Poll: How many straight birth-gendered females are on the Escapist?

[Something Amyss]

As to solving other countries' lgbt problems, It's unlikely we would be able to get far, especially considering that countries with such problems also generally have an oppressive government and a wide variety of groups stigmatized and threatened by those governments/ the people's long held beliefs.
We can't wave a magic wand and fix it all, its going to require time... and while we wait, perhaps we could get our own house in order, our rug seams rather lumpy.

This seems like a distraction, anyway. Even if we're talking otherwise reasonable nations, this is our sphere of influence.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Why do people care if the term "cis" doesn't sounds as nice and fluffy as they believe is as necessarily accurate to describe them? Nobody else got to choose. What about the term "spinster" to describe unmarried women as opposed to "bachelor" for unmarried men? That is immeasurably worse. Why tie your self-worth to the sound of a word? Considering there are no societal complications for it, it rathers appears as needless nitpicking. In fact, this whole poll comes off as far less honourable than it claims to be.

 

[WindKnight]

Why do people care if the term "cis" doesn't sounds as nice and fluffy as they believe is as necessarily accurate to describe them? Nobody else got to choose. What about the term "spinster" to describe unmarried women as opposed to "bachelor" for unmarried men? That is immeasurably worse. In fact, this whole poll comes off as far less honourable than it claims to be.

I think its fair to say the people who object to cis are used to defining terms. They choose what terms are applied to others, how they are treated, and are generally used to media and society telling them that's their right.

Suddenly someone is doing that to them, and they don't like it, one bit, and rush to reassert their imagined right, rather than going 'hey, maybe this is how everyone else feels like when I do it, and maybe that should make me reconsider doing it.'.

 

[RedDeadFred]

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that this thread took the direction it did... Anyway, cisgender straight male reporting in. On the whole "normal" thing, I'd say that despite the dictionary definition being correct, this label has a lot more negative connotations for the "abnormal" than cisgender has for anyone. Yea, it's not the prettiest sounding of words, but really, what's the big deal? If it becomes the standard word to use, then it'll eventually sound normal too. Even if you are that offended by the sound of a word, it's not like it's being used frequently. For example, when I talk about one of my closest friends who just happens to be gay, I don't say "so I was hanging out with my gay friend the other day", I say "so I was hanging out with my friend the other day". Know why? Because his sexual orientation has nothing to do with why he's my friend.

Didn't really mean to go into a short rant, but it happened. My apologies if I offended anyone or misconstrued something.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

As a straight cis-male, I have a hard time empathising with other cis-men who think it's an insult. I mean, can it be used as in insult? Well, sure, what can't? It's just that I've run into so few trans individuals, especially in meatspace, that it's got no weight behind it, like a long-range nerf dart.

So, for me at least, cis is an accurate descriptor that just so happened not to be chosen by me. Then again, I'm a filthy gender traitor who can empathize with the frustration that created #killallmen after Operation Lolipop and thinks that the reactions to Male Tears mugs are both hilarious and justify their existence, so...

I dunno. Maybe straight cis-men should get some thicker skins. This is the Internet after all.
-signed, a straight cis-male confused about why he has a poll option.

 

[Something Amyss]

Suddenly someone is doing that to them, and they don't like it, one bit, and rush to reassert their imagined right, rather than going 'hey, maybe this is how everyone else feels like when I do it, and maybe that should make me reconsider doing it.'.

Honestly, wouldn't it be awesome if people would stop as think that? "Huh. I don't like it when it happens to me. Maybe I shouldn't do it to other people, since they may not like it."

 

[Dizchu]

Guys if you're so freaked out by the word "cis" sounding like "cyst", do you also refuse to acknowledge that you belong to the species "homo sapiens" because "homo" is in the name?

Well, seeing as "normal" is synonymous with "average", it's a pretty common comparison.

If you really want to make "normal" a dirty word, then why not make it THE dirty word that it is?

Normal means boring. It means average. It means you disappear into the background.

"Normal" is not synonymous with "average" or "common" though. Naturally-occurring blonde hair outside of Scandinavia is uncommon, but it's completely normal. There are plenty of things that are uncommon that are completely normal.

"Normal" implies that everything is fine, there's nothing to worry about. When you describe a person as "average" you are implying that they are dull and uninteresting. When you describe a person as "normal" you don't necessarily mean that they are boring or unremarkable, you're saying that they don't pose any threat and that they are able to function in society to a reasonable standard. When a cisgender person calls themselves "normal" to differentiate from transgender people, the implication is that transgender people are inherently flawed or fail to live up to the standards of everyone else.

