Why ' cis ' ? why even bother with it

I hope you are not responding to me personally. I was pretty clear about my view, which is non judgmental.

 

Not at all, I am just continuing to defend my right and duty, and that of anyone else, to be non-judgemental!

There are just so many in society trying to herd folk into being defined as (good) sheep and (bad) goats.

In this context there are those who assume that being 'cis', (or trans-) is innately good (or bad).

When there can always be bad sheep and good goats, we must only judge folk as individuals.

Not on the apparent colour of their skin, what is inside their knickers, sexual preferences, etc.

 

Whatever, you are entitled to be transphobic, but don't expewct me to respect that prejudice.

If I need to be specific in this context I will always use the cis- prefix. No disrespect intended.

I would never, ever, use the word "normal" in that context, as that implies that trasfolk are abnornal, and that would be a slur. Since I try to be respectful to all folk, until proven inappropriate, I won't do that.

 

Before you begin to call me transphobic too, let me say that such a thing would be quite amusing and absurd. And damn, do I want to say things you're likely to consider transphobic... But feel free to embarass yourself.

Your text is a good example of a post from someone conditioned to look for things to be offended by. Your eagerness to see only the one meaning of the word "normal" that gives you a reason to consider someone else transphobic is typical for those blinded by ideology.

I'll give you that *some* people who describe cis-males as normal are in fact transphobic. But I'd say that the majority of people who say something like "normal man" usually expect others to imagine a baseline XY cis-male, because they want to use a simple language everyone understands.

The first Merriam-Webster definition of "normal" says conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern, and with cis-males constituting more than 95% of male population they definitely are, by commonly accepted standards, the regular pattern. The the word "normal" is normally (funny how the word crops up, eh?) undestood to often mean "typical", or "of a type belonging to a majority case". Normal modern bicycles have two wheels of the same size, and while high-wheel bicycles do exist, their owners don't call anyone calling a normal bicycle normal by epithets such as penny-farthingphobes.

*Recognizing* that trans-men are in some ways different from cis-men (which they undeniably are), that they constitute a small minority of men (which they undeniably do), and that their rarity means they're not "normal", e.g. in the sense of most people interacting with one on a daily basis, does not equate to being transphobic.

You seem to pretend the other meanings of the word "normal" are to be ignored, you seem to try to twist English to let you cry transphobes where there aren't any, your efforts indicate you're aiming to create victims and villains, not to improve communication or actually help anyone.

I'll end with one minor nitpick. I'm not respectful to all folk, I just try to be polite. Respect has to be earned.

 

Bored, I've made my points, enjoy your lives.

 

Just reread the words, and see the transphobic bigotry in the language and focus on genitals.

Nobody else has a right to know what is in any woman's knickers, unless they invite you to find out.

That applies to ALL women, details of their genitalia is their's to know and only tell or show you if they wish.

You can always tell the transphobic bigots by their crude focus on genitalia.

Frankly, who does what, how and to whom is only the concern of those directly involved.

 

My eldest child is trans. She is finishing up all the exercises she has to do after surgery. I will admit that i gave it very little thought about the status of trans women until it became a reality in my family.
Thankfully she has me and her gf as immediate support. I even offered to fly to Montreal to be with her when she had the surgery.
She is happy now! That is important to me!

 

Cis and trans, used in the manufacture of isomers. Cis = Normal, trans = its state of transition from the normal state. Gender politicals, in their ideology to erase the word normal from describing birth assigned sex, find the terms useful, to remove the idea of fluid gender identities being abnormal.

 

That is the thing to hold on to; every woman, every man, is a person.

Each is different in their way.

They all have a family, friends, colleages, achievement, ambitions, potential.

Yes, you can be an arsehole and denigrate, misgender, harass them.

That just proves you'e an arsehole.

Each person is wonderful in their unique way; if you take the trouble to treat them with respect.

 

In other words, you lack reasonable arguments that could support your claims. But you're ready to jump in again to repeat your own ideas. No surprise here, your reaction is perfectly normal for people protected from truth by an ideology.

