-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Why do some cisgender people hate the term cisgender?
- Thread starter Ryo Hazuki
- Start date
- Status
Cisgender folks who don't like the label are that way because accepting the label forces them to validate trans people.
I don't think I've ever seen it invoked out of context, and it's hard to not read your concern as "I don't like when things are contextualized through the prism of cis privilege".
Your heart seems to be in the right place. But probably best not to bring the experiences of POC into the convo, IMHO.
This problem is this problem. And cis peoples' refusal to acknowledge the prefix is a problem.
This is legitimately what I was going to say lol.
I don't have any issues with its use as outlined in the OP. It's literally the word itself I find unappealing. "Trans" sounds cool. "Cis" does not sound cool. It needs to be a cooler word!
"My gender identity is not important to me" - then it shouldn't be a problem to be referred to as you present and are interpreted as. You are free to change your mind as to whether or not it's important to you
"My gender identity is important to me and I'm cis" - weird flex but go off cis. If I catch you making a cisgender flag or something I'm reporting you to the authorities just fyi
"My gender identity is important to me and I'm not cis" - then you're not cis. Congratulations have a free pink lemonade
Please tell me where the problem is
"My gender identity is important to me and I'm cis" - weird flex but go off cis. If I catch you making a cisgender flag or something I'm reporting you to the authorities just fyi
"My gender identity is important to me and I'm not cis" - then you're not cis. Congratulations have a free pink lemonade
Please tell me where the problem is
I managed a call center early in my career. We had a lot of Spanish speaking callers, so we added a prompt at the beginning of the IVR. Press 1 for English, 2 for Spanish.
Within a week I had literally HUNDREDS of complaints from English speaking callers that were offended they were asked to identify as English speaking, rather than being assumed the default.
I imagine the psychology is along those same lines.
Within a week I had literally HUNDREDS of complaints from English speaking callers that were offended they were asked to identify as English speaking, rather than being assumed the default.
I imagine the psychology is along those same lines.
This article is really fascinating on the subject: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170315-the-invention-of-heterosexuality
The TLDR version for folks who won't read it is that the term was invented, along with homosexuality and two others, to categorize erotic desires. Until that point, sexuality was instead categorized as being procreative (i.e. for the purpose of reproduction) and non-procreative. The former was acceptable, the latter was not. And so because the term was first used to describe non-procreative erotic desires, the term heterosexual was seen originally as a negative abnormality (as in being overly sexually preoccupied with the opposite sex).
BUT, that shift in how sexuality was discussed (i.e. not in terms of procreation but in terms of desires), created space for the perception to shift over time, meaning that heterosexual sex for pleasure became normalized over time and we are much less likely to be concerned about whether sex is done for procreating. And I'm sure we'll get there re: homosexual sex as well.
Exactly, I have no problem with the concept but when I hear that term it makes me think of having a bunch of growths and I feel gross.
The problem with this is that rejection of the term cisgender is not a question of self-identification. It is basic vocabulary necessary to have conversations about disparity and inequality. There needs to be language to define and discuss dominant classes and groups.Cisgender men and women need to be identified as such so that we can have conversations about cis-centric medicine, for example. Without a basic and obvious word to attribute to the dominant class, the dominant class cannot be discussed. This is an oppressive system.
It is not hostile to call someone cisgender. It is elementary. Someone with nothing to lose denying this terminology is senseless. The term is decades old. It's completely ordinary language. It has an inoffensive function. Resistance to it is very telling. Someone refusing this language should have it explained why this term applies to them and why this term is important. But they don't get to choose whether they are categorically cisgender or not. They are.
Yeah, I totally agree w/ this.
I'm sorry if I misread the scenario you responded to, but wouldn't it actually be a situation where someone tells you "I'm a trans woman," so you call them a trans woman because that is what they want to be called? (i.e. call people what they want to be called)?
Gender, totally. Race, I don't really identify with my ethnic background - mainly because of where I grew up.
But the point was that if a person asked me to call them something, I would call them that - I wouldn't impose my label on them individually, even though I would use it in conversation in general.