Calling someone "normal" when what you mean is "average" is like calling someone "strange" when what you mean is "unique", but I'm sure you're aware that while the two words may have similarities, they have very different connotations.

EDIT: Also notice how with the cliche insult "die cis scum", people have more of a problem with the word "cis" than they do with the word "scum"? It's like a gay person being called a "dumb ******" and then getting upset that someone called them "dumb".

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I think its fair to say the people who object to cis are used to defining terms. They choose what terms are applied to others, how they are treated, and are generally used to media and society telling them that's their right.

Suddenly someone is doing that to them, and they don't like it, one bit, and rush to reassert their imagined right, rather than going 'hey, maybe this is how everyone else feels like when I do it, and maybe that should make me reconsider doing it.'.

That is an excellent point, basically societal privilege summed up in a nutshell.

I dunno. Maybe straight cis-men should get some thicker skins. This is the Internet after all.

You know that highlights the hypocrisy of the situation. As a trans person, who has a lot of trans friends too, there's this culture of transphobia and we for the most part just kinda sigh and roll our eyes at it. But when we take even a little comical poke at cis folk, cis folk get all offended and scream bloody murder. Funny that, we're constantly assaulted from all sides with cissexism and transphobia and expected to just take it, we get even a tiny bit of our own back and the more privileged group acts like we're trying to exterminate them...

 

[ThatOtherGirl]

Guys if you're so freaked out by the word "cis" sounding like "cyst", do you also refuse to acknowledge that you belong to the species "homo sapiens" because "homo" is in the name?

Well, seeing as "normal" is synonymous with "average", it's a pretty common comparison.

If you really want to make "normal" a dirty word, then why not make it THE dirty word that it is?

Normal means boring. It means average. It means you disappear into the background.

"Normal" is not synonymous with "average" or "common" though. Naturally-occurring blonde hair outside of Scandinavia is uncommon, but it's completely normal. There are plenty of things that are uncommon that are completely normal.

"Normal" implies that everything is fine, there's nothing to worry about. When you describe a person as "average" you are implying that they are dull and uninteresting. When you describe a person as "normal" you don't necessarily mean that they are boring or unremarkable, you're saying that they don't pose any threat and that they are able to function in society to a reasonable standard. When a cisgender person calls themselves "normal" to differentiate from transgender people, the implication is that transgender people are inherently flawed or fail to live up to the standards of everyone else.

Calling someone "normal" when what you mean is "average" is like calling someone "strange" when what you mean is "unique", but I'm sure you're aware that while the two words may have similarities, they have very different connotations.

Not using normal also isn't just a gender thing. It is standard practice to not use the word normal in relation to pretty much everything, from sexual preference to disabilities (or lack thereof).

 

[MrFalconfly]

Guys if you're so freaked out by the word "cis" sounding like "cyst", do you also refuse to acknowledge that you belong to the species "homo sapiens" because "homo" is in the name?

Well, seeing as "normal" is synonymous with "average", it's a pretty common comparison.

If you really want to make "normal" a dirty word, then why not make it THE dirty word that it is?

Normal means boring. It means average. It means you disappear into the background.

"Normal" is not synonymous with "average" or "common" though. Naturally-occurring blonde hair outside of Scandinavia is uncommon, but it's completely normal. There are plenty of things that are uncommon that are completely normal.

"Normal" implies that everything is fine, there's nothing to worry about. When you describe a person as "average" you are implying that they are dull and uninteresting. When you describe a person as "normal" you don't necessarily mean that they are boring or unremarkable, you're saying that they don't pose any threat and that they are able to function in society to a reasonable standard. When a cisgender person calls themselves "normal" to differentiate from transgender people, the implication is that transgender people are inherently flawed or fail to live up to the standards of everyone else.

Calling someone "normal" when what you mean is "average" is like calling someone "strange" when what you mean is "unique", but I'm sure you're aware that while the two words may have similarities, they have very different connotations.

"Naturally-occurring blonde hair outside of Scandinavia is uncommon, but it's completely normal."

Now we are mixing statistically normal (which most definitely IS synonymous with average), with biologically normal (which could be interpreted as "nothing harmful").

If we have to use the word "normal" in conjunction with trans people, and people who aren't straight, and we've already agreed that there isn't any biological harm done to the species, so any biological norm is besides the point, we're left with the statistical normal.

