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

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

-Snip-

You seem like a very smart and reasonable individual, but I really can't agree with a lot of what you say. I think you should work on gender pronouns as they come in handy compared to naming friends/family/acquaintances, because if two people with the same name are together with you it'll become difficult just to use names.

You also seem like an intelligent and reasonable individual and I appreciate it. The conversation I've been having on the matter has been helping me come to better terms with it. Like the fact that these are my friends so they deserve the right to impose on me. The people I'm frustrated with, the ones that used pronoun usage as a weapon to beat me with? Those aren't my friends.

So yeah, it's something I'm going to try to work on. But as I said in the other thread, my foremost concern is that any error on my part would do harm to these people and simply avoiding the pronouns seems to benefit everyone. Form not hurting their feelings, to allowing me not to have to walk on eggshells around friends, to avoiding crazy confrontations with others who think I'm doing it on purpose.

If a simple apology for messing up doesn't suffice, then the person who is being confrontational about it is being really unreasonable.

Also I still think cisgender is the easiest way to separate out trans from non-trans with a single word,

As I said before, fag is much easier to say than homosexual and retard is a lot easier to say than developmentally delayed. Lot more letters and vowels and whatnot. Look, we use different terms all the time when one term is found to be offensive. This is just another one of those scenarios. For transgendered people we use Gender Dysphoria now instead of Gender Identity Disorder at their request, and rightfully so. Why can't we expect the same courtesy?

I suppose you have a point, it still doesn't mean that we should sit around letting words that are generally okay be hijacked.

and the word it self is not inherently bad.

Again, no word is inherently bad. There is not a single word that has ever existed that is magically evil no matter what.

The word is bad because it has become offensive due to it being used heavily in offensive scenarios such as the "Die Cis Scum" meme in which Cis individuals are framed automatically as the enemy of transpeople as bigots and murderers and worthy of death.

We have a long history of clinical words that have become insults. Cretins, retards, and all manner of sort. So this really doesn't work as a viable argument regarding the term itself.

The only problem that I have with that stance is that I've only encountered the word cis in the form of a derogatory when used online by obvious nutters. I know personal experience doesn't amount to much, but as far as I can tell in the trans community there is a concerted effort to use it as a classification, not a label intended to demean someone, or damage someone.

It's hatespeech now.
Plain and simple.

Worse, it's not been turned into hatespeech by an antiparty (for example feminist: feminazi), but has become akin to "******" but for nontransgender people... made so BY transgender people.
Which as a G in the LGBT community...
I find it reprehensible to have done such a thing.

It was a meaningless word to begin with, and to give it meaning with hate has been just reprehensible.

It's used in conjunction with hate speech, hate speech I've never ever heard a trans person use, and every trans person I know uses it as a clinical term for people who are born with their gender identity matching their birth sex. Also the word was coined around a decade or so ago, when it was coined it had the meaning of a person who has a gender identity matching their birth sex, the pejorative sense it's been used in conjunction with (See: "Dis cis scum") is a tumblrite, and twitter thing, and seems to be used by social justice types and extremists. Also you're being divisive with a group that you associate with as part of your larger community, so... I'm wondering what exactly you're on about, especially as a trans person, though I don't take the accusation personally.

First off, Cissexual is the clinical term regarding gender and sex matching. Cisgender is the term regarding being Non-trans as opposed to Trans. That's just a minor error I've seen repeated frequently here.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/die-cis-scum

How about having the hate speech tattooed on their arms and creating a full-blown internet meme on the matter? How about the number of groups supporting the term and demanding that anyone who takes offense with it do more work in preventing violence against trans people (I don't know about you but I've never had one instance of letting violence happen that I could stop or any instance were I've supported any kind of violence or advocacy of violence). That's only the most popular one. Beyond that the abuse of Cis privileged to trivialize opinions and discussions even when legitimate strikes a particular nerve.

It does not help the situation that "Cis" simply sounds like an insult too. But we've already been over that.

So consider the idea that the term is now synonymous with trans haters. Why in the world would I want to be associated with that? Wouldn't you take that offensively if someone decided that trans was a term for people that hated the Jews?

