“non-trans” normal person here, and I think everyone who has a problem with trans / queer / whatever people is a fucking moron. I absolutely support the “trans agenda”
I am fully aware what some people use, but it is a made-up word of the English language and I won’t apply it to myself. I don’t have a problem with people using it, but it’s not my vocabulary. It neither has an inherent sense, nor does it have any added value in most context.
I respect that it helps to normalize specifying whatever gender one associates with when “cis” people also do it, as opposed to only having trans / non-binary people to specify “what” they identify as. But my solidarity extends only to full acceptance and tolerance, not to changing how I “identify” myself :p
No, that part (cis) is a prefix and means “on this side of”. And for “on this side of gender” to mean what cisgender is used as, is a newly agreed-upon thing in the evolution of LGBTQ culture.
But when you say things like ‘“non-trans” normal person’ it sounds like you’re saying it isn’t normal to be trans. Why not just say “non-trans” or “cis” instead of saying “normal person”?
Well it certainly contributes to othering the people you don’t view as “normal”. Don’t use cis, whatever, but paired with you saying you specifically know cis is a term and you specifically choose not to use it, calling cis people normal certainly sounds transphobic. You’re following the conservative’s playbook. Don’t say cis people are the “normal” ones.
America has a majority of white people living there. Could you imagine if people started calling white people “normal”? The words you choose have consequences.
Again, I can’t make this clear enough, this isn’t some bullshit purity test. If you don’t wanna use the term cis to describe yourself, so be it, but don’t use normal. Especially when you’re already willing to use non-trans. Solidarity isn’t othering the persecuted.
That’s not quite how a natural language like English works. There’s a bunch of mess and idioms and “technically correct” is almost never how things start to get used in real life. Thus often it happens that whatever is the majority becomes the default, like for instance cisgender is a concept that almost never has to be used because 99% of people are cisgender. Not that it’s not a valid term, it’s just a term that’s almost universally redundant.
Lmao, but they specifically said they knew the term exists and refuse to use it and instead not only call themselves “non-trans” but also “normal”. This wasn’t someone just not knowing the word.
I think he’s referring to the difference of descriptive vs prescriptive. I mean, some english words and concepts just become standard without anyone trying to make them that.
Terms like cisgender or “they” as a pronoun on identical level to “he” and “she” is an example of trying to be prescriptive. You would never have to correct people with native level language skills on the correct use of these words if they weren’t.
Singular they had been around since the 14th century. If you want to say it was prescriptive then I might be willing to agree, but we aren’t in the 14th century. We’re in the 21st century. I’m sure you’ll agree that over 500 years of precedence makes it descriptive by that point.
“non-trans” normal person here, and I think everyone who has a problem with trans / queer / whatever people is a fucking moron. I absolutely support the “trans agenda”
Gentle FYI for you today, the term for non-trans is cis or cisgender. 💜
I am fully aware what some people use, but it is a made-up word of the English language and I won’t apply it to myself. I don’t have a problem with people using it, but it’s not my vocabulary. It neither has an inherent sense, nor does it have any added value in most context. I respect that it helps to normalize specifying whatever gender one associates with when “cis” people also do it, as opposed to only having trans / non-binary people to specify “what” they identify as. But my solidarity extends only to full acceptance and tolerance, not to changing how I “identify” myself :p
“Cis” is as real a word as “trans” is. They’re both Latin prefixes. Cisgender has literally no other meaning besides “not transgender”
No, that part (cis) is a prefix and means “on this side of”. And for “on this side of gender” to mean what cisgender is used as, is a newly agreed-upon thing in the evolution of LGBTQ culture.
But when you say things like ‘“non-trans” normal person’ it sounds like you’re saying it isn’t normal to be trans. Why not just say “non-trans” or “cis” instead of saying “normal person”?
You assume that in my world “normal” is a compliment. It’s not.
Well it certainly contributes to othering the people you don’t view as “normal”. Don’t use cis, whatever, but paired with you saying you specifically know cis is a term and you specifically choose not to use it, calling cis people normal certainly sounds transphobic. You’re following the conservative’s playbook. Don’t say cis people are the “normal” ones.
America has a majority of white people living there. Could you imagine if people started calling white people “normal”? The words you choose have consequences.
Again, I can’t make this clear enough, this isn’t some bullshit purity test. If you don’t wanna use the term cis to describe yourself, so be it, but don’t use normal. Especially when you’re already willing to use non-trans. Solidarity isn’t othering the persecuted.
That’s not quite how a natural language like English works. There’s a bunch of mess and idioms and “technically correct” is almost never how things start to get used in real life. Thus often it happens that whatever is the majority becomes the default, like for instance cisgender is a concept that almost never has to be used because 99% of people are cisgender. Not that it’s not a valid term, it’s just a term that’s almost universally redundant.
Lmao, but they specifically said they knew the term exists and refuse to use it and instead not only call themselves “non-trans” but also “normal”. This wasn’t someone just not knowing the word.
Interesting, because every word you’ve used is made-up word of the English language.
I think he’s referring to the difference of descriptive vs prescriptive. I mean, some english words and concepts just become standard without anyone trying to make them that.
Terms like cisgender or “they” as a pronoun on identical level to “he” and “she” is an example of trying to be prescriptive. You would never have to correct people with native level language skills on the correct use of these words if they weren’t.
Singular they had been around since the 14th century. If you want to say it was prescriptive then I might be willing to agree, but we aren’t in the 14th century. We’re in the 21st century. I’m sure you’ll agree that over 500 years of precedence makes it descriptive by that point.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0075424204265824
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
deleted by creator