Poll: How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?

[Britisheagle]

Can I not just be "male" or "female"? I don't get it. If I was a transgender I would want to be indeitified as the sex I had gone through all the effort of becoming physically.

I think it is ok if you were in a talk with loads of people who identified themselves as trans to help differentiate, other than that I think it is complete and utter bollocks.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

The word itself is useful. It's better than having to say 'normal' which can come off as insulting, or 'non-trans', which feels awkward.

If they ask me I always say 'male' or 'straight'.

But neither of those terms communicate the same thing as cisgender?

They communicate how I feel about myself, which is more than enough.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

I say it's getting parodied more often than actually getting used. Whenever I read cis______ it's usually along the lines of someone going "ur raping my culture you cisscum shitlord lolol tumblr is weird". I can't remember actually seeing someone use cis- in a conversation without making fun of Tumblr culture or something of the like.

And it's straight up not used outside the internet. So I don't know, I just know on the Internet it's sort of become a joke term.

 

[Edl01]

I dislike it honestly. There is nothing wrong with the word itself, however over time it has gained a lot of negative connotations from the way people use it. This is because whenever I see it used it is either to attack somebody for being, "Cis Gendered", or it is being used ironically to mock the people who use the term like that.

Honestly I think at this point people need to either make a new term, or make a concerted effort to use the term in a way that seems like less of an attack. After all a person is never going to accept another group of people if a particuarly loud portion that keeps complaining about, "CIS HET MALE SCUM".

So.. because you can say "Gay" or "Straight" In the context of, "That straight guy," AND "That straight **** over there..."... just get rid of the word? I don't think you actually said anything real after, " I dislike it honestly". The rest isn't really a sound argument against it, but it IS a sound expression of your perceptions, which lead to dislike of it.

It's a shame that as a society, we've learned to confuse preference and opinion, with a point.

That's not what I said at all. The word, "straight", is used in a positive context as you use in your example fact is the word Cis has become toxic. It is primarily used to attack people on both sides of the transgender debate rather than to further any discussion.

The fact is it isn't just, "my", perception, after all if you look at the above poll you will find that the vast majority of people on the site dislike the term as well, with over 50% of people finding it unnecessary, insulting or needing to be changed. And if a term meant to describe a group of people is viewed as negative by a majority of people then something clearly must be wrong with that term. And even if this is just perception

The term doesn't even necessarily need to be changed, it just needs somebody to remove the current connotations that the word has gained due to it's inflammatory use by people on the internet. Which of course is difficult, however the connotations of words in the English language change constantly, meaning it is possible, although that is probably much more difficult that simply finding a knew, less toxic, word.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

The fact is it isn't just, "my", perception, after all if you look at the above poll you will find that the vast majority of people on the site dislike the term as well, with over 50% of people finding it unnecessary, insulting or needing to be changed.

There actually seems to be more people who find it useful than those that think it's insulting. And the grand bulk don't think it's necessary. I can say from experience that it's not a word that crops up every other sentence, but it's pretty darn useful when it does.

No negative connotations.

Honestly, I think it's merely a case of people who think cis is 'insulting' don't actually know any trans people in real life. As then they'd realize that the word has its uses every now and again. It's not a crime not to know trans people, but at the some time don't pretend like you know us or our use of language.

Or the simple fact that it's a word that has purpose to describe something effectively and without subjectivity.

Pretty simple.

 

[Areloch]

The fact is it isn't just, "my", perception, after all if you look at the above poll you will find that the vast majority of people on the site dislike the term as well, with over 50% of people finding it unnecessary, insulting or needing to be changed.

There actually seems to be more people who find it useful than those that think it's insulting. And the grand bulk don't think it's necessary. I can say from experience that it's not a word that crops up every other sentence, but it's pretty darn useful when it does.

No negative connotations.

