this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
45724 readers
139 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not trans but don't understand why I have to accept being called cis.
My gaming friend who's m-f is a female now, sure, whatever works for her. But why must I suddenly have a name for something I am. I didn't choose any of this? Is it actually made to anoy me, it doesn't. Is it something that happens because, in the modern day we live in, this is just a change that has to happen? I don't know, probably.
What I do know is that the trans community is, in many cases, so unrelentingly hostile towards cis, because many don't understand. Even against trans people, some communities create so many rules. My friend had trouble trying to fit in because she wasn't trans enough for her discord group. Wtf?
Bottom line for me is; were all human, and that is more a problem than gender. Jealousy, pride, ego, it's all part of a human and that goes for cis/trans and the lot.
And I think alot of cis people hate being called that because it's new and it feels aggressive.
Can't wait for someone to smack me down for my opinion
Cis is literally just a root term meaning "not trans" I.E. "identifies with gender assigned at birth. I.E. full correlation between sex and gender, biologically (i'm using the interpretation that in trans people, there is a biological desync somewhere along the line, separating physical sex, and mental sex, causing the "trans-ness" to exist, you probably shouldn't disagree with me, because the research and lived experience behind this stuff supports it)
It's like me talking about your ethnicity. There is literally nothing you can do to have control over it, it's a fully observed concept, there is no "applied" conceptualization of the term cis. Just like there is no active conceptualization of the term "human"
yeah, none of us did, i didn't fucking want to be born, i didn't decide to exist, and even if i did, it wasn't here on this hell hole of a planet. Who gives a shit that people call you cis, because you are literally, objectively cis. You are arguing the most fundamental aspects of philosophy here. You might as well engage in nihilism if this hurts your soul.
no, it's not. It's not supposed to. It's a mechanism for classifying your existence in a broader, undefined society, that is experiencing challenges of definition more broadly across the whole of the field this term specifically resides in. In fact, healthcare in general, is experiencing a minor revolution.
if you're curious about why they exist, have a look into social gender expression, or gender identity more broadly, modern or historical (historical being 1950's) hell you can even go into ancient human history and see the same thing, though it's often different from how it is now. There were still clear distinctions in how things worked.
Things change, as they always have, and will continue to change, Change is good, it signals technological evolution, and social progress. There is nothing inherently bad about change. I mean sure there's bad change. Like hitler, for example. But if hitler didn't exist, there is no guarantee that we wouldn't still be fighting like the british were during the revolutionary war.
in defense of the internet, you are asking a pretty stupid question. It's like being mad when someone refers to you by your proper honorific title. It's just, fucking weird.
and infighting in the queer community is a thing, it's a big problem as of late, although that's a different story and nobody really knows how to classify it or what to do about it at this moment.
yeah, you're correct about it being new, people are apprehensive to change. It's normal, doesn't mean you need to express it though. Also, it likely feels aggressive to you because you haven't been classified before in your life time, to this degree at least. Chances are, you don't like it now, even though you've probably done the same thing to other people, and you've almost certainly seen this done to other people throughout your life, aware or not. Gay people were considered mentally ill up until the 70's and it was only really more normalized in the 90's.
BTW, i recommend you do some reading on the Schizoid personality disorder, and do some thinking about how it feels to be classified. It's better than being socially shunned, consciously or not.
If you feel like your life is crumbling because you're being called cis, you might want to think back to what red lining was like, or what the pushback against the gays was like, or what it was like being japanese in the US shortly after pearl harbor, or being muslim in the US any time after 9/11, or jewish, just in general. Or like a minority in an oppressive state/regime.
To sum it up here, you're complaining about being called cis. It's not a slur, it's not an insult, it's not degrading, it's just a classification term. And this is apparently, the most important problem in your life right this moment, judging by the fact that you left a comment about it. You're not worried about putting food on the table, or being sane, or fitting in with society, or being able to function within it, putting gas in your car, getting to work, having work, being able to do your job, and being able to live in general.
It's a rather privileged problem to have, and you should think about how good your life is, rather than how bad it is.
You don’t have to accept being called anything. Doesn’t have much use outside the Internet anyway.
