Question about the homophobia thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

These two sentences contradict each other:

"Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex."

Indeed, you yourself claim to have adopted gender norms that are tied to biological males. That is consistent with the first sentence, but not the second.

No they're not. Here is an example to spell it out for you.

Gender Norm: Men (males) work and earn money. Women (females) stay home and care for the house.
This gender norm is NOT "severed" from biological sex. It exists only because of biological sex and evolutionary biology. There is no other reason. "Severing" gender norms from sex means they would cease to exist.

I agree with you on this. Personally I think we should do away with gender completely. Have male and female categories, and if you are female and want to dress like a guy have at it. Male in dresses - wonderful. You don’t need a special name. Just be yourself.

^I’m in this camp, too. Just because you like Barbie’s, the color pink, and dresses doesn’t make you a woman. You are what you are biologically (male or female), and you simply like these things…..or you don’t like those things.

Agreed. Gender should be abolished. Biological sex is what defines us as women.

So you’re gender neutral?

Sure? What does gender neutral mean? Is it like unisex? Or is it more like non-binary?

But let me be clear - I am gender neutral. Not sex neutral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

These two sentences contradict each other:

"Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex."

Indeed, you yourself claim to have adopted gender norms that are tied to biological males. That is consistent with the first sentence, but not the second.

No they're not. Here is an example to spell it out for you.

Gender Norm: Men (males) work and earn money. Women (females) stay home and care for the house.
This gender norm is NOT "severed" from biological sex. It exists only because of biological sex and evolutionary biology. There is no other reason. "Severing" gender norms from sex means they would cease to exist.

Society formed those gender roles thousands of years ago out of convenience, not some underlying biological function. They are not directly based on sex/biology and thus can evolve over time.

The only sex-based roles are related to reproduction/sex organs. Producing sperm/egg. Menstruation. Pregnancy. Breastfeeding.

Everything else is up for grabs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

These two sentences contradict each other:

"Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex."

Indeed, you yourself claim to have adopted gender norms that are tied to biological males. That is consistent with the first sentence, but not the second.

No they're not. Here is an example to spell it out for you.

Gender Norm: Men (males) work and earn money. Women (females) stay home and care for the house.
This gender norm is NOT "severed" from biological sex. It exists only because of biological sex and evolutionary biology. There is no other reason. "Severing" gender norms from sex means they would cease to exist.

Society formed those gender roles thousands of years ago out of convenience, not some underlying biological function. They are not directly based on sex/biology and thus can evolve over time.

The only sex-based roles are related to reproduction/sex organs. Producing sperm/egg. Menstruation. Pregnancy. Breastfeeding.

Everything else is up for grabs.

Welcome back! I look forward to another enlightening discussion where you explain to us how "society formed those gender roles thousands of years ago out of convenience" in no way related to biology. It all happened due to "convenience" and it is sheer coincidence that these roles were assigned to males and females. I'd love to hear your thoughts on how society decided that women should wear high heels and makeup. Is this also due to "convenience"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

Actually, you folks go well beyond mere quotes and routinely judge all trans people by the most extreme examples. But, your post is quite revealing. I would be glad to disassociate myself from extreme views. You on the other hand, are quite happy to share the same position as Peterson.

You're joking right. Not identifying as "cis", a term which is based on an unscientific belief system which only gained common usage in 2015, is not an extremist viewpoint. Nor have any of the females in this thread threatened violence like Peterson (a male, surprise surprise).

But please, do explain which extremist trans rights views you would disassociate from. No where on this thread has any trans activist been able to step away from extreme viewpoints. I would be interested in hearing what those are.

Very early in this thread I questioned why trans women would want to be accepted at the all-women spa in Washington state. I thought that they would make other spa customers uncomfortable and be made to feel uncomfortable themselves. While I understood the desire of trans people to exert their rights, I think they, like everyone, should pick their battles and that one was not a good choice. I don't remember exactly what I wrote, but I also acknowledged the concern of employees and other customers that cis perverts would exploit this as an opportunity to access the spa. One other trans supporter also expressed doubts that going after the spa was a good idea.

