QT oriented question but anyone can comment: How much of a choice do we have over our gender identity (assuming for the sake of argument that gender identity exists in all people)?

submitted by DistantGlimmer from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

I’m not reading shit into it. I’m reading the actual literal definition of the word. I didn’t say anyone was “stoked” to be a woman- I said, and I’ll put it in caps so maybe you’ll actually see my point finally: IT IMPLIES WE HAVE A GENDER IDENTITY AND ACKNOWLEDGE THST GENDER IDENTITY IS REAL AND “VALID”

I don’t need a term for not trans, most people are “not trans” like almost all people are “not trans”. YOU want to force the idea that TWAW so you force “cis” on everyone else. People don’t have to subscribe to your beliefs. Period. I am not “cis” just because you’d like to call me “cis” so that you can pretend that transwomen and “cis” women are both women. Again, I don’t need a word for not trans, I am not defined or described by what I am not- You need this word for your belief system. Stop forcing it on others. You don’t need a designator to describe what someone is not. People don’t go around wearing “not diabetic” bracelets. I don’t need to say “normal” women, all women are “normal” or none of us are, we are just all females. I don’t need to say “real” women, an adult female human is a real woman. I don’t need to say “natal women” all women are female and we are all born female so we are all natal women. You need the word “cis” to try to force validating yourself on everyone.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

IT IMPLIES WE HAVE A GENDER IDENTITY AND ACKNOWLEDGE THST GENDER IDENTITY IS REAL AND “VALID”

It doesn’t imply you recognize anything. In any way. It might imply you have a gender identity but again that definition isn’t how the word is used. This is the plain language problem I’ve directly talked about before.

Again, I don’t need a word for not trans, I am not defined or described by what I am not- You need this word for your belief system. Stop forcing it on others. You don’t need a designator to describe what someone is not. People don’t go around wearing “not diabetic” bracelets. I don’t need to say “normal” women, all women are “normal” or none of us are, we are just all females. I don’t need to say “real” women, an adult female human is a real woman. I don’t need to say “natal women” all women are female and we are all born female so we are all natal women. You need the word “cis” to try to force validating yourself on everyone.

This is proving my point. You are so desperate for trans women to be this lesser thing that you get enraged by any implication that we aren’t lesser than you.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

“It doesn’t imply you recognize anything. In any way. It might imply you have a gender identity”

It doesn’t imply it- it means it. Why the fuck do you act like people can’t and haven’t looked this up? The definition may not imply that a “cis” person knows they’re “cis” but it’s usage, which is what you’re bringing up- absolutely means that “cis” people have a gender identity whether they know it or not. That’s why I said it’s forcing your ideology onto others. Who uses this term and doesn’t believe or at least claim to believe in gender identity? Why would someone use a word that is literally defined as someone whose gender identity matches their sex use the term “cis”, rather than relying on the trans prefix to speak about transwomen/transmen, if they weren’t implying gender identity and validating trans people in some way? Not snark, genuine question.

“but again that definition isn’t how the word is used. This is the plain language problem I’ve directly talked about before.”

It is how it’s used. It’s why GC people don’t use it. It’s why people who aren’t discussing trans issues or concerned with it don’t use it and some don’t even know about it. Also- you may not want to open the door to discussing plain language problems, it won’t go well for you. At all.

“ This is proving my point. You are so desperate for trans women to be this lesser thing that you get enraged by any implication that we aren’t lesser than you”

Lmfao. Not being the same doesn’t make anyone better or lesser than me. Transwomen are not women. That’s all that means. If you place value on womanhood over manhood that’s your shit to deal with. Women are females. Transwomen are not females, therefore they can’t ever be women. I’ve placed no value on either women or transwomen, I made a distinction between them that you wish to erase because YOU place value on womanhood over manhood. YOU are desperate for transwomen to be considered and included with women, this is something that can be backed up by your comment history, buddy. I don’t get enraged, I get annoyed at your refusal to ever admit to things that everyone else knows and understands. It’s exhausting. You project the value you place on womanhood and “not being a man” onto every GC person you interact with. All of this “lesser than” and value is coming from you. I’m just using the actual meanings of words.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Who uses this term and doesn’t believe or at least claim to believe in gender identity? Why would someone use a word that is literally defined as someone whose gender identity matches their sex use the term “cis”, rather than relying on the trans prefix to speak about transwomen/transmen, if they weren’t implying gender identity and validating trans people in some way?