Honestly, I think it's merely a case of people who think cis is 'insulting' don't actually know any trans people in real life. As then they'd realize that the word has its uses every now and again. It's not a crime not to know trans people, but at the some time don't pretend like you know us or our use of language.

Or the simple fact that it's a word that has purpose to describe something effectively and without subjectivity.

Pretty simple.

Of course, you face the issue of the people that don't know any trans people in real life, and frequent places like twitter, or tumblr, where stuff like 'cis scum' gets used. Is it how it's used in real life? Generally not, no. Can it VERY rapidly color their perception of a term? Absolutely.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Of course, you face the issue of the people that don't know any trans people in real life, and frequent places like twitter, or tumblr, where stuff like 'cis scum' gets used. Is it how it's used in real life? Generally not, no. Can it VERY rapidly color their perception of a term? Absolutely.

So I'm effectively responsible for people you don't personally like? People use words in the wrong way, or wrong context. Doesn't make them inherently bad. I've lost count of the number of times that people use 'disorder' in the wrong context and in a generally poor form on this thread alone. Doesn't mean I want to call for the word to be stricken, only for it to be used correctly. More to the point, people use the word 'abnormal' here to describe any perceptible differentiation regardless of how petty and utterly lacking in self-awareness (Edit: I would hope this is the case, unlike 'cis' for many I'm not going to assume everyone here has been using it in poor form).

The thing is if 'trans' is acceptable a word, then cis should be also. It's been around longer than English, and it's damn useful in a variety of context. Also, I fail to see the 'very rapidly' ... there seems to be about 5-10% of people on the poll who don't even know what the word means, or think that the meaning of the word is lost on others to explain their irritation.

If you were to drop cis and use another word in its place, people would have a problem with that also. I also find that people's perceptions of the word find itself utterly divorced from the reality of its use. Plenty of trans people here have said that if they use it, or recognize the word, as not being a pejorative but rather a qualifier with distinct categorical boundaries.

Maybe you should listen to the trans people now? If you're going to herald tumblr as if the official way people use words, then you should equally elevate all the trans people who have so far written in this thread how they see it and use it, if they do so use it. Otherwise you'll forgive me if your point merely seems like confirmation bias to me.

If I were to use the term 'straight scum' ... what's the problematic word in this context?

 

[Sanderpower]

Well it's the only way we know how to define non-transgendered individuals (instead of course saying non-transgendered individuals). Me personally I'm indifferent to it. Words and language are just tools for communication after all. Whatever helps better communication is a good thing in my book.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

That, and they have no experience with, or immunity to being labeled in a cold and clinical fashion outside of their control. Throw in a bit of stunted empathy and/or intelligence... some ideology and religion... and *poof*! Outrage.

I think it has more to do with self awareness and confirmation bias. You see one example of poor use, then assume that a word is somehow 'tarnished' even when popular use of it and meaning was never about it serving as a pejorative. It all strikes me as a bit language police-y. People are self aware enough when the use of '******' is thrown about ... unless its examination is to its critique, it's never usually used in civil conversation.

Instead we have people promoting a word that has DEFINE ABLY (Oxford dictionary, etc) poor connotations (see; 'abnormal') and is a word lacking in self awareness and entirely subjective, to try to replace a word that is neither subjective, and entirely descriptive. It's pretty mind-boggling if you think about it. I'm all for chaos of the self ... chaos within and without ... but the idea that we should throw away meaning and clarity of discussion for the sake of subjectivity? Particularly when the word makes it easier for specific people to communicate meaning, and relations of self to others in the social fabric?

It's one small step from that to the arguments various xenophobic people had about how foreigners should speak English and only English when in the company of other people in the workforce, because of potential misgrievances.

 

[Areloch]

Of course, you face the issue of the people that don't know any trans people in real life, and frequent places like twitter, or tumblr, where stuff like 'cis scum' gets used. Is it how it's used in real life? Generally not, no. Can it VERY rapidly color their perception of a term? Absolutely.