The internet memes freaking way of making it so that the rest of society can't have nice things. Either way I think the word is still young enough and obscure enough for the most part for a discussion on using it as a non-weaponized term is a valid one. The question is if we can get the barking loonies to shut up, or enough of the rest of the community to turn around on them and eject them from the conversation.

Perhaps it's just hard for me to see a term I've only really once seen used in a harmful way, that got the person who did it massively berated and attacked by the way, as truly harmful.

Also, it's not fair of you claim that the poster is being divisive with their community just by admitting that this term is offensive. That's a shaming tactic that only serves to harm open discourse and I hope its use goes away or itself begins to be shamed.

I should clarify that I was using the divisive part more in terms of the tone of the post. I kind of get rather miffed when someone on the L&G side starts blaming things on trans people, because as a trans person I get a lot of that crap on a regular basis. So it might have been some misplaced hostility on my part, either way the tone of the post still seemed like it was assigning blame to the trans community as a whole, not crazy tumblrites and twitter addicts.

 

[Lightknight]

If a simple apology for messing up doesn't suffice, then the person who is being confrontational about it is being really unreasonable.

The confrontation usually doesn't come from the transperson but from others. The transperson is just more likely to have their feelings hurt which I find far worse than a confrontation.

I suppose you have a point, it still doesn't mean that we should sit around letting words that are generally okay be hijacked.

We don't really have all that much control over linguistic drift as individuals. I don't know anything you or I could personally do or have done to have prevented the word from being used in the way it is. Nearly all the words we've been discussing are terms that have been hijacked and used in an unintended way.

The only problem that I have with that stance is that I've only encountered the word cis in the form of a derogatory when used online by obvious nutters. I know personal experience doesn't amount to much, but as far as I can tell in the trans community there is a concerted effort to use it as a classification, not a label intended to demean someone, or damage someone.

Who is using the term offensively is irrelevant to the fact that it is now perceived as offensive.

Please note that at no point have I said or indicated that this is some kind of movement in the trans community to use the word offensively. My only point is that it has and is being used in that manner and so now it's seen that way. So hopefully you don't feel like I'm blaming this on the trans community even if some individuals within the community carry responsibility for it. Otherwise, how many things can be blamed on the non-trans community if we were held responsible for the actions of the few?

I should clarify that I was using the divisive part more in terms of the tone of the post. I kind of get rather miffed when someone on the L&G side starts blaming things on trans people, because as a trans person I get a lot of that crap on a regular basis. So it might have been some misplaced hostility on my part, either way the tone of the post still seemed like it was assigning blame to the trans community as a whole, not crazy tumblrites and twitter addicts.

Oh, I see, I totally missed that part! Sorry for thinking you were just saying that because the person disagreed. This makes a lot more sense.

The use of the insults were started within the trans community and were perpetuated by other transpeople and vocal proponents (or self-proclaimed proponents) of the community (not that there's anything wrong with being a proponent of the transgender community, if we all were proponents of it then there wouldn't be a problem). Yes, a lot of nutters who are just making the community look bad but I don't think it's necessarily incorrect to believe that the offensive use of the term originated within the trans community. Am I wrong?

Again, this was done by individuals and not some kind of conspiracy transgender illuminati pulling strings. So not reflective on the community as a whole by any means. But reflective on the word itself and how it is interpreted? Yes.

Just like when some awfully anti-trans rhetoric came out of the feminist movement. It was shameful to see it come from there but that certainly shouldn't reflect the movement as a whole. You know?

 

[Lightknight]

? What I was saying is that if transgendered people found the term "transgender" offensive, then we would try to accommodate their concerns with another term that they do not find offensive. For example, they found Gender Identity Disorder offensive so it was changed to Gender Dysphoria even though it's still a disorder.

That's simply the right thing to do rather than keep calling people retards or fags or whatever other inflammatory label people insist on.

Got it... "White" is a terrible term because "White Devil" exists. Let me be really clear... volume of text does not act as a substitute for a logical point. Plus some equiovation between "Retarded" and "Retard", and the usual "Cis = Cis SCUM". *yawn*

If white became perceived as an offensive term then we would need to start evaluating the retirement of that term too. As is, "White Devil" references made popular in Hollywood Westerns just didn't push the term over the edge like Die Cis Scum did.

