Topic: Attn: Catherine
Anonymous A started this discussion 11 years ago #40,110
Have you even worn a dress before?Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 45 minutes later[^] [v] #534,140
did you hear about Whiteney HOuston
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,142
No, but I have a female t-shirt and I'm looking to purchase my first skirt and dress in the near future.
Green joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 24 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,144
squeegee joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 5 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,165
dw joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 8 hours later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,256
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,264
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 35 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,266
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 13 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,268
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 40 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,271
Anonymous H replied with this 11 years ago, 24 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,272
@534,268 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> Ouch.
its the truth, usually people who identify as trans or at the very least consider themselves another gender, they make a point to act as that gender, cathertine doesn't even do the tiniest bit, the only thing he does is identify as trans on tinychan/minichan even green has wore a dress in public
> Ouch.
its the truth, usually people who identify as trans or at the very least consider themselves another gender, they make a point to act as that gender, cathertine doesn't even do the tiniest bit, the only thing he does is identify as trans on tinychan/minichan even green has wore a dress in public
Anonymous B replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,273
when I was a boy others would pick on me for my faggy clothes
so my mom is a fag?
so my mom is a fag?
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 15 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,274
Anonymous I replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,275
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,277
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 26 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,278
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #534,296
WSD !VBNtXmsnv. joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #534,306
kook !!mCVqftDha joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 7 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #534,327
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #534,328
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 day later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,775
Anonymous H replied with this 11 years ago, 10 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,851
@534,296 (C)
> You just threw nonbinary people under the bus. You shitlord.
"nonbinary" isnt a real word, its made up tumblr jargon
> You just threw nonbinary people under the bus. You shitlord.
"nonbinary" isnt a real word, its made up tumblr jargon
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 14 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,852
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 20 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,854
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,855
> opinions
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,858
@534,851 (H)
@534,852 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
@534,854 (squeegee)
But those are all real things. Transexuals, non-binaries, people who identify with their biological gender, all things that exist.
Do you prefer alternate words for those things, or do you deny that they exist? At all?
@534,852 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
@534,854 (squeegee)
But those are all real things. Transexuals, non-binaries, people who identify with their biological gender, all things that exist.
Do you prefer alternate words for those things, or do you deny that they exist? At all?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,876
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
i deny that the letters "cis" used in that order has meaning outside of tumblr. it is a made up word with an imaginary meaning that is being used by one group to label another group for no other reason than to apply a label to said group.
i deny that the letters "cis" used in that order has meaning outside of tumblr. it is a made up word with an imaginary meaning that is being used by one group to label another group for no other reason than to apply a label to said group.
(Edited 18 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 22 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,882
@previous (squeegee)
Actually, its usage pre-dates Tumblr. As is pointed out in the first part of this RW article on the term, its first recorded use was by a researcher in 1994. So nom it's not a "Tumblr word". Tumblr did popularise it though, sure.
And it's really not as hostile as you're making it out to be. It's no different for there being a word for heterosexuality. Just a way to differentiate the "normal" majority from a given minority group.
Actually, its usage pre-dates Tumblr. As is pointed out in the first part of this RW article on the term, its first recorded use was by a researcher in 1994. So nom it's not a "Tumblr word". Tumblr did popularise it though, sure.
And it's really not as hostile as you're making it out to be. It's no different for there being a word for heterosexuality. Just a way to differentiate the "normal" majority from a given minority group.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 41 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,885
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
but there's already an accepted word in western culture for heterosexuals, straight.
it would be like pushing yet another term for "caucasians" on white people to try and label them with a word that has a deragatory sentiment. and the way i see cis being used it's basically a slur against heterosexuals.
die cis scum? i mean c'mon, it's trying to be "fag" for straights. i refuse to legitimize it.
but there's already an accepted word in western culture for heterosexuals, straight.
it would be like pushing yet another term for "caucasians" on white people to try and label them with a word that has a deragatory sentiment. and the way i see cis being used it's basically a slur against heterosexuals.
die cis scum? i mean c'mon, it's trying to be "fag" for straights. i refuse to legitimize it.
Anonymous N replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,887
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,888
@534,885 (squeegee)
So... What's the accepted word for being comfortable with one's biological sex, then? It needs a word of some kind. And this one seems to have roots in academia, no less.
> word that has a deragatory sentiment. and the way i see cis being used it's basically a slur against heterosexuals.
> die cis scum? i mean c'mon, it's trying to be "fag" for straights. i refuse to legitimize it.
I'm going to take a wild guess here, and assume you're not a regular on Tumblr, but are a regular on chans? So you probably only hear about nutters like that using it? You're only seeing the crazy use of it, plenty of people just use it as its meant to be used: a harmless, technical term. In fact, the word "gay" itself can often be used in a derogatory sense. Does that make it into a slur? No, because that's not what the word itself is.