And statistically transpeople aren't strictly speaking "normal".

According to some statistics only about 0.3% of the US population identify as transgendered
( http://www.marieclaire.com/culture/g3065/transgender-facts-figures/ )
However, since (just like with gay people) most transgender people probably are still in some kind of closet, I'm going to assume that only 10% have actually come out of the closet, but that still only gets us up to 3%.

3% isn't a whole lot. However, as I see it, it's 3% who have one hell of an ace in the hole when it comes to make themselves interesting. Of all the friends I've made in my life, those who I've had the most interesting talks with have always been the ones on the fringes of what's considered normal (statistically). People who are gay, or bi, people who has some kind of kink. Hell I also have some kind of knack for befriending people who are completely opposed to me politically (which is where I usually end up on the fringe).

EDIT:
But hey, I'm fine with using "boring" instead of normal, if you don't like me using the normal.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I am, but I cannot permit you to unload your device into me. I'm sure you've heard that before.

I'm also ten feet tall, but don't let that put you off.

So..you're like a Borg or something?

 

[bluegate]

This thread went south pretty fast, what is stopping people from simply checking the box that applies to them and moving along?
Can't find a box that applies to you then simply proceed to the moving along part.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I'm going to have to go with what another poster said;

I'm not going to use the word "Cis" to describe myself or other normal people. For two reasons;

1: "Normal" is a factually correct term for people who are born male/female and are interested in the opposite sex. Heterosexual people who are their birth sex are the overwhelming, crushing majority of human beings. It also is correct because it is describing the only possible viable path for reproduction for human beings - the only one that works.

Being trans or homosexual is a perfectly natural thing that can and does occur, but there is no way you can twist the definition or meaning of the word normal to fit trans or homosexual people no matter how hard to try, at least in the context of their sexuality or identity. Normal could be used to describe other things about them IE: their eating habits or intelligence, but not their sexuality.

2: The LGBT community poisoned the well on the word "Cis" from the word go. I'd be willing to bet 95%+ of the people here and in general had their first experience with the word "Cis" not for a scientific use, but to be used as an insult against them or someone else. And not a mild insult either - every time I've personally seen the word or heard of other people being called it, it looks as if its being used on the same level as "******" or "*****" - something that is supposed to be a very vulgar and crude slur against the target.

Its likely to never be an acceptable word to use generally because of the connotations it has already.

You know, there was a time I would have agreed with you on this, but no.

1. Bisexuals can reproduce, numerous homosexuals have kids of their own, nothing stops trams people from having kids if they don't go through certain treatments or procedures, surrogates and artificial insemination are a thing. Further, there are a huge number of species which engage in homosexual intercourse more often than heterosexual, would you not call those species "normal?" Further still, who gives a fuck? My existence is not defined by a biological pressure to reproduce, that is not what makes me normal. As for cis-heterosexuals making up the majority of people, historically that's not necessarily a fact at all, most men in many Greek influenced cultures had male lovers. Normal is a word solely used to define what separates out groups from in groups.

2. Yeah, guess what, people are dicks! Do you seriously think that doesn't get applied the other way around, with roughly triple the venom and nigh infinitely more violence? How many people have cis spray painted on their lockers by some clique? How many people are beaten by their parents as they yell at them for being cis? How many people get literally branded cis? Trans, gay, homo, lesbian, these are used as insults far more often with far more venom and violence, but they are still used because they are the best we have. The hate that comes with the title of cis is hardly any burden to bear comparatively speaking.

 

[Something Amyss]

As a trans person, who has a lot of trans friends too, there's this culture of transphobia and we for the most part just kinda sigh and roll our eyes at it.

Partially out of necessity. Because on top of simply joking, even mentioning things like "privilege" is sufficient to send a good chunk of cisgender folk into a tizzy. It's somewhat baffling and somewhat infuriating how easy it is for a majority group to claim they "feel" attacked, when you're afraid of even poking your head up because you've actually been attacked and feared further repercussions.

I tell you, I wish I had the luxury of being able to take umbrage at something like how I didn't like the sound of the term "cis."

But Jag's point is even more insidious, because it's frequently the folks who claim that cis/heterosexual/males are under attack who derisively tell others they have hurt fee-fees or they're too sensitive or they're special snowflakes. All too frequently, they're the most brittle, fragile, thin-skinned people who will cry foul at even an imagined slight, but when it doesn't affect them it's all "stop being so sensitive."