And one of your later comments definitely deserves a repeated reminder of one simple piece of wisdom. Respect is not something everyone deserves, there's no good reason to treat everyone with respect and many good reasons to not do so. Respect is something one has to earn, while *pushing for* respect is a good way to lose any.

However, I guess you too can enjoy your life, no matter how misguided you might be now, so I'll end this post by wishing you that any collisions with reality you might experience in these matters someday don't hurt too much.

 

No just bored with the same old shit, the faux-offended troll responses.

My take on respect is that I presume respect for anybody unknown, show respect if due, otherwise pretend respect if I can. If I vcan't, I just block, delete and move on, as I do with all trolls and bigots, you included.

So yes, I've ignored you too, as a bore and a boor.

 

The whole <insert ideology of choice> phobia is a desperate rant tactic of the idle left to shut down discourse. Similar to the shock tactics used by the Brown Shirts/Antifa scum.

 

Im a cis male but I'm definitely not normal.

It's ok to be abnormal. I have abnormal sexual thoughts. I'm into bdsm, I have fetishes. I'm abnormal.

I do my best to accommodate a person's pronoun if it's he or she. I think it's a bit pretentious to expect people to accommodate pronouns past he or she.

If you are born a man and now Id as a female, if I can tell I will say ma'am to you. If you were born female and id as a man I'll say sir to you. If I can't tell I'll use a neutral pronoun.

It's all about acceptance.

All I've wanted in my life is to have my kinks accepted, embraced. My wife is doing her best but she keeps my kinks at arm's distance. So I can relate a little to a trans person in that aspect. Difference is they are trying to get an entire society to accept them. I'm only trying to get one person to accept me.

Life's tough. It's ok to give a little.

 

My take is that 'normal' is a pretty meaningless concept.

If you asked 'the average American' what he thought of those into chastity or an FLR, I doubt that his response would often be 'normal'. I'd expect 'pervert' to be a far more common descriptor.

Butin the course of quite a long, very interesting and often quitre challenging life I've been down more than a few less often travelled pathways.

As a result I know those into chastity or an FLR are as normal, as those into cross-dressing, transitioning to anotrher gender, enjoying BDSM or corporal punishment, and many other deviations fromn the commonly assumed and perceived Overton Window of 'normal'.

Just holding up a mirror to those here objecting to the cis- prefix!

 

It's an issue of respect, something you seem to have missed. Don't you self-reflect for one second about how you have spent so much energy arguing this rather than simply being respectful?

Tell me, do you use the term "normal" in the presense of those physically disabled, or mentally impaired, or the blind (justbecause these conditions are uncommon), or in those situations do you at least feel the sense of disrespect it conveys?

No-one likes to be described as abnormal because it is a means of othering someone, of implying that they are somehow less than you. Even if you can't see it, at least have the humanity to not wish to make someone feel belittled, or is compassion beyond you?

 

So your default stance is to not respect (to any degree, and to disrespect) anyone until they have earned your respect? Is that what you're saying?

 

In and of inself, you are correct. But its all about how it is framed, how the objection often sits within a context that does clearly have transphobic undertones.

 

Yup, it is most commonly the trolls who accuse others of trolling, because of the Dunning Kruger effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Such folk just can't see themselves as others see them.

 

And yet many here have posted well-reasoned arguments against your objection. So how is discourse being shut down right here by those other than yourself?

On the other hand, your own objections to actual established language (which has existed for longer than you have been born) has not been reasoned at all (other than you don't like it) and you have not countered or (heaven forbid) conceded the vast majority of the well-thought-out responses to your post. Where is your contribution of substance to the discourse?

You then yourself make posts talking of ideology implying blind unreasoned thinking, but (ironically) without substantiating any of it yourself. In fact you cannot substantiate it within this context, due to the many posts by others here and to which you have neither countered nor conceded..

Funny that, isn't it?

Perhaps you should try a little introspection.

 

So, you want to use the word "normal" instead of "cisgendered". SUre, that's your right.