The problem here, I think, is that nutters like that have become too prominent in the eyes of some, and attatched a negative connotation to the word by association. It's a shame it's played out that way, because it's a harmless word in itself.
So... What's the accepted word for being comfortable with one's biological sex, then? It needs a word of some kind. And this one seems to have roots in academia, no less.
> word that has a deragatory sentiment. and the way i see cis being used it's basically a slur against heterosexuals.
> die cis scum? i mean c'mon, it's trying to be "fag" for straights. i refuse to legitimize it.
I'm going to take a wild guess here, and assume you're not a regular on Tumblr, but are a regular on chans? So you probably only hear about nutters like that using it? You're only seeing the crazy use of it, plenty of people just use it as its meant to be used: a harmless, technical term. In fact, the word "gay" itself can often be used in a derogatory sense. Does that make it into a slur? No, because that's not what the word itself is.
The problem here, I think, is that nutters like that have become too prominent in the eyes of some, and attatched a negative connotation to the word by association. It's a shame it's played out that way, because it's a harmless word in itself.
TTEH joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 7 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,889
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> So... What's the accepted word for being comfortable with one's biological sex, then?
"Normal"? :)
> So... What's the accepted word for being comfortable with one's biological sex, then?
"Normal"? :)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,890
@previous (TTEH)
Well, that's kinda dismissive of trans people, isn't it? Like, would we describe heterosexuals as "normal" compared to gays? Nah. So why's this case different?
Well, that's kinda dismissive of trans people, isn't it? Like, would we describe heterosexuals as "normal" compared to gays? Nah. So why's this case different?
TTEH replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,891
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)Yeah, I'm just being a dick.
> Like, would we describe heterosexuals as "normal" compared to gays?
Yes. :D
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,892
@534,890 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
straight = comfortable with own gender and attracted to opposite sex.
trangender = uncomfortable with own gender
homosexual transgender = uncomfortable with own gender and attracted to same biological gender
heterosexual transgender = etc.
etc.
etc.
straight = comfortable with own gender and attracted to opposite sex.
trangender = uncomfortable with own gender
homosexual transgender = uncomfortable with own gender and attracted to same biological gender
heterosexual transgender = etc.
etc.
etc.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 24 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,893
@534,891 (TTEH)
I suspected. Just wanted to make sure. :P
@previous (squeegee)
But "straight" doesn't refer to gender identity, just sexuality. Nobody uses it in that way.
Are you that disturbed by the radical SJWs that you refuse to accept a word that they also happen to use? Again, this isn't really any different than somebody refusing to accept the word "gay" because they've seen lots of crazed homophobes use it as a slur. The existence of nutters using it in a negative way changes nothing. It sees lots of use by non-crazy people. I promise.
I suspected. Just wanted to make sure. :P
@previous (squeegee)
But "straight" doesn't refer to gender identity, just sexuality. Nobody uses it in that way.
Are you that disturbed by the radical SJWs that you refuse to accept a word that they also happen to use? Again, this isn't really any different than somebody refusing to accept the word "gay" because they've seen lots of crazed homophobes use it as a slur. The existence of nutters using it in a negative way changes nothing. It sees lots of use by non-crazy people. I promise.
(Edited 36 seconds later.)
Anonymous N replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,894
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,895
@534,893 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
then i'm making up a word too, it's dubfs, and it means "a person who labels others out of an insecurity derived from being labeled themselves."
it's an acedemic word which happens to only be used on one website in all the world and the vast majority of people it applies to aren't even aware there was a need for such a word at all! but, just becuase it's not fancy and defined in "books" doesn't mean you have the right to deny its definition.
then i'm making up a word too, it's dubfs, and it means "a person who labels others out of an insecurity derived from being labeled themselves."
it's an acedemic word which happens to only be used on one website in all the world and the vast majority of people it applies to aren't even aware there was a need for such a word at all! but, just becuase it's not fancy and defined in "books" doesn't mean you have the right to deny its definition.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,898
@previous (squeegee)
> "a person who labels others out of an insecurity derived from being labeled themselves."
Now you're strawmanning. Is it so hard to believe that there's a legitimate requirement for the word, rather than it being a sinister plot by angry transexuals to bring down everyone else?
But okay, let's say you just make up a new word. Maybe it gets popular, catches on as the main term. But oh wait, then the SJWs start using it! Can't use it now, because it was used as a slur. Better invent another new word.
> and the vast majority of people it applies to aren't even aware there was a need for such a word at all!
Hmmm, those Muslims go around saying that gays don't exist in their countries. And that's probably true in a sense, because in Muslim countries, gays are either too scared to come out or are indoctrinated to repress their beliefs. So it's a situation where it seems like everyone is straight, bar a few fringe exceptions.
