To despise being called ‘cis’?

[Ostryga]

I’m not ‘cis’. I’m not ‘cisgendered’. I’m literally a woman. I’ve just read a guardian article that calls women seeking IVF cisgendered.

Why????

I thought an online discussion was about everyone who wanted participating and answering the points they found interesting? And let the discussion flow?

Are we supposed to be centering one person?

Anyway, I am not happy with CIS.

I am very happy with this thread. I have so many new arguments to make after reading the interesting posts here.

Ah - other posters tone police but you just engage in a bit of verbal self defence, I see. So why were you policing Arabella’s tone again…? You really did sound like you needed a bit of a break.

I mean, you did advise me and Eresh upthread to “take a break/take a nap”, and I don’t really know, was that a genuine piece of advice or was it in a snide tone?

It’s like shooting fish in a barrel here; but I really do think you clearly aren’t up for the concept of the AIBU board. Even FWR is less combative. As I said, this is a very calm thread for AIBU - you try posting on some other topics here and you’ll have a fire lit under your bum (metaphorically). You should see some of the “tone policing” that goes on on here! Your eyes would pop out

Fucksake! I genuinely was not being patronising, Helloise. I wandered into a thread that was on 'trending' and caught a bit of it. I hadn't read most of your contributions, just saw a poster that seemed to be a bit overwrought and made a comment that perhaps was insensitive, for which I'm sorry if you felt it that way.

Having read back over some of your contributions, though, I must say that you are really coming across as very rude. Repeatedly so. It's unnecessary.

Do you actually have a comment on the use of 'cis'? (This thread is nothing to do with chromosomal disorders). You're a woman. Great. How do you feel about being called 'cis'?

She was being patronising though! She told me to calm down and have a cup of tea.

Prior to that you told her, and others, to have a nap!

That you got a response in the same vein is par for the course, in any debate!

Again, you are insisting we are Alice to your Humpty!

I have not had a nap! I feel fine!

@Ereshkigalangcleg

She was being patronising though! She told me to calm down and have a cup of tea.

I seem to remember you told both foxglove and I to "have a nap" because we dared to disagree with you, Helloise. Forgotten that?

Yes, I do! You can feel free to tell me off for it just like I did with Arabella. Though I didn't tell you to have a nap for disagreeing with me, you still haven't managed to do that coherently - it was because you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said. In any case, It's still not fucking "tone policing". Read the definition again. Like, honestly, you're not even trying. Guess you didn't get your nap in after all.

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

She was being patronising though! She told me to calm down and have a cup of tea.

Prior to that you told her, and others, to have a nap!

That you got a response in the same vein is par for the course, in any debate!

Again, you are insisting we are Alice to your Humpty!

wtf is is this alice/humpty thing? I haven't read the book, sorry, I try to avoid the work of paedophiles.

Yes, I do! You can feel free to tell me off for it just like I did with Arabella. Though I didn't tell you to have a nap for disagreeing with me, you still haven't managed to do that coherently - it was because you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said. In any case, It's still not fucking "tone policing". Read the definition again. Like, honestly, you're not even trying. Guess you didn't get your nap in after all.

Is this another way of saying "I can be patronising because my reading of your post is that you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said, but you can't because that makes you a big fat meanie (even if your reading of my post is that I was deliberately misrepresenting what you said)?"

As much as I admire the detailing powers of certain posters...

Back on topic, cis my arse

derailing

it was because you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said

No, I just said I thought foxglove was clear, and you didn't like me supporting her, as you said

So, ANYWAY. The cat's mother here would like to get back to the point of the thread.

Poll now is 1500+ and still on 92% YANBU, OP.

I think we can conclusively say you are definitely NOT being unreasonable.

Has there ever been any research done on the use of 'cis'? Has anyone ever actually asked women if they are happy to be renamed like this? (Outwith of MN, I mean.) Would be good to know.

I've never heard of any, Arabella.

I'm still waiting for someone to define 'woman.' Pretty fucking cheeky to create subsets of something you can't explain.

I too would like to know whether a survey has been done which details what 'cis' means and asks the question. I suspect it won't get done because it would be deemed problematic to 'remove' the language a small group of people apparently need to describe themselves.... like allocating every one else as being 'binary' to their 'non-binary'.

It is, really, isn't it?

Helloise has done a lovely job of making this thread all about how upsetting it is when people are allowed to talk back to you. I know, it's horrid.

I think we should get back to the actual topic.

You can feel free to tell me off for it just like I did with Arabella.