It’s linguistically necessary. When we say women it is trans women and natal women. If we only want to talk about trans women we say trans women. It would be proper to say “not trans women” because it has the same valuation problem as saying real women and trans women. It would imply that trans women are better. Which isn’t the case

It is how it’s used. It’s why GC people don’t use it. It’s why people who aren’t discussing trans issues or concerned with it don’t use it and some don’t even know about it.

No it isn’t. When a trans person says cis, it just means not trans. There are no implications as to you other than that you aren’t trans.

Also- you may not want to open the door to discussing plain language problems, it won’t go well for you. At all.

I’m talking about plain language philosophy. As in the idea that becoming Overly focused on Achademically Precise definitions rather than how words are actually used manufactured unnecessary communication problems. It’s been my point this whole time.

When you create a “real women” and “fake women” dichotomy you are saying you are are better. Deviance is considered lesser.

You don’t call people white and not white. You don’t call people Mentally normal and abnormal anymore. When you create a dichotomy with normal on one side or real on one side you are creating a dichotomy where one side is obviously supposed to be superior.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

“It’s linguistically necessary.”

If you believe TWAW, which is exactly my point. Most people don’t believe this.

“When we say women it is trans women and natal women.“

This is not true for everyone. Again- that’s my point. So, like I said, using “cis” is meant to validate TWAW, if you don’t believe that, you don’t use “cis”.

“If we only want to talk about trans women we say trans women.”

Most people say “transwomen” every time they wan to refer to transwomen. Once again- my whole point.

“It would be proper to say “not trans women” because it has the same valuation problem as saying real women and trans women.”

How is this a problem? There’s no value placed on either women or transwomen by not using “cis”. It’s clear what is meant by both terms. Yet again- my whole point.

“It would imply that trans women are better. Which isn’t the case”

Lol wut?

“ No it isn’t. When a trans person says cis, it just means not trans. There are no implications as to you other than that you aren’t trans.”

God I hate when you act so obtuse! The implication is that TWAW. This. Is. My. Whole. Point.

“ I’m talking about plain language philosophy.”

“Cis” is not plain language. It’s not commonly used, it is used to validate transwomen and transmen and claim that they are the gender/sex they identify with. Again- my point.

“As in the idea that becoming Overly focused on Achademically Precise definitions rather than how words are actually used manufactured unnecessary communication problems. It’s been my point this whole time.”

Sure except the definition and how you’re using it fucking match. For the hundredth time- my point. We don’t need “cis” as a distinction or marker unless we accept TWAW and TMAM.

“ When you create a “real women” and “fake women” dichotomy you are saying you are are better. Deviance is considered lesser.”

I don’t create real or fake women. I distinguish between women and males who have hormonally and surgically altered their body to resemble women and think that that makes them women. I don’t place value on either- I acknowledge that they are NOT THE SAME. You are placing value by forcing TWAW and using “cis” to do so.

“

You don’t call people white and not white.”

This is irrelevant. Sex and race are not the same. I would absolutely call a white person claiming to be a different race “white”. Because they are white. Again- you’re forcing TWAW with this example. You’re forcing your ideology on me. And making a “point” that explains nothing and has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

“You don’t call people Mentally normal and abnormal anymore.”

No we don’t, but we do use phrases like “mental condition/illness/disorder” so what’s your point?

“When you create a dichotomy with normal on one side or real on one side you are creating a dichotomy where one side is obviously supposed to be superior.“

Didn’t use the words “real” or “normal” unless I was responding to you doing so- I distinguished between transwomen and women. You don’t want that distinction to be acknowledged, which is why we’ve been going back and forth over this. You are placing value on things and projecting that onto me. It’s obvious I’m sure to everyone but you. I’m done with this conversation because all you’re going to do is keep proving my point for me and I can prove my points on my own. But thanks for showing whoever may read this that I was right. Ta-ta for now, Masks. ❤️

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

If you believe TWAW, which is exactly my point.

Which I and many people do. Hence it is necessary. If you don’t want to call yourself cis, don’t. But it’s still a necessary term.

This is not true for everyone. Again- that’s my point. So, like I said, using “cis” is meant to validate TWAW, if you don’t believe that, you don’t use “cis”.

