CIS

Because it is an innate response. How do you know you are conscious?

That's not my argument. My argument is that no one needs to decide, they are. You know that you are you, you don't need to sometimes think I am Ms Theft. In the same way someone else knows that they are they.

So how can someone born male "know" they aren't male? My son is quite feminine. He's still a man.

How do I "know" I'm a woman other than because of my female body?

That's not my argument. My argument is that no one needs to decide, they are. You know that you are you, you don't need to sometimes think I am Ms Theft. In the same way someone else knows that they are they.

🙄 You're under the impression that people need to have a bit of a think in order to decide whether they were born female or not?

You are one because you know you are one. I think therefore I am.

You are one because you know you are one. I think therefore I am.

If the innate feelings do not match the sex at birth

If the innate feelings do not match the sex at birth

I'm just a woman. I don't need to identify as one, because I am one.

HTH

If the innate feelings do not match the sex at birth

If the innate feelings do not match the sex at birth

Exactly you are a woman who also identifies as being a woman.

By your logic the feelings a man (ie male born person) has are those of a man by definition. So how can a man be a (trans) woman?

Exactly you are a woman who also identifies as being a woman.

I don't.

I just am a woman.

No need to "identify" as one.

Because the feelings you have are innately you. But you can describe them as you have and cannot separate yourself from them. Therefore your feelings are part of you and those feelings are those of a woman by definition. You identify as being a woman.

Apologies sounds like we’re on the same page. I hate “cis”. I find it rude and I wouldn’t use it. Equally in conversation I wouldn’t go out of my way to describe someone as a trans woman, because it’s rude. In general though we need language to distinguish between women and men who feel they are. Trans women works fine. But in my head they are men, and that’s ok as long as I’m polite, I think.

I mean in the same way black people can choose a word used to describe them is offensive, so can women. Women in most cases find the word Cis being used to describe them offensive or just unnecessary, it shouldn't be something they have to just accept or get over being called, if they want to use it to describe themselves as an individual, then fine.
Trans women can also choose to call themselves whatever they fancy, but in the same way I can't announce I'm now a black person
... They also are not a woman. I certainly couldn't announce I'm black now and start using words offensive to people that were born black because I wanted to distinguish between myself and them despite also saying white women who decide they are black, are black women. I could wear fake tan to darken my skin, it wouldn't change my biology and it could never make me understand the struggles of racism that they have endured over their lives and it would be unacceptable to pretend to. I wouldn't have the same medical risks, if I lied by self identifying the wrong ethnicity on medical information, it could be harmful to myself but also to useful medical statistics for black people as I would dilute the scientific data which helps to identify if certain ethnicities are at risk of certain medical issues and less people may get medical screening

Basically I'm saying language can be offensive and words being used to describe a massive chunk of society should be dictated by the majority of that, not by the small percentage who aren't part of that society. Transwomen are free to call themselves whatever they like, words like 'tranny' don't get used in general now to describe them as this is outdated and you would never see it in a BBC article why is 'cis' any different, there are few women that would choose to use that word to generally describe themselves, woman is quite sufficient.

Logging male crimes as female ones because they seem themselves as fully female dilutes crime data, could make it seem like male crime is dipping while female crime is increasing.

Language is important. Although I think transwomen should be free to wear what they want, live generally how they want if they are not encroaching on women's single sex spaces, not be abused. I don't think they should take rights or safety measures away from women and I think language has an ability to harm women when misused also

From what I can work out, the end result is the destabilisation of some societal values through the destabilisation of established science. I believe that a group of people wish their beliefs to be considered accepted and have developed philosophical theories, such as queer theory which links with gender identity theory, to do this.

And you are right in that it is patriarchal and misogynistic. The groups who are involved have used tactics to try to hide their misogyny. Some by claiming to be female people and therefore claiming oppression using the axis of sexism etc.

When I first read that campaign groups had strategy documents about how best to do this such as the Denton's report and the Trans Law Centre communication strategy document, it started to fall into place. These groups were actively attaching their aims onto the legitimate aims of other groups in a deliberate strategy. It had a chilling effect.

Language has been a very huge part of this strategy. The use of the words 'cis' is part of that.

So too is the public shaming that happens when language demands (and they are demands despite many people declaring they are not and declaring it is 'just respectful') are not complied with. These groups have opened up society to bullying by those who I can only think feel righteous in admonishing, demonising and berating others who don't comply with the language around these topics.

Pronoun use is very much a part of that. Just think of the pressure that people have to announce their pronouns and the shaming that goes on when people used the established language conventions for pronouns rather than complying with requests / demands.

In case you want to read these documents, here they are:

You can find the Dentons report through this link .

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/iglyo_v3-1.pdf

This is the link for the Messaging Guide : Transgender Youth and the Freedom to Be Ourselves

From December 2021

static1.<a class="break-all" href="//www.squarespace.com/static/5fd0f29d0d626c5fb471be74/t/61b13d00236e2f7f2dbb9a36/1639005441624/Transgender+Youth+and+the+Freedom+to+Be+Ourselves.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">squarespace.com/static/5fd0f29d0d626c5fb471be74/t/61b13d00236e2f7f2dbb9a36/1639005441624/Transgender+Youth+and+the+Freedom+to+Be+Ourselves.pdf

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4439659-Ryan-Grim-results-of-latest-trans-activism-poll-A-tweaked-playbook-for-the-US?reply=113763453

The Transgender Law Center’s work.

This link also shows a 'playbook' on how to leverage other social justice issues to manipulate people into supporting beliefs not upheld with any factual or scientific evidence at all. In fact, in this link above, the general population are called 'persuadables'. They are not hiding that this is pure emotional manipulation.

And finally, here is something similar from the UK Greens. Just in case people still doubt that there is an emotionally manipulative tactic being used across the world. This one gives people stock answers that they believe will work to either shame people into agreeing with them or that they feel will be 'convincing'.

https://lgbtiqa.greenparty.org.uk/2023/06/15/dogwhistle-guidance/

it is in archive sites if you want to track it down.

Caution: the link to the Greens includes some misinformation presented as 'facts'. Happy to have a discussion about this with anyone with questions.

And? Don’t understand where you’re going with this. I was asking the PP I quoted if both women and trans women had to accept being called something they object to?

The comparison with the racial slur you mention is a false one; calling someone a man may be something that doesn't like but it’s not near-universally recognised as offensive. It also doesn’t have the history that’s offensive. If someone wants me to use the feminine forms of address even if they are a man I will because I don’t think that hurts anyone and certainly doesn’t hurt me. But any decision other than the SC one would have been hugely problematic in many ways.

In a functional society we need to have commonality; one person’s preferences cannot dictate how we all behave. Indeed that would be impossible because we all want different things - as demonstrated by the extreme polarisation around this issue. Not everybody can have what they want.

This differs from your racial slur example where a social consensus has largely been achieved - few people other than with the “cultural permission” use it. Those that do are in the vast majority those who mean it to be offensive. Some people are vile.