bullshit. cis- is a latin prefix that means “on this side of”. So for example, the Roman region Cisalpine Gaul could reasonably be interpreted as “the part of Gaul that’s on our side of the Alpines”. The prefix trans- is the antonym meaning “on the far side”. Transalpine Gaul was the part of the Roman empire on the other side of the Alpines. When related to gender, the only way cisgender can be read in any context is “their gender aligns with their sex”. There is no way that could ever be reasonably be interpreted as a slur.

When you have a trans-something you have cis-something. It’s how language works.

The only way for cisgender to be a slur is if you consider transgender a slur too.

Cisgender originated on Usenet in alt.transgender in 1994.

I Coined The Term ‘Cisgender’ 29 Years Ago. Here’s What This Controversial Word Really Means.

https://www.historians.org/research-and-publications/perspectives-on-history/may-2017/tracing-terminology-researching-early-uses-of-cisgender

People on tumblr being really mad when they say cisgender doesn’t actually make it a slur ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Ok, I’m going to be completely honest with you. I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not.

Are you telling me that I made a shit comment? If so, please do say so because I’m gonna be honest: I am not sure about this comment and I’ve been thinking about deleting it ever since I posted it. I rewrote it like five or six times before until I finally got fed up with it and said “fuck it” and posted it. :|

EDIT:

So, according to all of you, I worry too much. Thanks a lot for the support, and I’m glad you liked my comment. ❤️

why not come out and make your point instead of JAQing off?

And I’m only, like, 98% joking about it also being the day I saw a headline on Lemmy about Wayland use overtaking X11.

I mean, honesty, there has to be some legally standing harm having been done or be possible. By a fucking billionaire tech mogul guy to a foundational, open, and free part of the tech ecosystem who also relies on fundraising.

Edit: on the other hand I’m waiting to be pounded by a reply about the logo being open source. Which it is. But you know ethics and tech and stuff.

It might not be worth challenging them, by the time it gets anywhere the current business will be gone. They always had little to no hope of paying off the $13bn loan Musk saddled the business with, now the business is worth less than the loan. Musk knows this, which is why he’s trialling all sorts of dodgy shit on the platform, such as this and also the API charges.

Jesus, that’s really fucking blatant, wow

It’s just the generic unicode character, they wouldn’t have a case.

The most critical component of “free speech” to a right-winger isn’t just the ability to say whatever they want with no repercussions, it’s also that an audience has to be forced to listen to them.

There are plenty of shithole places on the Internet where they can spout their transphobic, Great Replacement anti-Semitic shit all day long, but that’s not good enough for them. They need a “lib” to be triggered.

Guys Im starting to think the guy who’s only rich because daddy used apartheid slave labor may not have the best views on race

Yeah I suspect as much too. Nothing more than a passive and abhorrent form of violence imo.

Not to play down how absolutely terrible I’m sure Musk is as a father, but her mum’s also loaded. That would certainly make the decision easier.

Where I live, I can be legally denied a job, housing, or medical care. If the cops wanted to, they’ve retroactively invalidated changed drivers licenses, so they could probably just arrest me for driving. I couldn’t access any form of domestic violence resource when escaping my marriage.

Some trans people are crazy assholes - just as some cis people are crazy assholes. But there is no system level oppression of cis people. Drama is annoying, but drama doesn’t mean you don’t get to eat.

“Cisgender” is no more a derogatory term than “heterosexual.” It’s simply a descriptor. It means your gender and biological sex are the same. That’s all.

It’s only derogatory to you if you feel that “cisgender” should be “normal” and thus not have a word. But we have a word for all kinds of things people might consider “normal.” Sighted is a word even though being able to see is the norm. I’m sure you can use ‘sighted’ in a derogatory way. Maybe some blind people even do, I don’t know. That doesn’t make the word derogatory.

“Cisgender” is not the queer equivalent of something like “tranny.”

Removed by mod

Whenever I speak the Italian vulgar, I’m always talking to my homies in Cisapline Gaul.

Getting into fistfights > Learning a single vocabulary word ??

Wow. A VIOLENT snowflake. Daring today, aren’t we.

Your position is great, all these kids are being warped by slander and pejoratives (as contextual), and nobody seems to care about manipulating all these new kids being grown up into a world that’s burning down and their McDonald’s meal will cost $26.99 next year with no jobs existing. But they’re concerned more about gender and words and feelings than reality anymore.

Cisgender is straight up just not a slur though, it literally just means the opposite of transgender, which is also not a slur, despite the fact that it can be used with derogatory language or sentiments.