Protecting? lol... You've been online too long. I don't like pseudo-intellectual hypocrisy used to justify bigotry. I'm annoyed and disgusted by dishonest rhetoric, feigned ignorance, poorly conceived fallacies, and I find intellectual dishonesty pathetic and annoying.

I react badly when I see it, and I have no respect or patience for people who can't own their bigotry. Even worse are people who lack the empathy or interest to appreciate how others perceive their lot, and then react like peevish children when a fraction of the same treatment is directed their way.

Do you feel like this rant is conducive to the discussion? Are you just angry and feel the need to lash out at me like I'm an enemy somehow? I hope you don't feel like I've been this disrespectful to you. The occasional sarcasm, sure, but outright attempts at causing offense or belittling you as a person? Certainly not. If you continue with these abuse ad hominem then I'll have to excuse myself from further discussions with you on the matter. Not that you'd see that as any sort of loss, I'm sure.

FYI, usually bigotry requires a component of intolerance, prejudice and/or hate to qualify. For someone to "own" their bigotry they would at least need to fit that definition. For example, let's say someone is having issues with the use of pronouns and how its used in conversations compared to the possible consequences of getting it wrong. Someone being intolerant of that person's concerns would be considered "bigotry" due to the intolerance qualifier being met.

Oh boy, a PSYCH degree? WOW. Say, what have you done with that degree? I just ask because, you know... "Psych" can be the launching pad of a very respectable career in a clinical or research setting... or it can be that shit you do when you're drunk at college.

So... therapist? Researcher? What field?

What have I done with it? Thrown it in the garbage to make way for the degrees I actually use. A pysch degree is essentially worthless unless you get a masters in it and the other degrees offered far more lucrative ventures now rather than years down the road to make the same or less.

I would argue that anyone with less than a masters in it would qualify to call it, "that shit you do when you're drunk at college." For me, I had overlapping courses that enabled me to pick up the degree just by giving up a few electives to the topic so I figured "why not?". My brother has gone full-blown psychologist and damned if he's not still in college for it despite being in his 30's. He'd probably argue that anyone without at least a master's and a few thousand clinical hours would qualify as calling their education before that point as "that shit you do when your drunk at college."

Needless to say, this is my least mentioned degree. The only thing I got from it is a general history of psychology and a basic understanding and awareness of a variety of conditions. I should have minored in beer making and would have gotten more out of it. Mmmmmmm... beer....

Anyways, my point was that I did hear the term and I did hear it used offensively outside of academia and outside of the internet. Now, would I have been around the people I was with had I not been through academic pursuits? Probably not. So you could ultimately be right there as far as one impacted the other.

 

[donscarletti]

It's a term that is used primarily by people outside the group it refers to and those within the group it refers to rarely if ever identify with the term, so some may consider it to be a harmful term. However, I don't let the concept of "identity" bother me and people are free to refer to me and people like me however they want. Simply put if to a transsexual person finds this term to be useful, let them use it.

Still, I would consider it disingenuous if an individual who called me "cisgender" was to take exception towards others using their own nomenclature to refer to the transsexual community. This is not to say like "if you can call me cis, I can call you pervert" or anything deliberately abusive like that. But using terms that may be considered inaccurate like "cross dresser", "transvestite", "tranny" or "ladyboy" to an individual that doesn't identify with these terms is no different.

I think society is far too worked up about such things at the moment. I identify myself as X and you see me as Y. This is OK, we can identify others just as we can identify ourselves. How we see ourselves is not authoritative, or even a clear picture, I think others can call me what they want.

 

[Lightknight]

So... to get down to the essential points.

You are highly educated individual with at least one first-order relative who is similarly educated.

Eh, I am educated on a wide range of topics but for me to accept "highly educated" would require me going more in depth into one of those subjects. Something like a doctorate. But what does a doctorate really tell anyone nowadays?

I think we can agree that places you in a tiny minority of people on Earth.
Even then... you would likely not have encountered it without that background, the internet, or actively seeking it out.

I can concede the point. However, you should concede the point that the internet does, in fact, exist and a whole hell of a lot more people have access to it than I had access to the academic track that led me to it outside of the internet. So what does it matter whether or not I'd have heard of it if the internet does exist?