You don’t say “That trans person over there” or “That cis chick over there” or “That gay dude over there.” You say their names. (Or “that person” if you don’t.)
Because no one is really going to care about my sexual orientation in a formal setting or when they come across me or another random person at the grocery store.
You can call me a leaf for all I care. We most likely won’t be seeing each other the next day anyway.
Because that's what you are. It's a statement of fact, not an insult
Cisgender isn't a new term. Also, it's because trans people are actually somewhat accepted now so we need a more mainstream way to reference people who are and are not. Really simple concept
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL. You're not the victim here, stop it.
Bullshit. If that were true you wouldn't care about being called cis.
It only feels aggressive to those who have been saying sht like "tranny" with bile in their tone, likely because theyre projecting their intentions.
Glad I could help out.
Guess you're right. But the part about the trans community is something I've seen happen to my friend, not myself.
They were so unfair. Like you say. They were victims and very bitter about it.
I really cannot care about most of the drama. That's too time consuming. Old men probably feel threatened, I don't. Regardless, we will never meet eachother but a discussion keeps the mind fresh, thank you.
You also have to accept being called "white", but noone gets up in arms about it.
not to be that guy here but I f do not identify as white. I understand I am racialized in my society as white, but whiteness is oppressive, and I reject whiteness. you may call me "Pennsylvanian" though.
then you should probably identify as some form of mixed then.
"some form of mixed" isn't my ethnicity. I'm a Pennsylvanian
well technically, you're some form of American, not Pennsylvanian. Technically, you're using a demonym which is actually irrelevant to ethnicity.
how dare you tell me my ethnicity doesn't exist.
well it's a demonym, which does exist.
If you were talking about race, i would agree with you, because race literally does not exist.
ethnically I am a Pennsylvanian..wtf..
ethnically would be some flavor of european, slav, asian, or south african/american and to some degree, american (considering the natives as american)
like i said, that's a demonym.
you're wrong and condescending: not a good combination.
doesn't take much googling to find out im not wrong. As for being condescending, i think i would just argue that i'm correct.
it's my ethnicity. I would know
well, i mean your genetics would know. I'm not sure you would, unless you can read your own DNA.
ethnicity isn't genetics
and dogs aren't genetics, neither are nuclear reactors, or vacuums.
this is a nonsequitur.
you made it first. You said that ethnicity isn't genetics. Which is true, because ethnicity != genetics. In order for your statement to be properly true it would have to something more like ethnic heritage = genetics, because heritage is genetics.
it's also culture. my family has been here longer than the USA. we predate the revolution by generations. I'm Pennsylvanian.
so you're part native american then?
there is family lore that I have a Dakota great grandma but obviously she would have had to move east and that's only 20th century anyway
regardless, though, I am pennsylvanian
yeah, anyway, while you are technically pennsylavnian, that's not ethnic, that's a demonym, ethnically you would be american/native american, and whatever flavors you have kicking around in your lineage going into the past.
Sometimes they're vaguely related, but they're still distinct concepts and not directly intertwined. It's analogous to the concept of state and country pride, you might be proud of your state, and also your country, in different though familiar respects.
I'm ethnically pennsylvanian, and you can't define my ethnicity out of existence.
i'm not defining it out of existence, you're the one defining it into existence, i don't think there is such thing as an ethnic Pennsylvanian.
I'm not even sure the state has been around long enough that you could even start to approach that term. This is why it's a demonym.
Ethnicity is generally related to long running family heritage. Which also means that it's generally some form of mixed, Caucasian being the most generous group category of all of them, ironically.
Speaking of ethnicity, the origin behind the term Caucasian, is literally that humanity started in the Caucasus mountains. Which is definitely bullshit, now technically Caucasian is referring to race, but it's used to refer to ethnicity these days, since race is kind of, bullshit anyway.
i mean your family might originate from what is now Pennsylvania, but that doesn't make them Pennsylvanian, that would make them natives of a specific descent, most of which is likely gone from your modern lineage, unless you kept it all within the group somehow. American expansion was one hell of a history lesson.