I think you’re currently in a place where I was in myself many years ago. This is all assuming everything you said was in good faith. You see all of the pain and damage the -isms have caused (racism, sexism, etc) and it seems at first blush that if society simply disregarded the traits those -isms are based around, the problem would go away. There’s enough truth in the idea to make it feel like a solution and, even if it’s subconscious, it kinda takes the onus of action off of you and puts it on the people that that are actually racist or exist. I don’t want to assume your political leanings, but I was farther right on the political spectrum than than I am now, and it fit well with my ideas about personal responsibility and limited government at the time…and I feel like it was regarded as common sense with everyone in that political sphere at the time. At the time, I was a 20-something cishet white guy (I’m still all of those things, except 20), and I felt like everything I had I’d earned, and I legit thought people could pull themselves out of the mire if they wanted it enough. I didn’t like being grouped in with the -ists, but I also wasn’t likely to call out a buddy for making an offensive joke.

That whole chain of thinking is deeply flawed, but it’s an easy place to land, especially in middle-America. I feel like a good analogy that would have hit home with me at that point in my life would have been stories about places where Christianity was outlawed. I remember I had one of those old Christian comic books that were popular in the 90s about it. If you wanted to wear a cross, you’d have to hide it, you couldn’t talk about being Christian or meet with other Christians (like a church service or prayer group) without having to worry about the law coming down on you. (Really makes me wonder where that infamous sense of persecution the right has comes from). At the time, I’d hear those stories and think, “Man, government sucks…it would be terrible to have to hide who you were like that.” I think about those stories now and I think instead about not wearing the clothes you’re comfortable in, not being able to get healthcare for legit medical diagnoses, not being able to have a club or group of similar people you couls safely meet with to build community around shared life experiences. The story about persucted Christians in some unnamed dystopia was also telling the true story of LGBTQ people in my own country. And women in my own country. And racial groups In. My. Own. Country. I never would have accepted the idea that those persecuted Christians would be OK if there just wasn’t religion. Just like I know marginalized groups today won’t be OK if whatever society deems “wrong” with them just went away. Societies have inertia, and without someone exerting some kind of force on them, they’ll maintain their current trajectory. I came to see I didn’t like my societies trajectory, so I started trying to change it, probably went a little too extreme in the other direction for a while, but eventually learned to just listen first. It’s OK if I belong to a group (or several) that have been bad actors. It means I’m in a position to leverage my privileges to help change society’s momentum. I grew up very poor, but I’ve got pretty much every other privilege society has to offer. I honestly don’t know that I’d have been as fortunate as I am today if even one of those privileges was missing. Even with the deck stacked pretty well in my favor, it was a fucking fight to get here…and even now, doing so much better than most, it feels like barely hanging on some days. I agree that humanism is what we should be striving for, but I also understand that I’m part of a group that’s done a lot of bad to a lot of other groups. I don’t think it makes sense for me to be “proud” of any immutable part of my identity, but that also means I shouldn’t feel personally attacked when people talk about that identity. Things like the whole bear thing would have probably bothered me in the past, but now it’s more nuanced. I’m sad people feel that way, but I don’t blame them, and I’ve listened enough that I believe them. Now the question I ask isn’t “How is this fair to me?” but instead. “How can I use my membership in the group to help change its momentum to something better.” Sometimes it’s voting, sometimes it’s canvassing or protesting, sometimes it’s reaching out to someone I see a part of my past self in.

Cisgender is a descriptive term. If you have seen it in a derogatory context, then you should take issue with the context.

It is so strange to say that identity should take a back seat to humanism when every historical example of discrimination and dehumanization is based on identity. Identity in those instances is not imposed on oneself, but is used to define the outgroup that is being dehumanized. Identity politics is simply an honest accounting of groups that being descriminated against. When the discrimination ends, we see the group identity evaporate. We need only look at the early 20th century definitions of Caucasian, and the identity politics of Irish and Italian Americans subsequently evaporating when that definition evolved to include all Americans of European decent, to see that identity politics is a reaction to injustice and not the other way around.

agender

guess this is what i will tell people to call me now. because i don’t give a shit that i have a penis.

100% agree with you. but sadly humanism doesn’t incite people to team-based violence, so it’s very going to be very popular. human beings very much prefer tribal thinking to global thinking.

The definition of cis is, “a person whose gender identity corresponds to their sex assigned at birth.” Does you gender identity correspond to the sex you were assigned at birth? Mine does.

People made the same arguments about “heterosexual” and “straight”, at least with the latter I could see why someone would see that as a slur (it’s a term originates from animal farming), while “heterosexual” just describes someone is attracted to the opposite gender (go on, and use it as an “a ha!” moment against me by claiming it as a proof that even I know there’s only two genders, like fundamentalists do with atheists saying “oh my god!”). “Cis” is just the opposite of “trans”, even if Musk had the techbro-level idea of treating “cis” the same way most sensible people treat that “cool and funny” gamer word, he wants to say out loud in the public, like he used to do it in apartheid Africa.

Because cis people are banned

No women allowed club, only bros