Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT 2897 - 2901 (16-20 February 2015)
Aegir:
--- Quote from: valkygrrl on 19 Feb 2015, 16:54 ---
--- Quote from: kent_eh on 19 Feb 2015, 06:29 ---
--- Quote ---...with a cis guy
--- End quote ---
Excuse me for being clueless about such things, but can someone define the term "cis" for me?
I assume from the context that it has something to do with having a traditional gender identity, or something like that.
--- End quote ---
All things considered, being accused of following either traditional masculinity or femininity is pretty damn insulting.
I tend to agree with Elizabeth Hungerford about the C-word. https://liberationcollective.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/a-feminist-critique-of-cisgender/
Edit: I should be more clear. Hungerford's reasoning goes beyond the simple who's really 100% conformable with gender roles but it is the suggestion, along with the idea that trans people get to apply a label to another group that people are just expect to accept. They don't care for a lot of words people have applied to them after all.
--- End quote ---
I completely disagree with this article. She doesn't believe that transwomen are real women. I don't know if you read all the comments but here is one of her responses:
"The concept of a cis/trans binary effectively REVERSES the power dynamics between males and females on the axis of gender.
It suggests that a male person’s subjective and VOLUNTARY self-identification as a “woman” can nullify his experiences of membership in the class of people who are privileged at women’s expense.
Further, it suggests that subjective and voluntary self-identification can actually render him (now her) MORE oppressed than the “other” women in the class he alleges to have joined!"
Being trans is not voluntary. Whether or not one chooses to transition, identifying as a woman isn't a choice.
snarkyone:
--- Quote from: no one special on 20 Feb 2015, 08:42 ---b) If there were (or is) such a sticky, why not just post a link to it when someone asks a question. Problem solved.
--- End quote ---
Okay consider for a moment, You are somewhere living your daily life. People keep coming up to you and asking a question, so you answer it. And then more come, and more still. All asking the same question or questions. So after a while you make a sign with the question and the answer and hold it up next to you, yet people still ask you the question. Over and over and over. Everyday of your life for years. Now you have to tell people how to read the sign less than 2 feet away from you? Does any of that seem rational? Don't get me wrong, we understand how people would much rather hear it as a part of the narrative. That taking it upon one's self to find out for themselves stems back to looking up a word in the dictionary you don't know how to spell in the first place. We get it, we do. Which is usually why we answer the questions for the first few thousand times. But remember, we are human too. Not walking wiki's ready to take everyone's query. So before you slam us for being tired of pointing at the sign, put some effort into it. It demonstrates that you're not just curious but serious. And then when people have questions, they are a lot more thought out, specific, and welcomed. :)
..... basalt. That was good.
Fig:
Two Monty Python references in one thread, awesome. Let's leave no stone unturned lest we get the pointed sticks out.
snarkyone:
--- Quote from: Fig on 20 Feb 2015, 08:53 ---Two Monty Python references in one thread, awesome. Let's leave no stone unturned lest we get the pointed sticks out.
--- End quote ---
Only 2? I must be slipping. OR SILLY WALKING!!
snarkyone:
--- Quote from: Aegir on 20 Feb 2015, 08:50 ---
--- Quote from: valkygrrl on 19 Feb 2015, 16:54 ---
--- Quote from: kent_eh on 19 Feb 2015, 06:29 ---
--- Quote ---...with a cis guy
--- End quote ---
Excuse me for being clueless about such things, but can someone define the term "cis" for me?
I assume from the context that it has something to do with having a traditional gender identity, or something like that.
--- End quote ---
All things considered, being accused of following either traditional masculinity or femininity is pretty damn insulting.
I tend to agree with Elizabeth Hungerford about the C-word. https://liberationcollective.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/a-feminist-critique-of-cisgender/
Edit: I should be more clear. Hungerford's reasoning goes beyond the simple who's really 100% conformable with gender roles but it is the suggestion, along with the idea that trans people get to apply a label to another group that people are just expect to accept. They don't care for a lot of words people have applied to them after all.
--- End quote ---
I completely disagree with this article. She doesn't believe that transwomen are real women. I don't know if you read all the comments but here is one of her responses:
"The concept of a cis/trans binary effectively REVERSES the power dynamics between males and females on the axis of gender.
It suggests that a male person’s subjective and VOLUNTARY self-identification as a “woman” can nullify his experiences of membership in the class of people who are privileged at women’s expense.
Further, it suggests that subjective and voluntary self-identification can actually render him (now her) MORE oppressed than the “other” women in the class he alleges to have joined!"
Being trans is not voluntary. Whether or not one chooses to transition, identifying as a woman isn't a choice.
--- End quote ---
Anyone that uses phrases like "Women born women" and argues that a word which describes people who aren't trans is somehow offensive, as if dark is bad description for the absence of light; is nothing more than a twatwaffle not worthy of your time, respect, or patience in the first place.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version