If it was an insult you would find people saying "you are a huge cis" to another trans person
What you mostly see is stuff that singles a single individual or stuff like a woman saying "all men are shit"
The only reason I can understand (in a positive way, obviously excluding people who hate it just because it means they can't be called "normal"), is that it's a term applied to them, rather than by them. An example would be how, in Canada, we've changed the general term for "native" people from aboriginal to Indigenous, as they wanted to be called that (not a term applied by a colonizer). So in that sense, I can understand why someone might want to label themselves as straight, for example, rather than cisgender, being that they are more comfortable with the term. Even if the term is considered outdated by some, it is similar to how many "native" people in the US still self-identify as Indian even though that term is considered offensive by many younger Indigenous people.
tl;dr: Some cisgender people likely want to use a term that they want, rather than a term "applied" to them (which is ironic, of course, since the cisgender majority has applied terms to other people through the past). But, I get the impulse.
tl;dr: Some cisgender people likely want to use a term that they want, rather than a term "applied" to them (which is ironic, of course, since the cisgender majority has applied terms to other people through the past). But, I get the impulse.
People don't like being called battle droids
starwars.fandom.com
Confederacy of Independent Systems
It is an honor to stand before you, for you represent the freedom and the future of our galaxy. The once-great Republic and Jedi Order have become victims of their own ambitions, and the Supreme Chancellor is no more than a pawn of corporate monopolies. As a people you called out for change, you...
starwars.fandom.com
Because when they get labels put on them they turn into big babies. To them they're just "normal" and don't need a label even though they insist on putting labels on others.
At this point it seems that the thread into three different conversations, namely:
1) Why some cis people hate the term (the original point),
2) Whether people that don't like to be called cis should still be called cis, and
3) Whether the term needs to exist at all.
Just pointing this out because there's a lot of talking past others as a consequence of people mistaking one conversation for another. I think 3 is so self-obvious that I regret even replying to it to begin with; my position on 2 matches Finale Fireworker's:
1) Why some cis people hate the term (the original point),
2) Whether people that don't like to be called cis should still be called cis, and
3) Whether the term needs to exist at all.
Just pointing this out because there's a lot of talking past others as a consequence of people mistaking one conversation for another. I think 3 is so self-obvious that I regret even replying to it to begin with; my position on 2 matches Finale Fireworker's:
User banned (2 Weeks): Inflammatory generalizations
I personally don't like the term because people of the LGBT community have basically used it in conjunction to saying cis = transphobic. Of course, I'm sure I just came across some of the toxic people from that community.
It pretty much just comes down to people being stubborn and set in their ways and not liking changes to the "normal" paradigm.
...because if even one other type of person exists, then we need a term to show the difference.
Why are you even asking this?
Even if this is true for you, which is hard for me to imagine, it is not a valid point because this experience is not reflective of reality. Cis is an extraordinarily benign term used in a wide variety of academic, medical, and social contexts.
It really cannot be stressed enough that cis is exactly the same as hetero/straight. It is as strange to hear someone say what you are saying as it would be for me to claim "people only use hetero to talk down to others." This is just not true. It is hard to imagine how someone could have this experience. If this is so, I blame social media algorithms. That sucks.
And on a personal note, I don't think trans people resentful about their marginalization counts as talking down. Trans people have a right to be angry.
This is the response I was looking for. People have such a virulent response and this is my best answer.
I don't really care about the word itself, but I would never really use it in the same way I would never say someone is a trans person. I am a man, a trans woman is just a woman etc.
Cis just means your gender matches your assigned sex. It is just a description of what those people literally are. The only reason these people wouldn't want to be called cisgender is because they don't want to consider why the word exists for a variety of bullshit reasons.
This isn't about calling someone something they are not, it is a term that is required to have an honest and fair conversation.
You might be coming from a well meaning place, but this isn't cool. Trans identities, non-binary identities... these things are important to people and carry weight and meaning. You might mean well, but you are effectively erasing things by doing this.
Trans people and non-binary people exist, we should acknowledge this.
It's a totally necessary term, though given how it's sometimes (often?) used in a pejorative manner, I would honor individual preferences about how I refer to people, even while using the term generally when discussing applicable topics. That feels totally reasonable.
I don't know how you can write that in good faith when there are thousands of posts on this forum that use the word and don't do that.