Now, I wonder if a devout Musluim might see much use for the word "straight"?
> "a person who labels others out of an insecurity derived from being labeled themselves."
Now you're strawmanning. Is it so hard to believe that there's a legitimate requirement for the word, rather than it being a sinister plot by angry transexuals to bring down everyone else?
But okay, let's say you just make up a new word. Maybe it gets popular, catches on as the main term. But oh wait, then the SJWs start using it! Can't use it now, because it was used as a slur. Better invent another new word.
> and the vast majority of people it applies to aren't even aware there was a need for such a word at all!
Hmmm, those Muslims go around saying that gays don't exist in their countries. And that's probably true in a sense, because in Muslim countries, gays are either too scared to come out or are indoctrinated to repress their beliefs. So it's a situation where it seems like everyone is straight, bar a few fringe exceptions.
Now, I wonder if a devout Musluim might see much use for the word "straight"?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 16 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,903
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
i never said gays don't exist, i said the word "cis" is meaningless. and to 99% of people it is.
why continue to try and reduce people to a single word? you can say more with sentences and you can better fully explain a person with paragraphs. this desire to reduce people to a single label is exclusionary.
and as a people, i would think homosexuals and transgendered people whould be the last to want to foster an exclusionary society of labels. i'm wrong though.
i never said gays don't exist, i said the word "cis" is meaningless. and to 99% of people it is.
why continue to try and reduce people to a single word? you can say more with sentences and you can better fully explain a person with paragraphs. this desire to reduce people to a single label is exclusionary.
and as a people, i would think homosexuals and transgendered people whould be the last to want to foster an exclusionary society of labels. i'm wrong though.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,906
@previous (squeegee)
> i never said gays don't exist,
You missed my point. My point was, terms can be considered "unnecessary" by some groups, but it doesn't change the fact that the terms are applicable. There's two distinct groups, and each needs a term. Whether that's gays and straights or transexuals and CIS people.
> why continue to try and reduce people to a single word? you can say more with sentences and you can better fully explain a person with paragraphs. this desire to reduce people to a single label is exclusionary.
That's... Not what it's doing at all. As I keep saying, it's just a term for people who aren't trans. It's no more reductive than saying someone is heterosexual. Or saying that they're left-handed. It just describes one aspect of them.
How does is the description of "is comfortable with biological sex" exclusionary, while "is attracted to opposite sex" isn't?
> i never said gays don't exist,
You missed my point. My point was, terms can be considered "unnecessary" by some groups, but it doesn't change the fact that the terms are applicable. There's two distinct groups, and each needs a term. Whether that's gays and straights or transexuals and CIS people.
> why continue to try and reduce people to a single word? you can say more with sentences and you can better fully explain a person with paragraphs. this desire to reduce people to a single label is exclusionary.
That's... Not what it's doing at all. As I keep saying, it's just a term for people who aren't trans. It's no more reductive than saying someone is heterosexual. Or saying that they're left-handed. It just describes one aspect of them.
How does is the description of "is comfortable with biological sex" exclusionary, while "is attracted to opposite sex" isn't?
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 52 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,916
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
becuase of the intent behind the usage of the word. Fag may mean cigarette but when you call someone a "fag" it's obviously not becuase you think they are a cigarette.
sure, people say "cis means straight" but really they mean "die cis scum." just like i can say i called someone a cigarette but everyone knows what i really mean.
look at it like this, pronounce "cis".
it sounds out as "sis" and i don't know any heterosexual males that would accept being called a sis becuase of the loaded meaning of the word sissy, which is what cis sounds like.
so heterosexual males, from the outset without even knowing what "cis" means, hear sis and get mad for being called that. so let's apply an already loaded sounding term and apply it to the very group that will get the most angry at its use?
who wins here? angry gays, that's who.
now they have a word to call heterosexuals that heterosexuals hate as much as homosexuals hate fag. to me it feels like a meme that's being used to try and "give them some of their own medicine" and tactics like that further divide idealogical groups.
we don't need any more loaded, bigoted, and exclusionary words to describe other people.
becuase of the intent behind the usage of the word. Fag may mean cigarette but when you call someone a "fag" it's obviously not becuase you think they are a cigarette.
sure, people say "cis means straight" but really they mean "die cis scum." just like i can say i called someone a cigarette but everyone knows what i really mean.
look at it like this, pronounce "cis".
it sounds out as "sis" and i don't know any heterosexual males that would accept being called a sis becuase of the loaded meaning of the word sissy, which is what cis sounds like.
so heterosexual males, from the outset without even knowing what "cis" means, hear sis and get mad for being called that. so let's apply an already loaded sounding term and apply it to the very group that will get the most angry at its use?
who wins here? angry gays, that's who.
now they have a word to call heterosexuals that heterosexuals hate as much as homosexuals hate fag. to me it feels like a meme that's being used to try and "give them some of their own medicine" and tactics like that further divide idealogical groups.
we don't need any more loaded, bigoted, and exclusionary words to describe other people.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,918
@previous (squeegee)
> sure, people say "cis means straight" but really they mean "die cis scum."
