Are you Politically Correct?

[Arwon]

If people didn't feel the need to specify "trans" men and women as being something distinct from other men and women in general day to day life, we wouldn't necessarily need the word "cis" as a contrastive. We don't live in that world. The alternative here is to simply call trans women "women", and trans men "men" without any sort of special markers or identifiers, ever.

But of course, even then, when when talking about trans issues we still kinda need a term for "not trans". Cis- is the well-established prefix opposite of trans- and is very clearly the best candidate. pitching a fit over the mere existence and usage of the contrastive prefix in discussions of trans issues is very, very silly.

 

[rah]

Again, if I ask someone not to use that term and they ignore my wishes and use it anyway, I don't see the difference.
And saying they've been marginalized doesn't change the rules of common decency. If anybody tells you they would prefer not to use a term when referencing to them, you do it. Quite simple.

 

[rah]

When 95% of the population uses the term I may change my mind. But until then I'll get to decide if it's an appropriate term to reference me when I'm present.

 

[Arwon]

I mean, nobody is going to stop you from being silly and self absorbed beyond making fun of you (congratulations, you have privilege and are insulated from consequence, well done!). But be aware that going "what about meeeee" at an oppressed group who is discussing their oppression is a pretty bad look. What you are doing is pretty much exactly the same as that sooky, derailing "all lives matter" response to black people protesting racist police brutality or "what about the men!" during feminist discussions.

 

[Farm Boy]

Again, if I ask someone not to use that term and they ignore my wishes and use it anyway, I don't see the difference.
And saying they've been marginalized doesn't change the rules of common decency. If anybody tells you they would prefer not to use a term when referencing to them, you do it. Quite simple.

Why are you trying to treat people as equals? Silly goose. Wrong age/identity. Stuff it, or something.

 

[rah]

No difference then calling Charles Chuck when he prefers Charles. If you don't want to show common courtesy go for it.
I personally have never heard of the term until an hour ago, it's not exactly common usage. Shoot me.

 

[Lexicus]

equivalent to a white person openly asserting that racial slurs aren't offensive and that racial minorities should shut up.

You want to talk about logic and principles, the upshot of the "you choose to take offense at everything" principle is that no one should be responsible to anyone else at all. Just say whatever you want, act completely impulsively, if someone else has a problem it's their fault, not yours!

 

[Gorbles]

@rah

If you don't want to understand why cis as an adjective (?) isn't the same as getting someone's name wrong, then that's fair enough.

For the record, if you'd lead with the Charles example, I know I wouldn't call them Chuck if they didn't want to be. That's far more comparable to misgendering and deadnaming than objecting to a Latin prefix. As I have been consistent with throughout: the context matters. You not seeing the differences in different contexts is a separate thing.

 

[rah]

I've never heard the term before, how the heck would I know. For all I know it's like the term cracker.
Come back when it's common usage.

 

[Arwon]

I dunno what it is but I'm against it!

 

[Gorbles]

I've never heard the term before, how the heck would I know. For all I know it's like the term cracker.
Come back when it's common usage.

O-kay. And if I, as a cis dude, said it wasn't? Surely I'd have at least an idea of how offensive it might be? I'm aware of it, I use it, and I'm in social circles that use it too.

 

[Lexicus]

SHOULD someone receive such empathy? It depends. On what depends on who you ask.

True. Like, someone who insists on intentionally deadnaming trans people doesn't deserve empathy, they deserve a beating.

Usually when I see a combination of someone being a jerk and someone overreacting to it I think less of both,

LOL, I hope not equally!

I mean, nobody is going to stop you from being silly and self absorbed beyond making fun of you (congratulations, you have privilege and are insulated from consequence, well done!). But be aware that going "what about meeeee" at an oppressed group who is discussing their oppression is a pretty bad look. What you are doing is pretty much exactly the same as that sooky, derailing "all lives matter" response to black people protesting racist police brutality or "what about the men!" during feminist discussions.

it's funny because all these posters who are in here doing this thing have a history of doing all of these things! You are passing them compliments as far as they are concerned, heroic wielders of facts and logic against people who are either too childish to know when things are objectively not offensive, or engaged in a grand conspiracy to pretend to be offended in order to diminish the status of straight white men.

And yes, those two situations are exactly the same. I have never used any of the slurs in the past.
So if I am asked and I say I prefer not to be called that to someone, they're entitled to ignore my wishes and use the term to me anyway. How is that fair.

rah, you are being incredibly dense. You know that these two situations are not exactly the same, are in fact nowhere near to being the same.

For all I know it's like the term cracker.

and you know perfectly well that the term 'cracker' is nowhere near as offensive as the n-word so why are you doing this?

 

[red_elk]

But be aware that going "what about meeeee" at an oppressed group who is discussing their oppression is a pretty bad look.

Asking not to call someone a cis-person on the forum is not exactly the same as "going at oppressed group who is discussing their oppression"

 

[Narz]

Y'all are so boring. No one uses the word "cis" IRL

 

[Berzerker]

deriding only white cis-men is the epitome of PC

thats why Married With Children was popular, everyone was fair game for Al Bundy, even Al Bundy

 

[Arwon]

Y'all are so boring. No one uses the word "cis" IRL

Well, no. It's a prefix, not a standalone word, and typically used that way.

 

[rah]

O-kay. And if I, as a cis dude, said it wasn't? Surely I'd have at least an idea of how offensive it might be? I'm aware of it, I use it, and I'm in social circles that use it too.

Actually people get to decide what they find offensive. If a majority find it offensive, and as far as I'm concerned it doesn't take even that much, then it shouldn't be used.
I'm older and the groups I hang around with don't know about it, but I guess that doesn't matter because you've heard it.
It doesn't matter if it's scientific. If I find a scientific term that 20% of the group I'm addressing don't like it, I would stop using it.
As I said, let's wait for this to become an accepted phrase.

And if you go way back to when this started, I said I wouldn't be offended but that doesn't mean if I prefer it not to be used that it wouldn't be rude to continue to use in referencing me. Respect given is respect earned.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Sarah Silverman got fired as she was about to start acting in a new movie because the producers found a skit she did over a decade ago where she wore blackface. The whole point of the joke was how offensive black face is, in other words it was a joke about racism and not a racist joke.

Oh the old "it's just a joke" defence. There's nothing funny about being a racist "ironically". You're still a racist.

 

[Narz]

Well, no. It's a prefix, not a standalone word, and typically used that way.

I've never heard it used in any form by anyone IRL.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The point of the joke was making fun of how racist and stupid black face is.