So, what we have is a word that requires an adjunct (Scum, Die...) to make it insulting. "Cis" on its own, barring tone or additional words, really does lack the capacity to communicate insult. How it's taken of course, is beyond the control of language. GIVEN that, and given the enormous asymmetry between the treatment of (generally) despised minorities such as trans people and relatively privileged individuals in an academic setting, it's hard to conclude that exceptionally rare uses of an exceptionally rare term require revision of the whole term.

It was a full blown meme made pretty darn popular across the internet which most people frequent. If it were something that just popped up as an insult in this one forums I wouldn't say a thing about it. This isn't relegated to academia at that point. It was a term spearheading a public discussion on the topic. Good to elevate awareness of transgendered issues but bad regarding the term itself.

Now, where I and some others here diverge, is that they largely seem to be giving you the benefit of the doubt. They're assuming, or at least acting, as though you're making your best argument for something you sincerely believe. I don't believe that. I think you're bored out of your mind, and this is how you spin the wheels a bit. I think that you're creating a bit of an argument, so that you can have it in the first place.

While I certainly do engage in discussions to break the boredom in general, I have a wide range of choices to pick from and even have the ability to start my own. To pick a topic I don't believe in would be silly and needlessly dishonest.

Now, I am not particularly passionate about this subject. Not like I am regarding the best way I can interact with my trans friends. I would not have ever started this thread or discussed the matter unless it had been brought up by someone else. I simply believe that it is now viewed as an offensive term and am affirming that belief via debate. So perhaps you are reading into my lack of flaming disdain for the matter? I wouldn't waste my time with it if I didn't believe it. I just have a hard time being quite as offended at a phrase coined by a transperson on the national day to remember the atrocities committed against transpeople. I can sympathize with that line of thinking. But is it now generally believed to be offensive by the general person? Yeah. I believe it is. Would it be better to use something else like non-trans? Yes, I believe it would help to normalize the topic in general and would ultimately help with transgendered awareness and public sympathy. I just don't think it will make a huge difference.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Yeah, all I'm getting here is "Stop calling me heterosexual, I'm normal for god's sake"

I don't think I've ever seen cisgendered used in a pejorative way, are people counting uses of "cis scum" as the same thing as cisgendered? I'm not even sure how you would use cisgendered as a slur though unless it's followed with something else. In any case, it's a term that should exist, whatever specific word you choose for it.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

 

[CrystalShadow]

This website used to be about gaming and nerdy culture. For few years it was a bookmark I would visit every day to read articles, watch videos and look at intelligent people talking about their hobbies.

Now, it's not a bookmarked site, but out of... I don't know, nostalgia I suppose, I still come back and check what's going on here from time to time. And what do I see? Very little new content on the front page besides gossip and conspiracy theories, only Shamus still writing quality articles.

The worst thing though? This crap. The Escapist is becoming more and more like Tumblr every single day. With thread after thread about 'gender identity' or Gamergate (which nobody else cares about anymore) and it's just tiresome. The world is not full of people changing their genders around, but you'd think it was totally normal if you visited the forums here. I don't care if you're male, female or a swamp monster, what do you think about The Witcher 3? What about Sony? Hey there's a new indie game on Steam, anyone played it?

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that you shouldn't talk about this stuff, it's obviously an important part of a small section of people's lives. But is The Escapist forums really the place for it?

I really don't know where you got this Idea from that anything has changed on the forums. Because, it really hasn't. I've been here longer than you. (officially. Who knows when it comes to lurking around without an account), And this topic (and ones of a similar nature) have been doing the rounds here forever.
It was going on in 2009, it was going on in 2012, it's still going on now. Nothing has changed, except maybe your awareness of it, and the actual, official content of the site.

It's fine that you dislike the topic or something, but you have some pretty bad memory if you think it's something new, or that it represents somethIng having changed in the forums.
Because it really hasn't. Not at all.

You know what has? Constant incessant whiny nonsense about 'gamergate' - a tempest in a teacup if I ever saw one, yet so many people won't shut up about it it even managed to lead to an entirely new sub-forum.
First new subforum in many years...

