Because of course being a woman is all about wearing pink and makeup

[thundercunt]

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/may/03/jordan-raskopoulos-makeup-is-this-proto-symbol-of-femininity?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

Ffs - it's like a bloody game of dress-up!

I'm still holding out that the eyeliner article is a big piss take - otherwise it's just scarily depressing

Gingernaut - I think the phrase is "womanface"

Another confused 'trans man' here!

Although, I'm going to tell my boss on Monday. I can't wait for my pay rise!

If the full body picture is how Katelyn really dressed to go to the supermarket then it's no wonder people stared. What the hell were they thinking? Did they not observe what other people go shopping in? That would be a strange outfit for anyone at the store (in the daytime at least), whether they were 18 or 34. It's a good example of the fantasy life that it appears many transwomen aspire to, which doesn't seem to be of a contemporary woman, but more of a pre-teen (which is what that picture reminds me of, as my 16 year old has grown out of that look already - the second picture is just disturbing).

I can understand the challenge, and the lack of forgiveness that I think they are referring to (we forgive teenagers for looking a bit bizarre where what appears to be an adult man wearing similar stuff just seems highly inappropriate dressing up). I still don't think that's a good excuse, it's not as if there aren't hundreds of adult women to model your look on after all.

It was a good article though, a bit more grounded and self aware than many. I still find the later looks overly vampy, but I recognise that there are women who look like that, and there is way less 'look at me' going on.

The other article I thought was rather sad. If he had been embraced as a feminine man as a teenager then he'd have had a much happier life. Why has that apparently become impossible?

On the plus side, yesterday they published a 10,000 word piece entitled "Where oil rigs go to die"

For those of us who are more interested in oil rigs than make-up

Well done. It is possible to be interested in both.

What an over reaction most of the posts on here are. The person being interviewed did not in any way say that being a woman is all about wearing pink and make up so really no need for the "ooh I must be a man" posts.

She was describing her own experience of using make up without having gone through the experimental teenage years. Newsflash teenage girls on the whole are more likely to try out make up than teenage boys so it was hardly a controversial statement.

The premise of the series is a somewhat silly, fluff piece occupying a few hundred words. Still plenty of room for 10,000 word articles on oil rigs. Not everything has to be serious and important.

I did not find any of the 4 articles particularly interesting as I don't know who any of the interviewees were. However the premise is not a million miles away from several interviews Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has given where she talks about make up and appearance.

I have friends on Facebook who talk about make up a lot - the rest of the time it's about food, how much they love their 'hubs' and then how BORED they are. It does make me wonder what goes on between their ears when their whole life seems to revolve around looking pretty for their man and then making him dinner. So regressive

Do you say that to their faces or just snipe about them behind their backs?

Lass your post is a breath of fresh air!

The article series is about female writers and makeup. It'd be weird for them not to discuss makeup. If they weren't trans would a discussion of makeup have the same impact on you?

I also don't understand what is so offensive about cis. I only here it used in conversations where they need to differentiate between trans and not trans. Normally on these discussions people say they are happy to call someone the gender they wished to be called, so if that's true and your discussing a trans woman and non trans woman why is it so offensive to use it? To me it's the same as using 'neurotypical', it's less offensive than calling someone 'normal' and therefore implying the other person is 'not normal '.

And many teenage girls DO go through awkward makeup phase , it's the age when people who wear it as adults tend to start experimenting with it ! Not all teens but a huge amount! So why is that so offensive??

If a cis woman
What? Oh, right. You mean a woman.
cisgender?
Stop indulging these people. They are trying to change the truth to suit themselves.

I agree with Lass and RaRa. The whole concept for this series of articles is a bit bobbins really. Given the framework for the interview, I don't see anything objectionable in Jordan's answer. Jordan is hardly likely to have chose the sub-heading for the article

Barbara Cartland is obviously the ultimate woman

shows age

You don't need to qualifier for the word woman (or man).

You don't need a prefix for 99.9% of the world's population in order to differentiate them from the remainder.

Who would accept a description that means you're totally comfortable with the oppressive role that women have had imposed on them?

And you're not even being asked.

I also don't understand what is so offensive about cis. I only here it used in conversations where they need to differentiate between trans and not trans.

You don't need the 'cis' prefix to differentiate between trans and not trans. 'Trans woman' and 'woman' does the job just fine.

No the article does NOT describe one person's experience of makeup. This is a direct quote from the article: "Makeup being this proto-symbol of femininity and the attitude towards masculinity, if you were male, having any interest in makeup made you less male."
That attempts to speak on behalf of all society about makeup, which is ironically stereotypically male privileged.