But tell me, would you vocally describe yourself as "normal" in the presence of say, someone in a wheelchair? Would you be perfectly happy saying to them "Of course, I'm normal, unlike you."?

 

Wow, took me awhile to read everything, can’t believe I hadn’t seen this thread earlier.

I think somewhere this topic got bumped from word irritation, to trans rights and the legitimacy of being trans.

As for the word irritation of cis...I am not a fan either. I think it’s redundant. The actual need to ever use that as a descriptor is pretty minor, and imagine if there was any description at all it would gravitate towards describing it as trans. Like “which girl?” “The trans girl” etc. Adding cis prefix to describe something obvious is silly...like cold ice cream. If it wasn’t cold we would call it melted.

Before anyone comes after me, I am not talking about not using she, her, etc. I am strictly talking about leaving useless prefixes off of people who plainly don’t need them. I once read a person ad stating they were cis...is that really necessary?!

As for almost every argument I read on here both for and against, about the the only one I thought was worth reading was from someone that was actually trans. The rest...
Both of the sides have extremely flawed science, narrow minded statistics, and a self absorbed thought process of “right”.

I particularly enjoyed the one where going through transition was comparable to asking for someone to cut off their leg. Cause ya know, transition is ALL about cutting your penis off. Oh and some good ok fashioned counseling should help them cope enough to handle whatever comes their way. Ya know, maybe they should just pray really hard.

As far as the intersex topic...I am, have always been, and have always known that I am intersex. I’ve lived my entire childhood, and adult life as a boy, it just so happens some people are born with both secondary sexual characteristics. To say gender isn’t fluid, is black or white, or has easily explained boundaries is laughable. It’s difficult and shameful, it’s confusing, and until the internet brought us the information and resources, there was no way to know there were others out there. Most of us were “fixed” as babies and received surgeries at a very young age. With me some of it is physical, I’ve always felt a bit feminine, but having been raised as a boy, I wouldn’t have the foggiest clue on how to actually be a woman, even if physically I am close to being one. Gender is more than having a penis or not, and I would think being trans isn’t about getting rid of their penis either.

I also find it hilarious when people get upset about trans using the same bathroom as “their daughter, what am I supposed to tell them?” Ummm that she needed to go potty. What exactly do they think is going on in the ladies room? I would think 99.999 percent of all trans just want to blend in and not be noticed as anything different, and the ladies room would make it even more so.

 

Yes, sometimes I do use equivalent terms (not from an English-speaking country), and so do they. I regularly work/meet/whatever with people from all those "uncommnon" categories you've mentioned, and we all use such common everyday language, because our goal is to communicate, not to find things to be offended by. It is perfectly normal to hear a blind person say things like "I saw it on TV" (trust me, I've heard many do so, both in formal and informal settings) even when they're incapable of actually seeing anything, because their aim is to convey a message, not to bemoan their situation.

You using the word *abnormal" is a strawman, I don't think anyone here uses it to describe those too far from the average. In everyday conversations, most sensible people call something or someone "normal" when it is reasonably close to average or majority, e.g. "normal SUVs have four wheels". There's no "othering" in acknowledging reality.

Frankly, your post all but confirms that some people behave as if they *want* to be offended by innocent words. They see insults and belitling and whatnot where there isn't any, they fail to accept that not everyone is willing to use language the way *they* want it used.

You trying to paint me as lacking humanity and being mean to those with disabilities or sexually non-conforming is kind of funny. I do read Braille, I have my sign name, I know how to help a person in a wheelchair ride down a regular staircase and have actually repeatedly done so, I'm on the LGBT+ spectrum myself... I'm part of the "other" crowd myself. Maybe you live in an area where too many people have been conditioned to feel insulted by common words, but I don't. Trust me, the vast majority of those who live where I do and who do have to deal with their disabilities on an everyday basis prefer those around them using everyday language. It helps them know they're simply accepted, with no need to accent their differences. And they can tell when you're using "other" language to talk to them / about them and that in itself *proves* you see them as "other" in your mind.