Eh. Whatever. Don't know what leads someone to have such a selective memory...
And... I don't really care either.

 

[Lightknight]

You know, I just saw a GamerGameter argue that "Neckbeard" had become a slur on part with "******" and "******." I wasn't really impressed there either. Language is a vehicle for meaning and context, and if that context is, "Some anonymous shmucks make a meme online, and because it's online it's forever."... then who cares? That's true for (at this point) EVERYTHING.

By comparison, the context for "******" is... "We burn people like you." "******" had literally hundreds of years of brutal treatment to charge it.

I quite agree that it is not equivalent in harmfulness to those other slurs. It's approximately as mundane as "retard" in which it's offensive but doesn't dredge up decades or centuries of mistreatment and oppression. Hopefully I haven't made it sound like that kind of "AAA" slur. Instead, it's more on par with something like "KKK member" if that was used as an insult. A term that is used to categorize us a hateful and bigoted by default.

"Cis" has... what? The online outrage of a minority of a tiny minority who sometimes add "Scum" or "Die" to it? You'll note that "Die ****** Scum" and "******" are equally offensive... because the word "******" is a slur. Cis is simply objective descriptive unless you act to change that.

You do realize that the term "******" not only started as an objective description but also still is one in the rest of the world, right? Same with "Negro". This fact is brought up frequently on the BBC in order to make sure the speakers don't use the terms and hurt American's poor innocent ears.

So it's only in the American context that it's a slur.

As for the tiny minority. I don't think transpeople are necessarily the biggest offenders of using the term that way. We certainly have documentation of some that used it that way including the initiator but my own anecdotal experience would place the majority of the blame on the shoulders of people who think they're doing good for the cause when they're really just making asses of themselves, or, in some cases, correctly applying the slur to an individual that deserves it. I could be wrong but many of the people I see using the term in that way just seem like they want to score points in some unknown internet system that keeps score. It really just ends up alienating non-transgendered individuals from the conversation and if normalization of the condition is the desired impact then this is quite harmful to the cause.

Nothing you've said in PAGES of direct challenges on this point has even come close to dealing with that reality. Each time you're challenged on this point, you pivot to a moral equivalency , or your own personal perception of offense.

Are you saying that you don't believe the term to be offensive? Interestingly enough, did you know it's even offensive to some transgendered people in that they believe it perpetuates binary gender constructs? From researching this response to you I just learned that non-transgendered was replaced by Cisgender because they believed it was normative. So I'm not sure what I'd even replace the term with now. Though it is incorrect to believe that calling something non-anything is normative against the thing which they're "non". Like a Non-White indicates that White is the norm and non-whites are not. So it actually goes the opposite way. But I'm not in charge of how people view terms.


Here's a few mainstream articles on the topic of it being insulting to some:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/the-new-c-word_b_5617913.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/09/cisgenders-linguistic-uphill-battle/380342/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/j-nelson-aviance/i-am-not-cisgendered_b_5598113.html

However, please note that I'm not against labels in general. I do believe in their use so I'm not one of the people stating that the reason this is insulting is because of the imposition of a label.

Regardless, if it wasn't insulting to a significant number of people then what would be the purpose of these articles?

1.) (and this is what I believe) You're just bored and lonely. The rest is noise and justifications, maybe around a core belief, or maybe not. It hardly matters, because you're just in this to hear your own voice and reassure yourself of something you're not getting offline. In my experience, people who produce walls of text where less would do are essentially masturbating.

The only thing you're right about is boredom. But boredom is why anyone is here, on the internet. It's an opportunity to learn and be entertained in so very many ways. So I'm bored and saw someone commenting on a topic I do have an opinion on. Time to voice that opinion and see how it stacks up to reality. So far in researching information to bring into this topic it seems like it's a pretty common sentiment.

I'm sorry if you feel like this abusive ad hominem is appropriate. It isn't and it doesn't disprove my position no matter how diligently you try to employ it. I'd appreciate it if you'd return the same courtesy I'm giving you by not pretending to know my motivations.