As Datun said, cis is offensive because it's unnecessary and describes a role that oppressed women. Gender is a prison that stops women from achieving their full potential and the word cis seeks to make gender inate. Ciswoman is NOT the opposite of transwoman, it's a slur word.

It is this persons experience of makeup though. And if I'm honest, I've never heard of the phrase 'proto- symbol' but in the context I'm pretty sure they were saying from their childhood view: makeup was viewed as 'girly' and as a child they were trying very hard to appear 'boyish' and therefore hid and felt ashamed of their fondness for makeup . I hardly think that's offensive sterotyping. Makeup IS associated with looking feminine! It's a shame because little boys should be able to play with makeup if they want to, but it's undeniable that they'd get some odd looks and negative comments for doing so.

I do think there are issues with trans movement such as sport , safe spaces for women etc but this thread stinks of finding something to be offended about.

No the article does NOT describe one person's experience of makeup. This is a direct quote from the article: "Makeup being this proto-symbol of femininity and the attitude towards masculinity, if you were male, having any interest in makeup made you less male."
That attempts to speak on behalf of all society about makeup, which is ironically stereotypically male privileged

One general comment saying make up is seen as a feminine thing not a masculine thing. And you disagree that generally that is exactly how society views make up? It's a comment I've seen countless times on FWR- that society is unwiling to accept men wearing make up.

The article did not say anything resembling what the OP has interpreted it to mean. The determination on this thread to be offended is awesome.

What was that drivel I've just read?

And what is a cis woman? I'm a woman, an actual biological woman. A trans woman is a trans woman.

Why do trans people call non trans people cis? It reminds me of cissy which has negative connotations? Is cis short for something else?

Gah It was a short fluff piece about make up. It is obvious from this thread and the strap line that it is a short fluff piece about writers and their relationship with make up. As booksandcrocheting said it's a bit bobbins as a concept. If you are not interested in make up you didn't have to read it. The article doesn't even mention "cis".

Barbara Cartland is obviously the ultimate woman Rather silly comment, not in the least bit borne out by the article.

I agree with rara this thread stinks of a determination to be offended.

I particularly loved "because I used to play and paint Warhammer as a boy I am actually quite good at makeup".

Well I used to play and paint Airfix as a girl and I'm shit at makeup.

I also did not get the memo about the adolescent makeup phase for girls.

Neither did many of my school friends. We did not wear pink either. Have we done woman wrong?

I also don't understand what is so offensive about cis. I only here it used in conversations where they need to differentiate between trans and not trans. Normally on these discussions people say they are happy to call someone the gender they wished to be called, so if that's true and your discussing a trans woman and non trans woman why is it so offensive to use it?

If cis just meant 'not trans' I wouldn't mind using it. But it doesn't, it means being happy with the gender identity that matches your biological sex. I don't have a sense of gender identity at all (it's a social construct!) and I certainly don't identify with all the feminine stereotypes that have been used to oppress women (and which feminism should be about challenging). If you want to call people by the gender they wish to be called, please don't call us cis.

dArtagnansCrumpet

It has a scientific meaning, along the lines of 'on the same side as'.

The trans-community will say it means that you are comfortable when both your sex and gender are in alignment.

As gender is used historically to divide the sexes and oppress women, most women would not be comfortable with accepting wholesale their stereotypical gender role (submissive, passive, nurturing).

So it doesn't really fit most women anyway.

But it is in such common usage now, that it is merely being used to differentiate between trans and non-trans. Which is completely unnecessary. There are transwomen and women. I don't need a prefix forced on me that indicates the root of women's oppression - ironically.

For all of you objecting to the use of "cis" why not direct your points to poster WellErr who for no reason introduced it by posting this early on the thread

WellErrr

Cis is offensive

The article itself never mentioned "cis"

Neither did many of my school friends. We did not wear pink either. Have we done woman wrong?

No Hulder you are not doing woman wrong. How you can spin that article to that conclusion however is stunning.

You might have missed the memo about make up since you clearly missed the memo that all people are individuals, some of whom are/were interested in make up.

You could thatch a house with the amount of straw men arguments on this thread. First prize in thatching goes to WellErr for lobbying in "cis"

The thing is Lass, whilst you might be, say, technically right, everything about the author of that article says autogynephilia.

From the initial desire to dress in a girly way, to being jealous of the other women in the make up room, from the interest in overly feminine things from his youth.

Whether you, or anyone else, thinks he is or not, to me it's patently obvious.

The first mention of 'cis' on this thread was actually dinosaursandtea who said:

If a cis woman talked about makeup in her interview, you'd leave it alone - they do that all the time!

WellErr was responding to that.