Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

As we know, 'cis' is a load of BS

71 replies

Leafstamp · 06/07/2021 16:23

I've just seen this on Twitter, and thought it was too good not to share...

twitter.com/HaydenHewitt/status/1412425371744706560

For anyone who doesn't want to click:

If CIS means "on the same side as" and TRANS means "on the opposite side as" does "Trans Woman" mean "on the opposite side as woman". I wonder what the opposite of woman is?

and a couple of replies:

CIS man would be a transwoman.

...This is what happens when you appropriate scientific terms used in genetics, chemistry and geography and use them to enable you to enter female spaces.

OP posts:
Pommie69 · 08/07/2021 13:44

Cis is misgendering the judge at Maja Foirstater's hearing Dec 2019 said so.

NiceGerbil · 08/07/2021 01:48

I said this years ago on here.

That logically if you can ID into the female sex class then it has massive repurcussions for everything, globally.

I pointed out that if you haven't asked the gender you don't know how to record them so you can't.

I was told (by a man) not to be silly.

I also said the end point was in terms of hierarchy

Men- called men
Men who ID as women- called women
Women who ID as men- called men
Women generally- non people. I think I said. Or cunts. It's succinct. And how we're being treated. And has the advantage that it's a word in use already.

This was dunno 5 years ago or more.

Jux · 08/07/2021 00:28

@NiceGerbil

To clarify

I think different groups have different needs and issues.

Trans people should have things to support them.

It's nonsensical to include TW as women. And detrimental. To both women and TW.

the fact that nothing can be female only. But TW can and do have two advocacy areas to join.

Is s tad unbalanced.

It's nonsensical to include TW as women. And detrimental. To both women and TW.

We have been trying to say this for many years now, but we get banned, deplatformed, threatened, lose our jobs, etc etc for it.

Of course it's nonsensical, but apparently TWAW and if you say they're not then you are committing all sorts of hate crime.

NiceGerbil · 07/07/2021 21:40

It's a backlash to the way really useful concepts were bastardised and became hierarchy of oppression etc.

That led to the reaction that people who had lots of oppressor points took it personally and got offended/ defensive/ resented the 'special treatment' of those with more oppression points.

And so some thought if you can't beat em join em.

Original poster
Leafstamp · 07/07/2021 14:02

Heterosexual people are inventing bizarre words to "validate their queerness" in order to get a piece of the rainbow.

This sort of thing is just ridiculous isn't it? And ironically is kind of the opposite of letting people "be their true selves".

OP posts:
Original poster
Leafstamp · 07/07/2021 13:58

[quote Ereshkigalangcleg]Phrenology is not new either. It is however bullshit.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology[/quote]
Perfectly illustrated.

Age of a word/definition/concept does not correlate to it's bullshit status.

OP posts:
TalkingOutYerArse · 07/07/2021 13:34

It is, total bullshit.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/07/2021 13:25

Phrenology is not new either. It is however bullshit.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology

Original poster
Leafstamp · 07/07/2021 13:08

@statsgeek1

I'd be interested to hear what your definition of 'new' is and why it being 'new' or not is relevant to the bullshit status of the term.

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/07/2021 08:45

Of course it isn't a load of 'bullshit'.

I think that's a perfectly reasonable opinion. If one doesn't believe in modern gender identity ideology, like most people, it seems absurd to hear that there are two types of women, the vast majority of female people who identify with their sex and a group of males who say they feel like female people.

OldTurtleNewShell · 07/07/2021 08:02

@statsgeek1

Of course it isn't a load of 'bullshit'.You have every right to challenge it's use but, let'snot pretend it's new.
New in terms of chemistry, no. New in terms of using it with a social construct like gender, yes and certainly in the way the concept is now widespread in applying personal identity labels to those who reject it. 'Cis' is nothing other than the biological essentialism that 'terfs' are always accused of. Nothing screams biological essentialist more than insisting that gender aligns with sex for the majority of people, even for those who reject it.
MagpiePi · 07/07/2021 06:59

Is 'queer' now the same as non-binary?

Are there subtle differences in how special you are, or how your specialness manifests that helps you choose your label?
Do you have to join the 'woke' club to be given access to the list of definitions. Or do you just have to self-identify as woke?

Can I have my own stripe on the mish-mash flag that stands for 'totally confused'? It could be sky blue pink...

statsgeek1 · 07/07/2021 06:54

Of course it isn't a load of 'bullshit'.You have every right to challenge it's use but, let'snot pretend it's new.

WarriorN · 07/07/2021 06:47

Trans people should have things to support them.

There's so much talk of pride. Be proud and honest, don't nick everyone else's needs and spaces.

And the "valid" and validation craze. 😑

WarriorN · 07/07/2021 06:45

Even what Q stands for, some say questioning, some say queer.

Some decide that queer means they have blue hair.

Heterosexual people are inventing bizarre words to "validate their queerness" in order to get a piece of the rainbow.

NiceGerbil · 07/07/2021 01:42

To clarify

I think different groups have different needs and issues.

Trans people should have things to support them.

It's nonsensical to include TW as women. And detrimental. To both women and TW.

the fact that nothing can be female only. But TW can and do have two advocacy areas to join.

Is s tad unbalanced.

NiceGerbil · 07/07/2021 01:38

But this is all fine!

The same way that

TWAW
and so can represent women in women's political groups etc
But also are trans. So TWATW? no! It doesn't work like that. Trans people need their own stuff (that bit is fine by me)

Women? Can we have anything just for the half the world's population oppressed forever?

No! That's exclusionary.

Makes total sense.

Original poster
Leafstamp · 06/07/2021 20:48

Yes I think I have heard chemists explain it’s a nonsense prefix to use. Always good to bring it to the attention of newbies to this board.

Queer puzzles me. From what I can gather a lot of lesbian and gay people (perhaps above a certain age??) consider it offensive/a slur. Yet somehow for others it’s acceptable to use and some describe themselves as queer quite happily.

I think language is a big part of all this, but I’d better not say more about what we call people if I want to keep my account.

OP posts:
donquixotedelamancha · 06/07/2021 20:27

antifa now means something entirely different.

What could be more antifascist than attacking religious minorities in a black-shirted mob?

WarriorN · 06/07/2021 19:55

think chemists have pointed that out here before.
That should say.

WarriorN · 06/07/2021 19:54

Very good! I think chemists have pointed that out before.

This whole movement is about twisting words.

Eg antifa now means something entirely different. As does queer.