Why here? Well, if you don't care about this really, but find it intellectually stimulating, then it would be very easy for you to keep a discussion like this going forever. People with a vested personal interest, and history of abuse (i.e. trans people) will naturally be easy for you to bait back into it whenever you want. Other topics are not necessarily so easy to manipulate.

I am here because this is where the thread was created and a place in which enough transgendered individuals are part of the community as to ensure that I can learn the most from this discussion here. Were it not created and was this place not populated with Transgendered individuals then I would not be here.

2.) You're just dancing around your real objections, which are painfully pedestrian and amount to personal offense and an intellectual incapacity to own that offense. I think that's how you come off to some of the more well-meaning trans people here, although to his credit I can actually see PaulH losing all patience and interest with you. I think this option is much less likely, but I do tend to see ill intent where simple incompetence will do.

Or, and this is a novel concept, maybe you're just wrong? Maybe people do see the term offensively and you're just defending a newly bigoted term for whatever your personal reasons are? Consider that you could be the equivalent of one of those people defending the term "retard" by exclaiming about the fact that it means delayed or obstructed progress and how much sense that makes when discussing someone who is delayed developmentally. Your not wrong, the definition does work. But that's not really relevant. Gender Identity Disorder also worked fine and we saw fit to change it for the exact same reasons and I supported that. But you can't seem to consider supporting this? Why? Who benefits?

 

[Lightknight]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Two sides saying what they think/feel and why then responding to one another?

I certainly feel like I've been having discussions in this thread and have learned a lot from the posters here.

 

[Lightspeaker]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Typically people don't do that in the internet, a few people in this people in this thread for example. Point is there's something of a difference between "well why do you feel that way? Here's another way of thinking you might want to consider" and "your opinion is WRONG".

 

[Lightknight]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Typically people don't do that in the internet, a few people in this people in this thread for example. Point is there's something of a difference between "well why do you feel that way? Here's another way of thinking you might want to consider" and "your opinion is WRONG".

Do you feel like I'm being guilty about this here or like I've been presenting points and counterpoints? I've been trying to carefully word my reasoning here. Not that anything you said has to be about me. I'd just like to know if I'm coming off in that way.

 

[CaitSeith]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Two sides saying what they think/feel and why then responding to one another?

I certainly feel like I've been having discussions in this thread and have learned a lot from the posters here.

Just for curiosity, what have you learned from the posters here?

 

[Lightknight]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Two sides saying what they think/feel and why then responding to one another?

I certainly feel like I've been having discussions in this thread and have learned a lot from the posters here.

Just for curiosity, what have you learned from the posters here?

In this thread specifically? Not a lot. There haven't been that many facts presented. I've learned some minor things like the etymology of the term and some more perspectives on why the word is liked or disliked. There's a lot of general information to be had.

Regarding the transgender topic in general, this week I learned from several of the posters here that I was being selfish for not wanting to let my transgender friends impose their pronouns on me. I had been not using them in discussion to avoid a number of issues (fear of slipping up and using the sex-pronoun I associate with them and hurting them or getting others upset and a desire not to be controlled). They helped me deal with the frustration I had from previous situations in which the backlash for making such a mistake colored my view of the matter pretty strongly.

So I've been able to come to terms with the fact that since they're my friends they've earned the right to impose and that these people aren't the same people who have wronged me in the past and thus don't deserve to be punished for what someone else has done.

That lesson is pretty damn important to me even if my friends won't even notice a difference (they likely had no idea I wasn't using pronouns at all).

Regarding other topics on these message boards? A lot. Even in debates where we never see eye to eye I research my side of the conversation and fact check the other person's. By the end of the conversation I am typically a near-expert on the matter where materials and other resources for research are abundant.

 

[Lightknight]

You listen in the same way that a teenager arguing for something they want listens. You don't actually appear to think about the points, only how to fit them back into your pre-existing narrative. I think for many people with less experience with that behavior from intelligent adults, it comes across as simply not listening.

If you provided convincing evidence then you might find out whether or not I am listening to your points.

In the meantime, I'm going to assume you have no further interest in exploring the topic with me in an intellectually honest and genuine way. If you'd devoted some of the time you spent on trying to pretend to know my motivation then I may have actually had the opportunity to learn from you. Instead you assumed that I wasn't listening and ended up wasting yours and my time.