So I'm effectively responsible for people you don't personally like? People use words in the wrong way, or wrong context. Doesn't make them inherently bad. I've lost count of the number of times that people use 'disorder' in the wrong context and in a generally poor form on this thread alone. Doesn't mean I want to call for the word to be stricken, only for it to be used correctly. More to the point, people use the word 'abnormal' here to describe any perceptible differentiation regardless of how petty and utterly lacking in self-awareness (Edit: I would hope this is the case, unlike 'cis' I'm not going to assume everyone here has been using it in poor form).

The thing is if 'trans' is acceptable a word, then cis shoud be also. It's been around longer than English, and it's damn useful in a variety of context. Also, I fail to see the 'very rapidly' ... there seems to be about 5-10% of people on the poll who don't even know what the word means, or think that the meaning of the word is lost on others to explain their irritation.

If you were to drop cis and use another word in its place, people would have a problem with that also. I also find that people's perceptions of the word find itself utterly divorced from the reality of its use. Plenty of trans people here have said that if they use it, or recognize the word, as not being a pejorative but rather a qualifier with distinct categorical boundaries.

Maybe you should listen to the trans people now? If you're going to herald tumblr as if the official way people use words, then you should equally elevate all the trans people who have so far written in this thread how they see it and use it, if they do so use it. Otherwise you'll forgive me if your point merely seems like confirmation bias to me.

If I were to use the term 'straight scum' ... what's the problematic word in this context?

Wow, calm down. I was merely extrapolating on your "the only people that have a problem with it don't know trans people in real life". If they have no good frame of reference of it's usage, it's going to appear to be a negative term. I didn't say anything more or less than that.

And weither you like it or not, tumblr and twitter are gigantic social communication platforms, so yes, the way words are used on them impacts their meaning to society at large. I utterly despise this fact, but it doesn't remove it. It may be unfair to taint a word by the minimal, but widely visible, negative usage, but the same thing could be said of all kinds of things that fall to the association fallacy, such as feminism. The vast majority of feminists are great people working towards a noble goal. However, the most visible ones are the awful ones that make humanity look bad, not just feminism. Which is why feminism has such a bad rap recently.

It may not be fair, but it's what happens. The same thing happens to words, and my pointing that fact out for the sake of furthering the topic doesn't put me in agreement with the phenomenon.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Wow, calm down. I was merely extrapolating on your "the only people that have a problem with it don't know trans people in real life". If they have no good frame of reference of it's usage, it's going to appear to be a negative term. I didn't say anything more or less than that.

And weither you like it or not, tumblr and twitter are gigantic social communication platforms, so yes, the way words are used on them impacts their meaning to society at large. I utterly despise this fact, but it doesn't remove it. It may be unfair to taint a word by the minimal, but widely visible, negative usage, but the same thing could be said of all kinds of things that fall to the association fallacy, such as feminism. The vast majority of feminists are great people working towards a noble goal. However, the most visible ones are the awful ones that make humanity look bad, not just feminism. Which is why feminism has such a bad rap recently.

It may not be fair, but it's what happens. The same thing happens to words, and my pointing that fact out for the sake of furthering the topic doesn't put me in agreement with the phenomenon.

I'm perfectly calm.

As for your argument, why exactly should people who labour in confirmation bias then be allowed to dictate the terms by which language is used? I can point to this thread that dislike of the word cis is not some grand over arching majority just because of exposure (lest you make the assumption that simple exposure to incorrect word usage is enough to tarnish the word alone). Association fallacy is just that, a fallacy. Lest we allow people's ignorance to dictate the course of language. For the same reason we don't scrap a word like 'evolution'. Enough people have put shit on it throughout history. Far more vehemently than anything seen on twitter, etc.

I'll point to the word abnormal. In a medical sense alone it has negative connotations. Doesn't mean I want the word to be abolished. It's a useful word to detail a strange condition of the human form. But then it shouldn't apply to people simply because of one's subjective feelings that it may be applicable.