Beyond that, frankly I don't pay much attention to trans activists so I don't know what type of extreme things they say or do. I mostly hear about them from anti-trans people. But, for instance, I have no problem criticizing the trans women who bared her breasts at the White House.

Alright. Regarding the Washington Spa case, your point was the trans woman "made a bad choice". While you 'acknowledged' the concerns of staff regarding their safety, you failed to acknowledge that women have a right to run or patronize a nude spa massage business that excludes biological males or penis havers. Or did I misunderstand that?

You are speaking from a position of immense privilege to not "know what extreme things they say or do". When females like myself make statements on social media such as "It's not fair for biological women to compete in volleyball against biological men" or "Can a 13 year old really consent to puberty blockers?" we face threatening extreme, misogynistic violence, usually by people who claim to be trans women. We see violent threats demonizing us as TERFs (a slur) and talking in vivid detail about the physical harm they wish to inflict on us. Some people are physically attacked in public for these views as well. 99% of these threats are directed at females (TERFs), not the biological males who are the ones who actually commit heinous acts of physical violence against trans people.

Of course, not all trans people make violent threats and plenty of gender critical men do, just as your Jordan Peterson example perfectly illustrates. But, I NEVER see women making violent threats against transpeople. Of course, you have the luxury of not knowing about all these extremist violent threats. You, a male, have the right the critique the white house flasher. But if I critique males who injure females while playing volleyball, I am a TERF bigot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

I don’t need you to agree with me. I just need you not to make rules that endanger my (now adult) trans child It’s definitely easier to get to a point of tolerating different viewpoints in small groups or one on one conversations. I hope that by being reasonable and kind, people see that it’s not about pushing an agenda, it’s about protecting people we love.

My own sister isn’t on board with “the trans agenda” but she loves my kids and asks questions in respectful way and we discuss topics as respectfully and calmly as possible. She sees now that she doesn’t have to understand and gets why some things she thought were no big deal before are actually hurtful or harmful to trans people. Just like when she married someone from another culture, it opened up her mind to a different perspective and then when she had kids, she actually became more protective of that cultural identity even though she doesn’t come from that culture and can’t understand exactly what it’s like to be on the inside, even though they’re welcoming. She slips up sometimes and says insensitive things, and then she tries to do better. And I know that even though she doesn’t get it, or maybe even doesn’t like it, she’ll always advocate for my child to be treated equally/fairly/equitably/safely as needed, whether that means reconsidering who she votes for, teaching her own kids to be respectful of others, sharing her experience of witnessing a close family member socially transition to a different gender to her conservative friends, complimenting new styles and sending cute clothes as her way of being supportive, or trying to pick restaurants with gender neutral bathrooms to avoid having to choose and make anyone feel uncomfortable when we go out to dinner. And she knows that I know she’s not really 100% on board and if she could choose, she’d choose my child not be transgender, but that I appreciate her efforts to be accepting and that it was a lot to absorb when we told her the news.

Most importantly though, it’s just not a big deal anymore. My kid is the same kid as always, just with different packaging and pronouns, and far more comfortable not having to hide who they are. And not to generalize, but that’s how pretty much every trans person and person who is close to a trans person has described themselves-the same but better off being out. You don’t have to deny your religion or give up your morals to accept that and call someone by their preferred pronouns. It’s not going to ruin our children to teach them that if someone asks to be referred to as he/him, we say he/him, or if anyone wants to wear a dress or have long/short hair we don’t need to stare or comment on it, and it doesn’t hurt them to read a story about it or someone having 2 dads or no dads or whatever family makeup the author chose. It makes it easier for them to be kind and respectful when they meet someone different from them in real life, and if they wind up being different somehow themselves, it lets them know they’re not alone. That’s the kindness and respect I hope to give and receive and witness around me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

These two sentences contradict each other:

"Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex."