But we didn't / aren't

Though I didn't tell you to have a nap for disagreeing with me, you still haven't managed to do that coherently - it was because you were deliberately misrepresenting what I said.

Or maybe because we interpreted your anger in a way you dind't like?

In any case, It's still not fucking "tone policing".

Yes, it really is!

Read the definition again.

What? The one that includes it being an ad hominem and anti-debate tactic based on criticizing a person when the argument slides out from under you?

Like, honestly, you're not even trying.

Trying to what? Annoy you? No, not doing that.

Guess you didn't get your nap in after all And there you go again, if you could but see it.

And the Humpty reference is quite well known, used quite a bit here:

“When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less. ' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things. '

You don't read the works of paedophiles? None? No films, books, essays, music either? Mmmmn. I doubt that is even possible these days, sometimes there only has to be a hint of an issue and out comes the accusation... So, no Grisham? No Matzneff? No John Green? Naomi Wolf trod a fine line. Chrissy Teigen and John Legend, perhaps?

How do you decide? Given that words mean just what you say they do?

@beastlyslumber

Helloise has done a lovely job of making this thread all about how upsetting it is when people are allowed to talk back to you. I know, it's horrid.

I think we should get back to the actual topic.

I hear you and shall retreat from the fray!.

I am not now and never shall accept the appellation 'cis'. I hight woman!

My position on the identity label "cis", as I have mentioned on many such threads in FWR, is that it isn't true to say that it just means "not trans". It presupposes a belief in gender identity ideology that I simply do not share.

If it just meant "not trans" then as a woman who isn't trans a "trans woman" would be an FTM trans person. Not a male. A woman is an adult human female. I won't prop up an ideology I believe to be based on untruths and regressive stereotypes. I don't think that's a fair or reasonable expectation.

On the subject of a poll

Where could do one that would be more representative?

I can’t imagine other sites would be more receptive than here to even talking about it as a topic

If it just meant "not trans" then as a woman who isn't trans a "trans woman" would be an FTM trans person

It really doesn't make sense ... at all. And seems unnecessarily confusing, to me.

A transwoman is a transwoman (a male person). And a woman is a woman (female). That's clear enough.

I still think this article is really good.

liberationcollective.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/a-feminist-critique-of-cisgender/

The cis/trans binary does not, and cannot, account for the experiencesof people with complicated, blended, or changing “gender identities;” nor does it address people with hostile relationships to gender in general. As a woman-born-woman who rejectsfemininity as females’ destiny,I surely do notidentify withmy assigned gender in the way that “cis” describes.Indeed, no one holding radical feminist/anti-essentialist views about gender could be considered “cis”because, by definition of these views, we reject gender as a natural social category that every personidentifies with. Feminists do not believe that everyone has a “gender identity,” or that we all possess some kind of internal compass directing ouridentification with“gender.”

(Continues)

Feminine gender conformity ala “cis” does not protect women (trans or not) from gendered oppression. While a man’s gender conformity with masculinity—both aesthetic and behavioral— will substantially insulate him from sex and gender motivated oppression and violence, a woman’s appropriate conformity to stereotypical femininity doesnot. The 2011 SlutWalk campaign (hopefully) served as a grave reminder that victim-blaming, woman-blaming rhetoric is alive and well in mainstream social discourse. The perception that women “bring it on ourselves” or “ask for it” when we dress in certain,undeniablyfeminineways is very wrong, but also very real. Some predators are even documented as specifically targeting conventionally “attractive” women.

The first good-looking girl I see tonight is going to die.

Edward Kemper, serial killer.[vii]

As long as stereotypical femininity remains the controlling standard of beauty for women, feminine-appearing women (trans or not) will be eye-catching targets for misogynistic violencebecause oftheir perceived “beauty.”In other words,becausethey are feminine-conforming.

Further, socially defined femininebehaviorssuch ashospitality, care-taking, and a socially structured desire for male sexual attention contribute to women’s vulnerability to exploitation. When a woman’s social performance (trans or not) is consistent with feminine subordination to male authority, rapists and other abusers may target these women as easy victims on the assumption that they will be less likely to resist unwanted advances.

I don’t like cis because it makes biological women a subset of women.

Then you try to centre women’s issues like maternity leave, abortion, endometriosis, menopause. But suddenly not all “women” are interested in that. Because it only affects biological women.

I have heard of women discussing endometriosis being thrown out of Facebook groups. Because the fact that they discussed it made the transwomen (biological males) dysphoric.

Women need to be able to centre women. Transwomen needs to be supported and allowed to centre transwomen.