I'm personally not a fan of labelling people in general. I guess that's my privilege as a cisgender male though that I try to stay out of identity politics since I know that they have nothing to do with me. People should just be allowed to live their best life without persecution as long as they aren't hurting anyone.
the insult in "cis scum" is scum
"hear cis as an insult" makes no sense because cis is not the insult
In my admittedly limited experience, when I have encountered pushback to labeling anything cis, it's usually coming from the position that cis is the normal default and shouldn't need to be qualified.
Personally, I actually really like the term even from back before I clocked that I was nonbinary. Finally some marginal use for chemistry knowledge.
Personally, I actually really like the term even from back before I clocked that I was nonbinary. Finally some marginal use for chemistry knowledge.
Yep. And often it goes a step further, in that they claim only the default is real anyway so we don't need any of these terms.
Yeah, I now realize you're missing context (it's actually a perfect example of the confusion because of three different conversations going on that I mention above). What originated the conversation was this post, i.e. argument 3:
Which was later justified with:
It is self-obvious that outside the context of transgender discussion, there's no reason to call anyone a cis woman or trans woman and it would be a non-sequitur (although one has to wonder how often cis people, specifically, have encountered this for it to be a problem...). But the point is transgender discussion exists, and in order for it to exist, we need terms for both cis and trans.
I think for the majority of people, it's just confusion on what it means and change that they haven't been properly educated on, so see it as an insult. And I think that same issue extends to non-cis people as well. And they are all drowned by the very loud transphobic people out there.
I'm gay, and I only recently heard the term Cis, and even more recently discovered what it meant. I'm discovering new identifications every day, and I'm happy that more people are able to express who they are, but it can be overwhelming and hard to follow. And I struggle with keeping up with it all and wish it were more simple, but that's also part of what I need to get better on.
I'm gay, and I only recently heard the term Cis, and even more recently discovered what it meant. I'm discovering new identifications every day, and I'm happy that more people are able to express who they are, but it can be overwhelming and hard to follow. And I struggle with keeping up with it all and wish it were more simple, but that's also part of what I need to get better on.
Most of these people probably wouldn't object to "heterosexual", though.
Ha, bingo!
I do think "cis" does sound silly and I'm surprised it stuck. But I think the reason some people hate the term is just because it sounds weird and they cling to the idea that, as non-trans people, they are "the normal ones."
I think one issue is that trans makes sense to most folks that hear it. Cis is just a made up word (I know it's not made up, I'm speaking as someone who isn't fully in tune to the internet left) no one knows what it means, so the majority of English speakers are just gonna be like "wtf u call me".
I really have to ask what context you've "often" seeing it used in a pejorative manner, because I have pretty much never encountered that.
It's depressing that the first instinct of so many people when encountering an unknown word is that of aprehension instead of curiosity. :(
Bingo.
It feels like this generation's "I don't see color~" nonsense.
Like no, genius, I'm gonna need you to see it, recognize it, and rebuke it, when you encounter it out in the real world.
*sensible chuckle*
Trying to think about it and why it might be perceived differently than hetero ( other than obvious transphobia ), I'd say it's maybe because of the context of exposure ?
Something along the line of mostly hearing it in a context where it's seems like a negative, I'm not saying that how it's mostly used, but that might be how you mostly see it used depending on what/who you read/follow etc.
Something along the line of mostly hearing it in a context where it's seems like a negative, I'm not saying that how it's mostly used, but that might be how you mostly see it used depending on what/who you read/follow etc.
I generally only ever see it or hear it online, whether in videos or on social media. When it's on FB or Twitter, it's most often part of a pejorative comment or response (a la "okay boomer"). It's only ever neutral when it's part of a gender-related discussion (like this one).
Whole lot of comments that feel like "I don't see color" or "We're all people and that's all that matters". Identities are a real thing and if you don't acknowledge that, you're just erasing a whole lot of people.
Uh-huh, is that so?
Uh-huh, is that so?
I'd imagine it's the same reason why I dislike being called Queer , as I identify as Gay. I'm not queer, I remember "Queer" being an extremely offensive thing thrown around when I was younger so the connotation is just negative. Nobody likes to be labeled as something they do not identify as, however, it is often those same people that find it very easy to label others that often get offended, so hypocrisy as well I suppose?
- Status