I am ethnically a pennsylvanian as you (and I, and every other source I've found) have defined ethnicity. I don't understand why you don't want my ethnicity to exist but kindly refrain from trying to deny it out loud like a fucking bigot.
yeah but it doesn't really make any sense though. Prior to Pennsylvania being Pennsylvania, it was literally Swedish. (well, and whatever other colony existed in that part at the time, the swedes are just one example)
By this argument, i'm [insert generic Midwestern state here] but that doesn't change the fact that i'm a mix of European, Germanic, and some other general flavor of mostly European lineage.
The states existence has no influence on my ethnic roots, just like how modern state lines in current day america don't like up with the original colonies. You could argue it's a part of your identity, and that's why it's a demonym. Unless you're stupid and don't realize i'm talking about the Pennsylvanian state in America, in which case i question how long you've been on the internet.
Ethnicity is a much broader term than demonym, you're talking about something on the scale of demonyms, a 4 story office building, i'm talking about ethnicity, something on the scale of the empire state building. These are simply two different things.
Also to be clear, i'm not denying your ethnicity, i'm arguing that you're using the term ethnicity wrong, because that's not ethnically relevant, it's a demonym, if you were to say your demonym was Pennsylvanian, i would agree with you. It doesn't take more than a few seconds of googling to realize you're just trolling.
Your statement is almost as bad as me arguing that i'm not ethnically white, because i have a 10% Hispanic ethnic basis. Which i'm sure both you and me, would agree, is fucking stupid.
in fact doing some cursory list looking here, wikipedia suggests that "Pennsylvania dutch" is a thing, but that's not what you're saying, and it has roots in Germanic, as well as seemingly the Amish? Though it's also protestant. And seeing as you're saying you have native heritage in your blood, i'm guessing you're probably not Amish.
whiteness is racism. it's not an ethnicity.
i'm not. i'm pennsylvanian in that there is a particular culture and shared identity that i would continue to use to identify even in the absence of the state. it's an ethnicity whether you like it or not. you can't gatekeep the existence of ethnicities, and you can't gatekeep an ethnicity that you aren't even part of.
yeah and i also live in a state, my ethnicity is literally not that state though. My ethnicity is more broad than that, it has roots in europe, and it's various traces of genaology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnonym Maybe i didn't link this last time, but this is the variant of demonym, but for ethnicity. In order for pennsylvania to be on the ethnicities list, it would have to have some form of long standing, genetic run through many, many years of human history, enough to the point where there is a pretty substantial genetic grouping between these people, in comparison to other people. The state's largest ancestry groups, expressed as a percentage of total people who responded with a particular ancestry for the 2010 census, were German 28.5%, Irish 18.2%, Italian 12.8%, African Americans 9.6%, English 8.5%, Polish 7.2%, and French 4.2%.[102][103] if you have a look at the population demographic, fascinatingly, it's primarily germanic, irish, italian, and the other usual suspects. Ethnicity is very broadly defined, but it's generally as evidenced by basically every example of it, is extremely long running. Pennsylvania is like 200 years old. The vast majority of settlers would've been of european descent,
The USSR existed for a shorter period of time, but a much more restricted period of time, and weirdly, is not it's own ethnic majority. They're all slavic.
funnily, i'm not, i'm just arguing that it isn't an ethnicity, because you have given me no reasonable evidence that leads me to believe that it is an actual ethnicity other than "trust me bro"
arguably, you're ascribing me an ethnicity that i don't identify with, which is probably something that last i checked, you can't do. But apparently i don't make the rules here so.
Unless you can give me an argument thats more compelling than the definition of demonym fitting the terminology you're using, and how better than it currently does, i'm simply not going to agree with you.
that never happened. your gas lighting and ethnocidal monologues are disgusting.
by your definition of the word, if i lived in iowa, my ethnicity would iowan, but that's just fundamentally not true.
ethnocidal is a new one though, i'll give you that.
this is a strawman
it doesn't help that you aren't providing any additional context or elaboration on your point. You literally just said you live in Pennsylvania, and therefore, you are ethnically Pennsylvanian.
your accusation of bad faith is, itself bad faith.
You're a white dude, that's a fact, you can dress it up as much as you want but that's the whole point of this post.