I'm not sure why I should listen to the same types of people again who try to conflate a word with their confirmation bias in terms of its nature when, as this thread is proof enough, that transgender people don't use it as a pejorative. Why exactly should transgender people feel the need to adapt a perfectly fitting term that seeks to clarify and express meaning, because of people who can't be bothered to pick up a dictionary? Sorry ... it helps no one ... and any substituted word to mean the exact same thing as it does now will also end up being attacked because of someone's feelings.

You know the grand majority of times I've heard cis? From cisgender people saying that it was used badly. I've never come across this offline, and yet I'd probably use the term once or twice every couple of days.

It's like saying: "I believe in 'hot', but this idea of 'cold' is garbage! Why not have 'not hot', or 'normal'?"

People use dialectic terms because it's a necessary tool to discuss how something is like or not alike. Nothing more. Frankly, I'm not sure why I should drop a term that has easy means to examine metaphysics of gender identity. Which is perhaps the greatest sin here, the fact that people should dictate the means to investigation shortcuts in looking at trans people and their relationship with others in the social fabric. Willful ignorance, and willful opposition, to effective tools of metaphysics and metaphysical examination on the basis of a perceived pejorative is anti-intellectualism at best.

Grimh said it best;

"It's a thing that describes a thing."

 

[Azure23]

It's just a dry, clinical term. If you were biologically born male, and then grew up and continued to identify as a man, you're cisgender.

It's just a more eloquent way of saying not-transgender. And it's probably pretty alienating to trans individuals when people use normal (as an alternative to cisgender) or worse. It's a word used to refer to people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth without implying that someone else is abnormal, or of less value. It prevents othering. It's as neccesarey as having a word describing trans individuals, which is to say, absolutely necessary.

Is the crux of this debate really that some fed up, exasperated people used it in a sentence to describe the type of person who is always shitting on them and then people felt offended by association? That seems childish to me. The person above me really said it best. It's just a qualifier with distinct and categorical boundaries. That some people insist it's a pejorative term should not change that fact.

And seriously you must, must, must abstain from using the word when discussing gender, just say not trans instead. I mean you'll still be silly for not using a perfectly good and well defined term, but at least you won't be othering people for no reason.

 

[Areloch]

Wow, calm down. I was merely extrapolating on your "the only people that have a problem with it don't know trans people in real life". If they have no good frame of reference of it's usage, it's going to appear to be a negative term. I didn't say anything more or less than that.

And weither you like it or not, tumblr and twitter are gigantic social communication platforms, so yes, the way words are used on them impacts their meaning to society at large. I utterly despise this fact, but it doesn't remove it. It may be unfair to taint a word by the minimal, but widely visible, negative usage, but the same thing could be said of all kinds of things that fall to the association fallacy, such as feminism. The vast majority of feminists are great people working towards a noble goal. However, the most visible ones are the awful ones that make humanity look bad, not just feminism. Which is why feminism has such a bad rap recently.

It may not be fair, but it's what happens. The same thing happens to words, and my pointing that fact out for the sake of furthering the topic doesn't put me in agreement with the phenomenon.

I'm perfectly calm.

As for your argument, why exactly should people who labour in confirmation bias then be allowed to dictate the terms by which language is used? I can point to this thread that dislike of the word cis is not some grand over arching majority just because of exposure (lest you make the assumption that simple exposure to incorrect word usage is enough to tarnish the word alone). Association fallacy is just that, a fallacy. Lest we allow people's ignorance to dictate the course of language. For the same reason we don't scrap a word like 'evolution'. Enough people have put shit on it throughout history. Far more vehemently than anything seen on twitter, etc.

I'll point to the word abnormal. In a medical sense alone it has negative connotations. Doesn't mean I want the word to be abolished. It's a useful word to detail a strange condition of the human form. But then it shouldn't apply to people simply because of one's subjective feelings that it may be applicable.

