards things like this but that also leads to varying levels of violence towards people who identify those ways and I cannot think of legitimate reason why that should ever happen in the first place. Genuinely I don't understand why this kind of thing bothers people so much, how does it affect you if you if someone identifies as a gender other than male/female? Who said that you had to? Also the policies that these people generally push are ones meant to curb violence against them and provide more protections for things like employment discrimination. Which, if the tables were turned and you were the ones on the outside looking in, I would wager that you would also want for yourselves.
There are definitely people with varying levels of acceptance towards things like this but that also leads to varying levels of violence towards people who identify those ways and I cannot think of legitimate reason why that should ever happen in the first place. Genuinely I don't understand why this kind of thing bothers people so much, how does it affect you if you if someone identifies as a gender other than male/female? Who said that you had to? Also the policies that these people generally push are ones meant to curb violence against them and provide more protections for things like employment discrimination. Which, if the tables were turned and you were the ones on the outside looking in, I would wager that you would also want for yourselves.
this spur of the discussion was because the poll requires people to pick one of the choices to vote, and there are users that don't want to use any of those choices. i don't see how anyone telling me that if i am "straight" and "male" that i am a "cisgender man" and i have to use that particular label because that is what YOU have desginated me as, has anything to do with employment protections, or safety. If you say to me "excuse me, my pronounce are this/that" i will say "ok great"--so why if i say "i don't want to be labeled as cisgender" people will say "well you're backwards and a caveman"?
i'll be real with y'all, the discourse surrounding this really ramped up entering 2019 and over Covid, and is mostly blown out of proportion in some ways. I almost never, ever encounter this in my daily life, and when I do it has to do with DEI initiatives at work. Yes, i know gays and lesbians, a couple of trans people over the years. Some have been friends at some point, depending on the circumstance. Beyond making any corrections I have never been met with hostility even if I decline to do things like say "i'm cisgender" or don't go to drag shows because it's not my thing.
At worst it's an extremely online conversation between two sides that don't really want to budge on anything. At best, and it certainly can be this way at times on GWM, it's two sides working to understand what the other wants. Unfortunately, we get a lot of things like "This gender ideology crap" and "you can't stop the wind with your hands" which leads to locked threads, ad hominems, or nuked comments and bans.
Imagine how different this thread would be. if the op just had a male female and trans option.
there would be 30 comments about how "my option" isn't listed and we'd be in the same place, just different bans
Biological fact: sex is male (XY) and female (XX). Trans is a gender self identification. As I see this from reading the press, trans people do not want to accept the biological facts that define sex. Some are militant about being accepted as real women despite their actual genetic and physiological makeup for example. Herein is the conflict with the rest of society. Pushback from real women who want privacy in bathrooms and fair play in sports. This is far beyond a benign advocacy for non discrimination. Some non trans people are enabling this redefinition of sex. It’s ok to be trans but don’t try to deny science or restructure society.
Ok, so we could redo the poll by adding man and woman to the options, and then when we are trying to figure who is what, we'll add the results of "man" and "cis man" together to get the accurate result, thus proving that they are in fact the same thing. Literal synonyms. Interchangeable. Mathematically equivalent for this poll.
cis is not a new term, it was coined sometime in the early 90s. first time i read it i was researching ais some years ago.
I find this interestingly informative from the psichological viewpoint, ever since I discovered I liked muscular ladies, I've question the very nature of my fetish, what developmental events made it so? was I born with it or did I learned it? am I secretely gay? like some people in the past used to say to us... but with this piece of information you get new interesting questions given the current results, the vast majority are "gender conforming"(I'll explain my quotations later) men... to such extent that even if you added the rest of the options you don't get even half of that, now, what does this say about our shared tastes? how diverse are us "bio-men" (XD I like this one better) withing this community, or are we a monolithic group, whatever the characteristics of such a monolith may be, and what about the rest? about "bio-women" Trans and "gender non-conforming" what is it about a muscular woman that attact you and how it differentiates from us "bio-men"? food for thought my friends.