Indeed, you yourself claim to have adopted gender norms that are tied to biological males. That is consistent with the first sentence, but not the second.

No they're not. Here is an example to spell it out for you.

Gender Norm: Men (males) work and earn money. Women (females) stay home and care for the house.
This gender norm is NOT "severed" from biological sex. It exists only because of biological sex and evolutionary biology. There is no other reason. "Severing" gender norms from sex means they would cease to exist.

I agree with you on this. Personally I think we should do away with gender completely. Have male and female categories, and if you are female and want to dress like a guy have at it. Male in dresses - wonderful. You don’t need a special name. Just be yourself.

^I’m in this camp, too. Just because you like Barbie’s, the color pink, and dresses doesn’t make you a woman. You are what you are biologically (male or female), and you simply like these things…..or you don’t like those things.

Agreed. Gender should be abolished. Biological sex is what defines us as women.

So you’re gender neutral?

Why are you so insistent on assigning everyone a label?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

I don’t need you to agree with me. I just need you not to make rules that endanger my (now adult) trans child It’s definitely easier to get to a point of tolerating different viewpoints in small groups or one on one conversations. I hope that by being reasonable and kind, people see that it’s not about pushing an agenda, it’s about protecting people we love.

My own sister isn’t on board with “the trans agenda” but she loves my kids and asks questions in respectful way and we discuss topics as respectfully and calmly as possible. She sees now that she doesn’t have to understand and gets why some things she thought were no big deal before are actually hurtful or harmful to trans people. Just like when she married someone from another culture, it opened up her mind to a different perspective and then when she had kids, she actually became more protective of that cultural identity even though she doesn’t come from that culture and can’t understand exactly what it’s like to be on the inside, even though they’re welcoming. She slips up sometimes and says insensitive things, and then she tries to do better. And I know that even though she doesn’t get it, or maybe even doesn’t like it, she’ll always advocate for my child to be treated equally/fairly/equitably/safely as needed, whether that means reconsidering who she votes for, teaching her own kids to be respectful of others, sharing her experience of witnessing a close family member socially transition to a different gender to her conservative friends, complimenting new styles and sending cute clothes as her way of being supportive, or trying to pick restaurants with gender neutral bathrooms to avoid having to choose and make anyone feel uncomfortable when we go out to dinner. And she knows that I know she’s not really 100% on board and if she could choose, she’d choose my child not be transgender, but that I appreciate her efforts to be accepting and that it was a lot to absorb when we told her the news.

Most importantly though, it’s just not a big deal anymore. My kid is the same kid as always, just with different packaging and pronouns, and far more comfortable not having to hide who they are. And not to generalize, but that’s how pretty much every trans person and person who is close to a trans person has described themselves-the same but better off being out. You don’t have to deny your religion or give up your morals to accept that and call someone by their preferred pronouns. It’s not going to ruin our children to teach them that if someone asks to be referred to as he/him, we say he/him, or if anyone wants to wear a dress or have long/short hair we don’t need to stare or comment on it, and it doesn’t hurt them to read a story about it or someone having 2 dads or no dads or whatever family makeup the author chose. It makes it easier for them to be kind and respectful when they meet someone different from them in real life, and if they wind up being different somehow themselves, it lets them know they’re not alone. That’s the kindness and respect I hope to give and receive and witness around me.

And that’s a two-way street, PP. Most of us are trying to protect ourselves and other biological women…it’s not about stifling trans rights.

Like PP was respectful of my ask (again, generally speaking), I’d hope to see trans activists respond in kind…..instead of calling people who disagree with them bigots and TERF and saying that they don’t care about what we say , so “sue me.” …….especially while demanding the awareness, respect, and consideration for your viewpoint.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

I don’t need you to agree with me. I just need you not to make rules that endanger my (now adult) trans child It’s definitely easier to get to a point of tolerating different viewpoints in small groups or one on one conversations. I hope that by being reasonable and kind, people see that it’s not about pushing an agenda, it’s about protecting people we love.