So maybe we can cut the crap and get to just one question.

Considering the citation provided of articles addressing the matter, do you believe that people find the term offensive, even if the term itself is not offensive?

 

[CaitSeith]

I wasn't going to post in this thread at all purely because of the amount of bile going around. But I just had to point this out:

- Thread title is "How do you personally feel about the term cisgender?"

- Thread consists of certain people arguing and trying to tell others how they should feel about it (i.e. that they shouldn't be offended because reasons).

In all honesty I did tell people that debate was okay and encouraged discussion. Obviously I had no idea what I was setting up there.

Its not your fault, you had good intentions. Its just disappointing that these things always seem to come down to "what you think/feel is wrong and this is why it is wrong" rather than people actually discussing things.

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Two sides saying what they think/feel and why then responding to one another?

I certainly feel like I've been having discussions in this thread and have learned a lot from the posters here.

Just for curiosity, what have you learned from the posters here?

In this thread specifically? Not a lot. There haven't been that many facts presented. I've learned some minor things like the etymology of the term and some more perspectives on why the word is liked or disliked. There's a lot of general information to be had.

Regarding the transgender topic in general, this week I learned from several of the posters here that I was being selfish for not wanting to let my transgender friends impose their pronouns on me. I had been not using them in discussion to avoid a number of issues (fear of slipping up and using the sex-pronoun I associate with them and hurting them or getting others upset and a desire not to be controlled). They helped me deal with the frustration I had from previous situations in which the backlash for making such a mistake colored my view of the matter pretty strongly.

So I've been able to come to terms with the fact that since they're my friends they've earned the right to impose and that these people aren't the same people who have wronged me in the past and thus don't deserve to be punished for what someone else has done.

That lesson is pretty damn important to me even if my friends won't even notice a difference (they likely had no idea I wasn't using pronouns at all).

Regarding other topics on these message boards? A lot. Even in debates where we never see eye to eye I research my side of the conversation and fact check the other person's. By the end of the conversation I am typically a near-expert on the matter where materials and other resources for research are abundant.

Thank you very much. I appreciate you answered my question.

 

[Lightknight]

Let me tell you what there is evidence of...

Isn't that what a discussion is as long as both sides are listening to the reasons and evaluating them against their own?

Two sides saying what they think/feel and why then responding to one another?

I certainly feel like I've been having discussions in this thread and have learned a lot from the posters here.

Just for curiosity, what have you learned from the posters here?

In this thread specifically? Not a lot.

The posters here (Aka, on the escapist) don't reside solely in this thread. It's a community of posters from a diverse group of people. I've been having two transgender-related topics in two different threads on this site at the same time and some of the posters here have been speaking with me there as well. In this thread in particularly, there has not been that much to learn from. You haven't been presenting facts, just rehashing how the term serves a categorical purpose and how it is irrelevant how people feel about the term because you believe the term itself is not inherently bad.

I mean... what is a person with eyes and a brain supposed to conclude from that instant about-face? Following it with bitter passive-aggression, "....earned their right to impose..." is just... gross.

Following that admission should be nothing... certainly not yet ANOTHER deflection and pivot.

I'm not surprised you would belittle someone learning and changing in a positive way.

FYI, since you weren't around the first time I establish what I mean by "impose" I'll repeat it. I don't mean "impose" as in "force". I mean "Impose" as in "take advantage of someone by demanding their attention or commitment." Like when you offer a friend a place to stay the night and they say, "I don't mean to impose".

It's disappointing to see someone as apparently intelligent as you grab an erroneously preconceived notion of someone and run with it all this distance. You're wrong about me. Sorry. But it's not my job to do anything more to help you see that. That's on you. I'm just unhappy that you and I couldn't have a productive conversation due to your bias of me.

 

[Lightknight]

Sure, it's all about you, not the cost of your "betterment" that you place on others. Plus the boredom we've agreed on earlier, remember?

Say, why didn't you start a "Help educate me" thread, instead of what you're doing? No no... sorry, I'll let you get back to that victim role...

I'm sorry you're frustrated that someone learned from a thread on the internet in a discussion in which all parties involved willingly took part. I don't really think there's more you and I should discuss. Good luck.