Cis is now labelled as a possible slur on X

[User1979289]

https://twitter.com/xdaily/status/1790714602101285101

Good.

Well, good.
Because I fucking hate it.

Well that's good. Because I'm not fucking cis anything.

Good. It is more than a slur, it is bullshit, delusional and entitled.

I agree with that decision.

I thought that has been the case since sometime last year?
Maybe they only just added the auto warning.

Ahhh, that made me smile. I'm not really familiar with twitter/X, is there any chance it was just a post by one person? Does twitter/X have a list of slurs they don't support?

Good.

Slur or incoherent nonsense. Either way, good.

Excellent

Good. Why should almost the entire human race be defined as not trans.

And, more specifically, it's always infuriated me that all women should be defined as 'not a man who identifies as a woman.'

The utter bullshit misogyny of defining a woman starting with 'not a man who...'

I am not keen on this.

I don't really like it as a term and would never use it or apply it to myself. I also think it's a stupid concept.

But I don't think it is a slur. That would imply someone is using it offensively, in order to be offensive. I don't think that's the meaning. <people who use it think it has real meaning.

It is true in some cases a person might use it disparagingly, but that is true of any characteristic description or identity grouping.

Which is to say, just because I think someone's use of language and belief is dumb, and maybe I don't really like being slotted into their worldview on that basis, it is not appropriate to try and control other people's beliefs about reality or the general expression of those beliefs.

It's a direct path to bad shit.

I would really hate to see people who have fought against this bs, once they start to be on the side with some power or general popular support, take on the kinds of tactics they have themselves been subject to. We've all seen where the attempts to suppress speech, ideas, and discussion have gone. What happens when civil liberties organizations that used to protect the speech rights of neonazis, and actual Nazis, for that matter, are now wanting to legally shut down people who say TWANW.

@TempestTost but in most cases cis is used as a slur or a put down. I am not cis, it is offensive to refer to me as cis as I do not identify as a woman. Using cis as my identity is simply wrong. Suggesting that I have cis privilege is a complete joke, being correctly sexed as a woman is not a privilege.

Cis has been considered a slur on X since the start of Elon Musk's tenure.

Unless someone specifically states that they identify as cis, it's misgendering to call them cis. Misgendering is one of the worst things that could be done to a person (much, much worse than mere rape and death threats aimed at women) so it's obviously hate speech

I'm not entirely comfortable with it either. Maybe I'm missing something and need to think it through more, but I'm not sure I regard being called 'cis' as a slur exactly. I see it more as being on a par with being called a 'Piscean' - a piece of nonsense that gives me a useful insight into the mindset of the person using it. It only becomes offensive to me if I'm compelled to adopt it myself.

For consistency with my stance on pronouns, I don't feel I can lay down the law about how others refer to me, as long as they are polite.

It doesn't say anything about my beliefs either. If you tell me @Floisme is a Pisces, I will know when she was born, but not whether she believes in astrology.

Banning feeds a sense of victimisation.

That's not what a slur is. The person saying it thinks it's a real category, and that you (and others) really fall into it. People have a right to think and even say things like that, whether you agree with the category or not.

They can't force you to accept that category, or use that language.

It's no different than a transman or transwoman trying to stop you for referring to them as their sex. You are allowed to think their ideology is bollocks, and use the category and language you think reflects reality. Even if they don't like it and feel it disregards their identity.

Trying to control people's language so it can only describe the world as you believe it to be is the exact mirror image of what TRAs have been trying to do. That is not bad just because they have an ideology that's not in touch with reality. It's wrong because people are entitled to their ideologies, and to describe the world in the way they think is accurate.

If cis was means to be inherently dehumanizing or diminishing, that would be a different story. That's what a slur is.

Honestly, sometimes it's not too hard to see the way in which the tactics of TRAs came out of the authoritarian left, it seems like enforcing rightspeak is baked in at times. There's no right not to find other people's ideas offensive or incoherent.

So you are ok with enforcing use of prefered pronouns?!

No, just using their logic. Preferred pronouns is bollocks and I refuse to use them. I get on with my transwoman neighbour but always refer to him as him when talking with others.

TempestTost If cis was means to be inherently dehumanizing or diminishing, that would be a different story. That's what a slur is.

'Slur' has a wider use these days, it refers to words that are deemed unacceptable or offensive, to a person or group.

I don't believe there has to be malicious intent behind it, or that it has to be 'inherently dehumanizing or diminishing', I'm sure there are lots of cases where people have said something or used a term for a group which is not inherently dehumanising or diminishing, but is not, or is no longer, acceptable.

It is the settled opinion of the group concerned that determines whether it is offensive or not. It's not acceptable for Group A to come up with a label for Group B, and tell them they can like it or lump it.

So it's not acceptable for Group A to tell Group B that they shall be called 'cis', even though they don't like it, don't agree with it, contest its meaning and find it offensive. Therefore, I think the current use of 'slur' is valid here, as 'cis' it is deemed unacceptable and offensive to the people to whom it is applied.

It's no different than a transman or transwoman trying to stop you for referring to them as their sex.
Sex is an observable biological fact, and trying to stop people from stating observable biological facts is a different thing altogether.

Rightly so

Hurrah!

I've never heard Cis before - what does it mean?