My own sister isn’t on board with “the trans agenda” but she loves my kids and asks questions in respectful way and we discuss topics as respectfully and calmly as possible. She sees now that she doesn’t have to understand and gets why some things she thought were no big deal before are actually hurtful or harmful to trans people. Just like when she married someone from another culture, it opened up her mind to a different perspective and then when she had kids, she actually became more protective of that cultural identity even though she doesn’t come from that culture and can’t understand exactly what it’s like to be on the inside, even though they’re welcoming. She slips up sometimes and says insensitive things, and then she tries to do better. And I know that even though she doesn’t get it, or maybe even doesn’t like it, she’ll always advocate for my child to be treated equally/fairly/equitably/safely as needed, whether that means reconsidering who she votes for, teaching her own kids to be respectful of others, sharing her experience of witnessing a close family member socially transition to a different gender to her conservative friends, complimenting new styles and sending cute clothes as her way of being supportive, or trying to pick restaurants with gender neutral bathrooms to avoid having to choose and make anyone feel uncomfortable when we go out to dinner. And she knows that I know she’s not really 100% on board and if she could choose, she’d choose my child not be transgender, but that I appreciate her efforts to be accepting and that it was a lot to absorb when we told her the news.

Most importantly though, it’s just not a big deal anymore. My kid is the same kid as always, just with different packaging and pronouns, and far more comfortable not having to hide who they are. And not to generalize, but that’s how pretty much every trans person and person who is close to a trans person has described themselves-the same but better off being out. You don’t have to deny your religion or give up your morals to accept that and call someone by their preferred pronouns. It’s not going to ruin our children to teach them that if someone asks to be referred to as he/him, we say he/him, or if anyone wants to wear a dress or have long/short hair we don’t need to stare or comment on it, and it doesn’t hurt them to read a story about it or someone having 2 dads or no dads or whatever family makeup the author chose. It makes it easier for them to be kind and respectful when they meet someone different from them in real life, and if they wind up being different somehow themselves, it lets them know they’re not alone. That’s the kindness and respect I hope to give and receive and witness around me.

And that’s a two-way street, PP. Most of us are trying to protect ourselves and other biological women…it’s not about stifling trans rights.

Like PP was respectful of my ask (again, generally speaking), I’d hope to see trans activists respond in kind…..instead of calling people who disagree with them bigots and TERF and saying that they don’t care about what we say , so “sue me.” …….especially while demanding the awareness, respect, and consideration for your viewpoint.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

Jeff isn’t a trans activist. When you label everyone you disagree with an activist, you are doing yourself a disservice.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

Actually, you folks go well beyond mere quotes and routinely judge all trans people by the most extreme examples. But, your post is quite revealing. I would be glad to disassociate myself from extreme views. You on the other hand, are quite happy to share the same position as Peterson.

You're joking right. Not identifying as "cis", a term which is based on an unscientific belief system which only gained common usage in 2015, is not an extremist viewpoint. Nor have any of the females in this thread threatened violence like Peterson (a male, surprise surprise).

But please, do explain which extremist trans rights views you would disassociate from. No where on this thread has any trans activist been able to step away from extreme viewpoints. I would be interested in hearing what those are.

Very early in this thread I questioned why trans women would want to be accepted at the all-women spa in Washington state. I thought that they would make other spa customers uncomfortable and be made to feel uncomfortable themselves. While I understood the desire of trans people to exert their rights, I think they, like everyone, should pick their battles and that one was not a good choice. I don't remember exactly what I wrote, but I also acknowledged the concern of employees and other customers that cis perverts would exploit this as an opportunity to access the spa. One other trans supporter also expressed doubts that going after the spa was a good idea.

Beyond that, frankly I don't pay much attention to trans activists so I don't know what type of extreme things they say or do. I mostly hear about them from anti-trans people. But, for instance, I have no problem criticizing the trans women who bared her breasts at the White House.