Then again, I'm a filthy gender traitor who can empathize with the frustration that created #killallmen after Operation Lolipop and thinks that the reactions to Male Tears mugs are both hilarious and justify their existence, so...

And that is why you will be spared in the culling.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

-snip-

The thing is, statistics don't dictate the concept of normality, just how common, or uncommon any given variable is. The concept of normal is defined as: "conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected." At least when we're talking about social situations, the use of "normal" in the technical sense doesn't apply, because we're talking about general usage. As in the fact that it's; normal to play video games, watch TV, or read a book in your spare time. Looking back though, it wasn't normal to do those things when video games and television were brand new things, or when most people were still illiterate. Homosexuality is considered a normal thing for the most part anymore, despite them being a vast minority of people. African-Americans are just normal people, despite them being a minority of the American population. It's normal to speak Mandarin Chines in China, but not in say, Sweden. Normal is a subjective variable when applied to people, not a technical linear state.

 

[Something Amyss]

It also is correct because it is describing the only possible viable path for reproduction for human beings - the only one that works.

Oh crap, I missed this before.

Seriously, PF, you've said yourself that you are against kids and even a partner having kids is a complete dealbreaker for you.

Does this mean you're abnormal, by your own terms? I'm really curious now, because you've offered a definition of normal that precludes not only me and mine, but you.

 

[MrFalconfly]

-snip-

The thing is, statistics don't dictate the concept of normality, just how common, or uncommon any given variable is. The concept of normal is defined as: "conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected." At least when we're talking about social situations, the use of "normal" in the technical sense doesn't apply, because we're talking about general usage. As in the fact that it's; normal to play video games, watch TV, or read a book in your spare time. Looking back though, it wasn't normal to do those things when video games and television were brand new things, or when most people were still illiterate. Homosexuality is considered a normal thing for the most part anymore, despite them being a vast minority of people. African-Americans are just normal people, despite them being a minority of the American population. It's normal to speak Mandarin Chines in China, but not in say, Sweden. Normal is a subjective variable when applied to people, not a technical linear state.

Statistics is one of many fields that use the word normal.

And as I see it, statistics really is the only field which CAN use the word normal without being offensive to anyone, which is why, if I use the word "normal", I use it in a statistical sense.

Also, I never said "normal is a technical linear state". It isn't. At the most I said "normal, used statistically, is synonymous with average", which it is. And depending on your sample-size, and where you took your sample, the average (or normal) will be different.

You know what, how about I just say "boring", instead of "normal"?

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

-snip-

The thing is, statistics don't dictate the concept of normality, just how common, or uncommon any given variable is. The concept of normal is defined as: "conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected." At least when we're talking about social situations, the use of "normal" in the technical sense doesn't apply, because we're talking about general usage. As in the fact that it's; normal to play video games, watch TV, or read a book in your spare time. Looking back though, it wasn't normal to do those things when video games and television were brand new things, or when most people were still illiterate. Homosexuality is considered a normal thing for the most part anymore, despite them being a vast minority of people. African-Americans are just normal people, despite them being a minority of the American population. It's normal to speak Mandarin Chines in China, but not in say, Sweden. Normal is a subjective variable when applied to people, not a technical linear state.

Statistics is one of many fields that use the word normal.

Statistics also solely rely on the technical definition from mathematics: e. "(of a subgroup) having the property that the same set of elements results when all the elements of the subgroup are operated on consistently on the left and consistently on the right by any element of the group; invariant." Which doesn't apply in a casual conversation.

And as I see it, statistics really is the only field which CAN use the word normal without being offensive to anyone, which is why, if I use the word "normal", I use it in a statistical sense.

I understand this, but at the same time it causes problems when used in casual conversation with out it being qualified as statistical.

Also, I never said "normal is a technical linear state". It isn't. At the most I said "normal, used statistically, is synonymous with average", which it is. And depending on your sample-size, and where you took your sample, the average (or normal) will be different.

Which isn't untrue, but the common usage of "normal" is to assert a state of correctness in typical conversation, thus asserting something different, or "abnormal" is inherently wrong and thus bad. Usually on an assertion of morality and a demand for those who are "abnormal" to conform to "normal", even when conformity is impossible.

That's not a strike against you personally, it's a problem with the connotations and usage of the word "normal".

You know what, how about I just say "boring", instead of "normal"?

Well then you'll have people who consider themselves to be "normal" taking it as a personal insult. Really thats the issue with general terms used in casual conversation, us humans take things personally so much we fuck up even basic language.