Not a slur
Sabine @ThatSabineGirl 21 hours ago
The sheer privilege of an oppressor class whining that they don’t like the word those they oppress use to describe them. It’s incredible.And no, cis/trans is not a binary, no more than skin colour, sexuality, or gender is.
So…it’s not a binary, but we have no right to say it doesn’t describe us. Ok…
There’s more of that careful thinking.
Cis people are SO FUCKING WHINY.
Cis. Cis cis cis cis cis CIS CIS CIS. YOU ARE CIS. And more importantly, you treat trans people like dirt and you need to stop.
Really? We all treat trans people like dirt? I don’t think that has been shown.
You’re cis. Deal with it. Like we have to deal with being trans, only you have a position of normality & a load of privilege to soften blow.
Hint: Oppressor’s feelings on what word those they oppress use to describe their oppressor class: NOT IMPORTANT
But “their oppressor class” is what’s in dispute.
Having privilege along a certain axis is not the same thing as oppressing people along that axis. It’s not the same thing at all. The difference is pretty important.
Being cis merely means you aren’t trans. It’s not a slur, it’s not an identity forced on you, it’s just a word which means ‘not trans’.
If it’s just a word which means ‘not trans’ then what sense does it make to say cis people “treat trans people like dirt”? How can it not be a slur if it means “an oppressor class” that “treats trans people like dirt”?
It can’t. Sabine is energetically using the word “cis” as a slur while energetically denying that it’s a slur. That’s incoherent.
These things matter.
Well, which is it now? Does she simply not understand the word “binary”?
Presumably this is the problem…
I’m really hoping that this sort of lashing out is just a sort of “growing pains” among trans advocates. After all, it’s not like feminism has a 100% track record, either.
Delft, I think what they are trying to say is that both among cis people and among trans people there are those who are strongly so and those who are so less strongly. Genderqueer and agender people are included among the trans population despite not necessarily wanting to transition to a gender different from the one assigned to them. Cis people include both people who strongly and obviously identify with their assigned gender and those who acknowledge that yes, that is their gender, but what does this fact even mean or matter?
What is she saying here; that being trans isn’t “normal”?
No, I get that part. We have a position of normality – we’re seen as normal. I agree that that’s a privilege compared to the alternative. The part I disagree with is that privilege equals oppression. It can, but it doesn’t necessarily.
Sambarge, right or wrong that’s certainly how society at large sees the matter. Even if you take out the pejorative from ‘abnormal’ and simply consider it as a matter of statistics. Dramatically fewer trans than cis people in society makes cis normal and trans not. I prefer to have a very broad understanding of normal that includes trans people personally. In other words, normal because it occurs, even if less commonly.
dammit, should have refreshed first. Ophelia beat me.
I read something here a few weeks ago that resonated with me, about how gender just isn’t really a part of my identity at all. I call myself a man because it’s easy; I have the expected biological hardware of a man and I present in a way that 99% of people would identify as a man. But it’s not like I go around thinking ‘I’m a man, I do man things’. If I’m interested in something I pursue it, regardless of what gender it’s stereotypically for. When I think of who I am, I don’t think of ‘man’, I think of my work and my hobbies and things along that line. I’m an individual, not a gender category. I don’t doubt that gender can be a large factor in someone’s identity, but it isn’t for me. I feel like this is probably true for a lot of ostensibly ‘cis’ people. Even if ‘cis’ means nothing more than ‘not trans’ I still don’t feel like that’s who I am because I don’t really feel like being ‘not trans’ is a part of who I am. ‘Agender’ might be a closer description. But If it’s a horrible sin for me to insist a trans person is some gender or another, why is it okay for Sabine to insist the same about me? The only explanation that makes sense to me is if Sabine thinks the rules don’t apply to ‘their side’, e.g. they’re trying to claim privilege for themselves under the guise of fighting privilege in others.
Yes, I want to know in what kind of oppression I have been engaging personally. Not simply by existing and sharing a characteristic with people who are violent to trans people, or people who fling insults at trans people, or those who refuse employment to trans people, or who refuse to have trans people use the public restrooms.
This doesn’t mean I am always 100% perfect in my treatment of trans people. I don’t always understand why some situation would be problematic, but if I am told I try to accommodate, even if I still don’t understand. I am willing to accept that it matters. If Sabine is going to call people oppressors for existing, or for being a majority, then she is being counterproductive.
musubk, I’m glad it resonated with you. A lot of people (or, I guess, really a few people) think it’s outrageous of me to say have said it, but I think that’s nonsense.
Some people *are* trying to force the cis identity on people who are not comfortable with the idea of gender at all.
For instance, while some trans and trans allies introduced me to concepts like genderfluid and agender, there was that person you quoted elsewhere, Ophelia, ranting about transtrenders and trying to insist that everyone has to be binary.
That frightens me, because that’s not acceptance or progressivism. That’s the patriarchy trying to stomp everyone back into place.
Samantha @11, leaving aside that defining ‘cis’ as being what is not ‘trans’ is a privative definition (like atheism!), you yourself note it’s only an idea — that is, an abstraction.
(de gustibus ;) )
So, what does it mean ‘to treat [X persons] like dirt?’ Failure to cringe and grovel at their feet?
Those ghastly ‘secular humanists’ treating Kim Davis ‘like dirt.’
Those uppity niggers treating the poor defeated confederates ‘like dirt.’
Those unimpregnated Yasidi girls treating ISIS ‘like dirt.’
See, you can play the trope anywhere.
This particular podium at the Victimhood Olympics seems like it might be absurd enough to disturb the whole mechanism.