Alright. Regarding the Washington Spa case, your point was the trans woman "made a bad choice". While you 'acknowledged' the concerns of staff regarding their safety, you failed to acknowledge that women have a right to run or patronize a nude spa massage business that excludes biological males or penis havers. Or did I misunderstand that?

You are speaking from a position of immense privilege to not "know what extreme things they say or do". When females like myself make statements on social media such as "It's not fair for biological women to compete in volleyball against biological men" or "Can a 13 year old really consent to puberty blockers?" we face threatening extreme, misogynistic violence, usually by people who claim to be trans women. We see violent threats demonizing us as TERFs (a slur) and talking in vivid detail about the physical harm they wish to inflict on us. Some people are physically attacked in public for these views as well. 99% of these threats are directed at females (TERFs), not the biological males who are the ones who actually commit heinous acts of physical violence against trans people.

Of course, not all trans people make violent threats and plenty of gender critical men do, just as your Jordan Peterson example perfectly illustrates. But, I NEVER see women making violent threats against transpeople. Of course, you have the luxury of not knowing about all these extremist violent threats. You, a male, have the right the critique the white house flasher. But if I critique males who injure females while playing volleyball, I am a TERF bigot.

Holy moving the goalposts Batman!

You say, "you failed to acknowledge that women have a right to run or patronize a nude spa". The court ruled that no such right exists so I am not sure what right you want me to acknowledge.

"You are speaking from a position of immense privilege" -- Yes, definitely. Privilege with which I was born and inherited and did nothing to earn. But don't you also have significant privilege? Both of us should count our blessings. We are not struggling with our gender identity, alienated within our own bodies, fearful of being cast out from our families, at risk of having our rights impinged by the government, and in danger of violence from bigots. I'm sorry that you have received threats. I receive regular threats to my and my family's safety simply for running this site. Enough that I've had to involve the FBI. So, I can sympathize with you in this regard. Unfortunately, the world is full of crazy people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

I don’t need you to agree with me. I just need you not to make rules that endanger my (now adult) trans child It’s definitely easier to get to a point of tolerating different viewpoints in small groups or one on one conversations. I hope that by being reasonable and kind, people see that it’s not about pushing an agenda, it’s about protecting people we love.

My own sister isn’t on board with “the trans agenda” but she loves my kids and asks questions in respectful way and we discuss topics as respectfully and calmly as possible. She sees now that she doesn’t have to understand and gets why some things she thought were no big deal before are actually hurtful or harmful to trans people. Just like when she married someone from another culture, it opened up her mind to a different perspective and then when she had kids, she actually became more protective of that cultural identity even though she doesn’t come from that culture and can’t understand exactly what it’s like to be on the inside, even though they’re welcoming. She slips up sometimes and says insensitive things, and then she tries to do better. And I know that even though she doesn’t get it, or maybe even doesn’t like it, she’ll always advocate for my child to be treated equally/fairly/equitably/safely as needed, whether that means reconsidering who she votes for, teaching her own kids to be respectful of others, sharing her experience of witnessing a close family member socially transition to a different gender to her conservative friends, complimenting new styles and sending cute clothes as her way of being supportive, or trying to pick restaurants with gender neutral bathrooms to avoid having to choose and make anyone feel uncomfortable when we go out to dinner. And she knows that I know she’s not really 100% on board and if she could choose, she’d choose my child not be transgender, but that I appreciate her efforts to be accepting and that it was a lot to absorb when we told her the news.

Most importantly though, it’s just not a big deal anymore. My kid is the same kid as always, just with different packaging and pronouns, and far more comfortable not having to hide who they are. And not to generalize, but that’s how pretty much every trans person and person who is close to a trans person has described themselves-the same but better off being out. You don’t have to deny your religion or give up your morals to accept that and call someone by their preferred pronouns. It’s not going to ruin our children to teach them that if someone asks to be referred to as he/him, we say he/him, or if anyone wants to wear a dress or have long/short hair we don’t need to stare or comment on it, and it doesn’t hurt them to read a story about it or someone having 2 dads or no dads or whatever family makeup the author chose. It makes it easier for them to be kind and respectful when they meet someone different from them in real life, and if they wind up being different somehow themselves, it lets them know they’re not alone. That’s the kindness and respect I hope to give and receive and witness around me.