Then don’t use it but isn’t it hypocritical to demand I “not put my beliefs on you” while simultaneously demanding I not use terms which are neutral but you believe an affront to your belief?

Most people say “transwomen” every time they wan to refer to transwomen. Once again- my whole point.

Which doesn’t change the fact that natal women is a distinct section of all women to many. So just woman includes trans women. Speaking about natal women specifically requires a specifying term.

There’s no value placed on either women or transwomen by not using “cis”. It’s clear what is meant by both terms. Yet again- my whole point.

Exactly. Since cis and trans don’t have an implied unequal valuation it’s more proper than something like trans and normal to trans women vs real women.

God I hate when you act so obtuse! The implication is that TWAW. This. Is. My. Whole. Point.

Other people using it doesn’t imply you believe anything. That’s my point. If you don’t like cis don’t use it but it’s necessary for people who don’t think trans women are lesser.

For the hundredth time- my point. We don’t need “cis” as a distinction or marker unless we accept TWAW and TMAM.

Which I and many others do.

I don’t create real or fake women. I distinguish between women and males who have hormonally and surgically altered their body to resemble women and think that that makes them women.

That’s you saying trans women are lesser. Right there, implication we are imposters or crazy. Plain as day.

No we don’t, but we do use phrases like “mental condition/illness/disorder” so what’s your point?

X has a mental illness vs. x is a mentally disturbed (crazy/ mentally ill) person isn’t the same. There’s an implication of deviance and hierarchy in the second.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

LMFAO As I said in my last response, I’m just gonna stop and let everyone read what you’re saying. You’re doing my part for me. You always do. You always show everyone that you read what you want to read and aren’t actually paying attention other than to try to make a point over and over. We always get what you mean- you’re just wrong.

Can’t resist mentioning your take on “neutral words” that I believe to be an affront to my beliefs... does that mean we get to call you a man? No, of course not- you’d be upset and call it disrespect (the hypocrisy).But, I’m sure you’ve found some justification to make yourself and other transwomen the exception to your bullshit. Like always. Toodles.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

does that mean we get to call you a man?

Cis isn’t an insult. Man is. You’ll also note I’m not calling you cis.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Lmfao again. Man is not an insult. Fact. It’s not an insult just because you don’t like it. I don’t claim “cis” to be an insult- I’m saying it only applies to people who support TWAW/TMAM. The difference is that the meaning of cis, literally the text book dictionary meaning of the word is describing something I don’t believe in and that hasnt been proven. man’s textbook dictionary meaning is neutral you just don’t like it for personal reasons. There’s fact behind calling transwomen men, there’s nothing behind “cis” that isn’t meant to affirm TWAW/TMAM. You can say you don’t believe in that definition- but you can not and have never shown how it is inaccurate.i can explain how cis is inaccurate unless someone subscribed to your ideology. No ideology is necessary to understand the word “man” or how it applies to transwomen. I didn’t call you a man or say you called me cis, I asked you if, since I shouldn’t be bothered by a word just because I don’t believe the same things as you, think it’s okay to use a word that you don’t want used towards you. My point being- how the hell are you telling me not to be bothered by it or I’m reading too much into it, given how you yourself feel about the word “man”. I could just as easily say “it’s just a term to mean a male adult human”. And you’d still be bothered, yet you go back and forth with me over “cis” a word that has no accurate application for me. I’ve already acknowledged that you don’t use the word here, but you using it outside of here is still you “misgendering” others and forcing your beliefs on others. TWAW is not a fact, gender identity is not proven- men being adult male humans is a truth that can be and has been confirmed many many times over. If you want to keep going we can I suppose, but you’re still proving my point for me so it’s accomplishing nothing.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Man is not an insult.

We will never agree on this. We can stop arguing about it since we both know we won’t ever agree.

I’m saying it only applies to people who support TWAW/TMAM.

Which is why they are the ones who say it.

but you using it outside of here is still you “misgendering” others and forcing your beliefs on others.

No. It isn’t. It means you aren’t trans. Even if it didn’t it only reflects the beliefs of the speaker and doesnt “push beliefs” on someone to call them cis.

given how you yourself feel about the word “man”. I could just as easily say “it’s just a term to mean a male adult human”.

Except it isn’t and implies a myriad of behavioral and moral implications as it is actually used. It shouldn’t but it does. But again we aren’t going to agree on this ever.