I'm not sure why I should listen to the same types of people again who try to conflate a word with their confirmation bias in terms of its nature when, as this thread is proof enough, that transgender people don't use it as a pejorative. Why exactly should transgender people feel the need to adapt a perfectly fitting term that seeks to clarify and express meaning, because of people who can't be bothered to pick up a dictionary? Sorry ... it helps no one ... and any substituted word to mean the exact same thing as it does now will also end up being attacked because of someone's feelings.

You know the grand majority of times I've heard cis? From cisgender people saying that it was used badly. I've never come across this offline, and yet I'd probably use the term once or twice every couple of days.

It's like saying: "I believe in 'hot', but this idea of 'cold' is garbage! Why not have 'not hot', or 'normal'?"

People use dialectic terms because it's a necessary tool to discuss how something is like or not alike. Nothing more. Frankly, I'm not sure why I should drop a term that has easy means to examine metaphysics of gender identity. Which is perhaps the greatest sin here, the fact that people should dictate the means to investigation shortcuts in looking at trans people and their relationship with others in the social fabric. Willful ignorance, and willful opposition, to effective tools of metaphysics and metaphysical examination on the basis of a perceived pejorative is anti-intellectualism at best.

Grimh said it best;

"It's a thing that describes a thing."

Ok.

Taking a step back here. Why do you keep coming back to talking about dropping the usage of the term entirely? I have said nothing about suggesting stopping it's usage. At this point it nearly sounds like we're on two totally different subjects.

You brought up the fact that "most people that dislike the term don't know any trans people", inferring that they wouldn't ever see it used in a context not on the internet. I built upon that by pointing out that social networking sites tend to fester the sort of people that would use it negatively, and if - as brought up just prior - they don't see it anywhere else but online, then the only likely exposure they'll have to the term is negative.

I'm not sure why I should listen to the same types of people again who try to conflate a word with their confirmation bias in terms of its nature when, as this thread is proof enough, that transgender people don't use it as a pejorative.

"Why should I listen to people in their confirmation bias of a term when I can have my confirmation bias the term is acceptable in this very thread!"

You see trans people in this thread utilizing the term in a non insulting way. And that's fantastic. However, many people online may not be so fortunate. That's my point. That's it.

Also, you bring up a term like 'abnormal', and point out that clinically, it may be valid to use in context, however due to a negative connotation stigma people would consider it to be rude to be used. However you then point out that cis is also a clinical term, but deny that people may have - after negative exposure online as stated - the same feeling about the usage of 'cis'.

Why is one word's stigma an acceptable stigma to malign it's usage and another word's isn't? Because - not trying to be a dick here, seriously - it sounds like you're OK with the term cis, so any negative usage of it that may taint other people's perspective of the word is irrelevent.

Which sounds a lot like confirmation bias.

 

[Techno Squidgy]

It's a perfectly accurate term to describe the situation of identifying with the gender that matches your biological sex. I have no problems with the term. I don't use the term to describe myself unless it's relevant to the conversation.

I honestly can't see why anyone would have a problem with it.

 

[Areloch]

Huh I've noticed a trend of people saying they think it's an isult using examples of it being paired with an actual insult, but then saying it's the "cis" part that's insulting. For example, "cis scum".

Pretty sure it's the "scum" part that's the insult there. You can say "trans scum, "black scum", "straight scum". Pretty sure you wouldn't say it's the trans, black or straight part that's the insulting part, so I don't get why cis is viewed differently in this context.

Well, as broached in this thread, how many people do you think know what cis actually means without it being specifically explained to them? I know it took me a while to understand what it was supposed to mean. So if you have someone utilizing a phrase constructed as , is it really that odd that they'd infer that the unknown word is also a negative?

In actuality, of course, cis on it's own isn't insulting, but if you see a word you don't know used in an obviously negative context, your perceptions of the word are likely to associate it to the insult.