And that’s a two-way street, PP. Most of us are trying to protect ourselves and other biological women…it’s not about stifling trans rights.

Like PP was respectful of my ask (again, generally speaking), I’d hope to see trans activists respond in kind…..instead of calling people who disagree with them bigots and TERF and saying that they don’t care about what we say , so “sue me.” …….especially while demanding the awareness, respect, and consideration for your viewpoint.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

Jeff isn’t a trans activist. When you label everyone you disagree with an activist, you are doing yourself a disservice.

I don’t call everyone I disagree with an activist. How would you like to be identified from trans activists?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

I don’t need you to agree with me. I just need you not to make rules that endanger my (now adult) trans child It’s definitely easier to get to a point of tolerating different viewpoints in small groups or one on one conversations. I hope that by being reasonable and kind, people see that it’s not about pushing an agenda, it’s about protecting people we love.

My own sister isn’t on board with “the trans agenda” but she loves my kids and asks questions in respectful way and we discuss topics as respectfully and calmly as possible. She sees now that she doesn’t have to understand and gets why some things she thought were no big deal before are actually hurtful or harmful to trans people. Just like when she married someone from another culture, it opened up her mind to a different perspective and then when she had kids, she actually became more protective of that cultural identity even though she doesn’t come from that culture and can’t understand exactly what it’s like to be on the inside, even though they’re welcoming. She slips up sometimes and says insensitive things, and then she tries to do better. And I know that even though she doesn’t get it, or maybe even doesn’t like it, she’ll always advocate for my child to be treated equally/fairly/equitably/safely as needed, whether that means reconsidering who she votes for, teaching her own kids to be respectful of others, sharing her experience of witnessing a close family member socially transition to a different gender to her conservative friends, complimenting new styles and sending cute clothes as her way of being supportive, or trying to pick restaurants with gender neutral bathrooms to avoid having to choose and make anyone feel uncomfortable when we go out to dinner. And she knows that I know she’s not really 100% on board and if she could choose, she’d choose my child not be transgender, but that I appreciate her efforts to be accepting and that it was a lot to absorb when we told her the news.

Most importantly though, it’s just not a big deal anymore. My kid is the same kid as always, just with different packaging and pronouns, and far more comfortable not having to hide who they are. And not to generalize, but that’s how pretty much every trans person and person who is close to a trans person has described themselves-the same but better off being out. You don’t have to deny your religion or give up your morals to accept that and call someone by their preferred pronouns. It’s not going to ruin our children to teach them that if someone asks to be referred to as he/him, we say he/him, or if anyone wants to wear a dress or have long/short hair we don’t need to stare or comment on it, and it doesn’t hurt them to read a story about it or someone having 2 dads or no dads or whatever family makeup the author chose. It makes it easier for them to be kind and respectful when they meet someone different from them in real life, and if they wind up being different somehow themselves, it lets them know they’re not alone. That’s the kindness and respect I hope to give and receive and witness around me.

And that’s a two-way street, PP. Most of us are trying to protect ourselves and other biological women…it’s not about stifling trans rights.

Like PP was respectful of my ask (again, generally speaking), I’d hope to see trans activists respond in kind…..instead of calling people who disagree with them bigots and TERF and saying that they don’t care about what we say , so “sue me.” …….especially while demanding the awareness, respect, and consideration for your viewpoint.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

Hey, I am the one that told you to sue me. Give credit where credit is due. That poster has been nothing but polite to you. Also, I told you to sue me for calling you "cis", not a bigot or a TERF.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

PP, obviously I was speaking in general terms….not specifically and solely on DCUM.

I do really appreciate what I think is your sincere consideration and respect for my preference.