Now it's time for me to dive into the mud... oh boy. I personally don't subcribe to the separation of sex and gender, I am a Man, I don't like the prefix Cis to differentiate me from a percentage of the population that are not the rule, but for the sake of this poll and the langua used, Cis is completely necesary as it includes terms that require disambiguation when placed in the same context, if we are to belive for instance that a trans woman is a woman as proposed by some, the term cis is needed. that being said, I think that most of the trouble here is the very notion of gender as a concept divorsed from sex, to which I personally don't subscribe either. it has been previously stated that the concept of gender exist back when we were Hunter Gatherers... let's say for the sake of argument that is true, some men back then felt more comfortable or was more suited for gathering than his peers and viceversa, after all the concern was to survive, why have a arguably incopetent hunter face the danger if maybe he could contribute better as a gatherer... but again this was not the rule, it was an exception and throughout history gender for the collective matched sex even if exeptions existed, so it's frankly difficult to separate both concept when there "seemed" to be no difference at all.. NOW! here's the issue Sex=/=Gender, the first to make such difference was John Money (this name might be scandalous for some) by coining the term Gender role and with it Gender Identity, controversies aside, his differentiation consisnt in the following axiom "Gender as opposed to Sex is determined by culture" and like culture it can be taught, he posed that if raised as the opposite sex, the person would in fact be indentifyably that opposite sex, raise a boy as a girl, he'd technically be a girl. which bring us to Bruce Reimer/Brenda Reimer/David Reimer, if you don't know, Money founded a clinic for gender reassigment back in the 80s. after a butched circumsition when he was a baby, Bruce's parents brought their twins to Money, he assured them that they could raise Bruce as a girl in order to treat the dysphoria of lacking his reproductive organ, this was also great for Money as this was a case of study he could use to prove his Gender theory, and so he asked the Reimer family to give Bruce a girl's name and socially transition him throughout his life along with hormonal therapy and the pertinent medical treatment back then, given the name Brenda, him and his brother would be brought for yearly meetings with money to keep track of it, after years of this Money reported outstanding results for his study. his work was adopted by the academia as the base for gender identity... BUT it turns out after 20 years of the study being concluded that the results were false, Bruce, change his name from Brenda to David when he grew up, and later the Reimer Family came out to tell their story, the treatment Money gave Bruce never worked, instead of peeing in a sitting position as requested by Money Bruce would rather pee standing up, at school he was bullied because as Brenda she was a rough, masculine tomboy that prefered to play with the boys and angage in boys activities rather than the feminine ones he was being taught at home... turns out even without his male organ, the hormones and the societal transition, he still behaved like a boy and later transitioned back to a man. he unfortunately commited suicide after lifelong struggles with his family, the loss of his brother and unemployement. SO! fundamentally the term gender is scientifically flawed and there I say invalid as when researches it proved false... as it seems the contrary was proven, that sex and gender have a link, that's why I don't subscribe to this ideas and why I wrote them in quotations, if the fundamental concept for this terms has no proven basis, then it all tumbles down in my book... NOW hold on! you didn't quote trans?... oh yeah I did not... well, I of those that think that in order to be trans to have to fulfil the prerequisite of having "gender"dysmorphia(I'd rather call it sexual dysphoria, remember I don't believe in gender, I actually think Trans-sexuals are a 100% real deal and transgender is a an empty term), so for me it's man, women, intersex (cause guess what spectrum exists in sex... within a binary... intersex people in their majority lean to a side of the binary) and transexuals (trans-man, trans-woman), it's not much, but I think this is pretty diverse, and to give credit to Money he did coin the term sexual orientation as well... which is a term that has actually been proven... I mean gay people exist along with heterosexuals.
TL,DR. due to the non-existent prove that gender is actually separate from sex, any term that stems from it is logically null.
Also, this is a pet peeve of mine regarding this issue, in accordance to the letany I posted to explain my believe systems, why Trans-women claim to be actual woman?, what's so bad about the prefix trans? is it so dysphoric to have a word that reminds you of what you don't want to be or what you say you are not?, and why any girl that present themselves with masculinized traits are seemingly pushed to transition? I thought diverse "gender" expression was ok, being here in a site dedicated to female athletes with prominent musculature, I assume some of the girls featured here most have been tomboy when they grew up, if they engage in what was traditionaly male endeavours, that means they most be boys inside? or are we gonna be more flexible with these roles? just throwing it out there
> AMAZED that this topic is not locked yet. Kinda tells you where we are, and what this movement is really about.
Please tell me what you think the movement is about? I’d also like to point out this all started because people started coming here and attacking the poll, not the other way around.
At a high level, it's about the destruction of Western society. At a lower level, it's about keeping people at each others throats. Labeling straight people as "cis" because you don't want to offend someone who is gay is insulting to straight. You can't just make a term for them and expect them to accept it.
Don't expect me to play this little game. Your sex is not "assigned", you don't get to pick it. You are born with it. I am a male, nothing else.
Ok, so we could redo the poll by adding man and woman to the options, and then when we are trying to figure who is what, we'll add the results of "man" and "cis man" together to get the accurate result, thus proving that they are in fact the same thing. Literal synonyms. Interchangeable. Mathematically equivalent for this poll.
They may be interchangeable for you, but that does not mean that they are interchangeable in conversation for others. The others' position makes more sense in my opinion as it asks: "Why be extra just for the sake of being extra?"
Biological fact: sex is male (XY) and female (XX). Trans is a gender self identification. As I see this from reading the press, trans people do not want to accept the biological facts that define sex. Some are militant about being accepted as real women despite their actual genetic and physiological makeup for example. Herein is the conflict with the rest of society. Pushback from real women who want privacy in bathrooms and fair play in sports. This is far beyond a benign advocacy for non discrimination. Some non trans people are enabling this redefinition of sex. It’s ok to be trans but don’t try to deny science or restructure society.
As i see being married to a trans woman, it is not a matter of acceptance about sex, at least for her. She ever accepted the fact to be male born. But, simply, she never allowed this fact affects her gender, her image and behavior towards society, that is and remains womanly. There is a big difference imo
They may be interchangeable for you, but that does not mean that they are interchangeable in conversation for others. The others' position makes more sense in my opinion as it asks: "Why be extra just for the sake of being extra?"
They are linguistically and mathematically interchangeable. I get that CIS has a certain connotation and some people out there seem to throw the term around like an insult. But you not wanting to talk about it and pretend it doesn't exist is your problem, not the poll's problem.
For the poster who said "I don't subscribe to gender and sex being different things. Why do we need gender?" It doesn't matter whether you subscribe to it or not, it's science. Gravity doesn't care if you subscribe to it either, it's still real regardless of your feelings.
I have left the poll up and unlocked because I also thought it was informative. However:
In the defense of the people saying that... there's a trend of "just words" turning into the pushing of policies aligned with those words, and it is not hard to see why someone might think you yourself have an agenda to push given your poll and comment history. I think it's a bit disingenuous to pretend people are getting upset for no reason when they sense the winds blowing in a direction they don't support.