Thank you for taking that the way I meant it. Sometimes I try to say something nice and it comes off as sarcastic. If you had an ID I’d avoid calling you cis. I’m not going to stop using it because it’s relevant to issues in my life, but if I can avoid using it toward you because you find it offensive, I will. It doesn’t cost me anything to be nice or thoughtful when I can, even if I don’t understand or share another person’s aversions.

I wasn’t being intentionally obtuse about this being an issue on DCUM because of anonymity. I would think someone who doesn’t like the term cisgender probably wouldn’t be having discussions where it comes up in person often, so it seemed like it would probably be more relevant here than IRL. I guess that’s what I get for assuming.

What a sweet, refreshing response. Again, thank you!!

(I’ll remember your thoughtfulness and respect as I interact with people I disagree with going forward.)

I don’t need you to agree with me. I just need you not to make rules that endanger my (now adult) trans child It’s definitely easier to get to a point of tolerating different viewpoints in small groups or one on one conversations. I hope that by being reasonable and kind, people see that it’s not about pushing an agenda, it’s about protecting people we love.

My own sister isn’t on board with “the trans agenda” but she loves my kids and asks questions in respectful way and we discuss topics as respectfully and calmly as possible. She sees now that she doesn’t have to understand and gets why some things she thought were no big deal before are actually hurtful or harmful to trans people. Just like when she married someone from another culture, it opened up her mind to a different perspective and then when she had kids, she actually became more protective of that cultural identity even though she doesn’t come from that culture and can’t understand exactly what it’s like to be on the inside, even though they’re welcoming. She slips up sometimes and says insensitive things, and then she tries to do better. And I know that even though she doesn’t get it, or maybe even doesn’t like it, she’ll always advocate for my child to be treated equally/fairly/equitably/safely as needed, whether that means reconsidering who she votes for, teaching her own kids to be respectful of others, sharing her experience of witnessing a close family member socially transition to a different gender to her conservative friends, complimenting new styles and sending cute clothes as her way of being supportive, or trying to pick restaurants with gender neutral bathrooms to avoid having to choose and make anyone feel uncomfortable when we go out to dinner. And she knows that I know she’s not really 100% on board and if she could choose, she’d choose my child not be transgender, but that I appreciate her efforts to be accepting and that it was a lot to absorb when we told her the news.

Most importantly though, it’s just not a big deal anymore. My kid is the same kid as always, just with different packaging and pronouns, and far more comfortable not having to hide who they are. And not to generalize, but that’s how pretty much every trans person and person who is close to a trans person has described themselves-the same but better off being out. You don’t have to deny your religion or give up your morals to accept that and call someone by their preferred pronouns. It’s not going to ruin our children to teach them that if someone asks to be referred to as he/him, we say he/him, or if anyone wants to wear a dress or have long/short hair we don’t need to stare or comment on it, and it doesn’t hurt them to read a story about it or someone having 2 dads or no dads or whatever family makeup the author chose. It makes it easier for them to be kind and respectful when they meet someone different from them in real life, and if they wind up being different somehow themselves, it lets them know they’re not alone. That’s the kindness and respect I hope to give and receive and witness around me.

And that’s a two-way street, PP. Most of us are trying to protect ourselves and other biological women…it’s not about stifling trans rights.

Like PP was respectful of my ask (again, generally speaking), I’d hope to see trans activists respond in kind…..instead of calling people who disagree with them bigots and TERF and saying that they don’t care about what we say , so “sue me.” …….especially while demanding the awareness, respect, and consideration for your viewpoint.

The hypocrisy is staggering.

Hey, I am the one that told you to sue me. Give credit where credit is due. That poster has been nothing but polite to you. Also, I told you to sue me for calling you "cis", not a bigot or a TERF.

I don’t understand this post. I’ve been very respectful to the kind PP. They didn’t say “sue me”—you did. As I said, you dismissed my POV (about being called cis) and said “sue me” in response.

Maybe you mistyped.