No... They really don't. I used it myself in a post before. Do I want death upon anyone who isn't transexual, now? No? Well then, it seems that the word is more than just a slur. Imagine that.
> look at it like this, pronounce "cis".
> it sounds out as "sis" and i don't know any heterosexual males that would accept being called a sis becuase of the loaded meaning of the word sissy, which is what cis sounds like.
People wouldn't just call other people this at random, you know. It would pretty much only come up in the context of conversations about gender identity. Like, I would imagine you don't go around referring to your straight friends as straight, unless sexuality comes up? And, you know, the word can be explained. It's unlikley that the word would be used without people willing to explain it, or people willing to ask what it means.
> to me it feels like a meme that's being used to try and "give them some of their own medicine" and tactics like that further divide idealogical groups.
Looping back around to an earlier point, it feels that way because you're on the chan side of the internet. Now, from that position, you're pretty much only going to hear about the zealous SJWs. Why would anyone pass along, or make fun of, somebody casually using the word CIS in a non-demeaning way? They wouldn't. This is just like how stereotypes are built up, the bad stuff being more talked about and thus becoming the default impression.
> sure, people say "cis means straight" but really they mean "die cis scum."
No... They really don't. I used it myself in a post before. Do I want death upon anyone who isn't transexual, now? No? Well then, it seems that the word is more than just a slur. Imagine that.
> look at it like this, pronounce "cis".
> it sounds out as "sis" and i don't know any heterosexual males that would accept being called a sis becuase of the loaded meaning of the word sissy, which is what cis sounds like.
People wouldn't just call other people this at random, you know. It would pretty much only come up in the context of conversations about gender identity. Like, I would imagine you don't go around referring to your straight friends as straight, unless sexuality comes up? And, you know, the word can be explained. It's unlikley that the word would be used without people willing to explain it, or people willing to ask what it means.
> to me it feels like a meme that's being used to try and "give them some of their own medicine" and tactics like that further divide idealogical groups.
Looping back around to an earlier point, it feels that way because you're on the chan side of the internet. Now, from that position, you're pretty much only going to hear about the zealous SJWs. Why would anyone pass along, or make fun of, somebody casually using the word CIS in a non-demeaning way? They wouldn't. This is just like how stereotypes are built up, the bad stuff being more talked about and thus becoming the default impression.
squeegee joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 19 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,921
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> > sure, people say "cis means straight" but really they mean "die cis scum."
> No... They really don't. I used it myself in a post before. Do I want death upon anyone who isn't transexual, now? No? Well then, it seems that the word is more than just a slur. Imagine that.
>
the same thing could be said of Negro. it's not actually a slur, like nigger is, but no one goes around calling anyone a Negro anymore because the word has a condescending tone.
> > look at it like this, pronounce "cis".
> > it sounds out as "sis" and i don't know any heterosexual males that would accept being called a sis becuase of the loaded meaning of the word sissy, which is what cis sounds like.
> People wouldn't just call other people this at random, you know. It would pretty much only come up in the context of conversations about gender identity. Like, I would imagine you don't go around referring to your straight friends as straight, unless sexuality comes up? And, you know, the word can be explained. It's unlikley that the word would be used without people willing to explain it, or people willing to ask what it means.
Unless they are using it as a slur and post, "DIE CIS SCUM," all over the internet to the point that that's the only usage of the word i've been exposed to. And no one stops to explain their insults. I've never seen "DIE CIS SCUM *CIS means heterosexual, btw", all i see is the insult.
> > to me it feels like a meme that's being used to try and "give them some of their own medicine" and tactics like that further divide idealogical groups.
> Looping back around to an earlier point, it feels that way because you're on the chan side of the internet. Now, from that position, you're pretty much only going to hear about the zealous SJWs.
because it is an insult used within that community to insult heterosexuals. The first time i heard CIS used i looked it up and found a tumblr where someone in the comments called it "perfect" because it sounds like sissy and would upset straight guys as much as fag upsets gays. i know anecdotes don't mean shit, but there you go. The times i've been exposed to it (away from minichan) it has always flowed form some kind of bigoted dialog or attached to a meme picture used to insult heterosexuals.
> Why would anyone pass along, or make fun of, somebody casually using the word CIS in a non-demeaning way? They wouldn't. This is just like how stereotypes are built up, the bad stuff being more talked about and thus becoming the default impression.
at one point the word nigger was used to just refer to black people, but then the USE of the word became primarily associated with bigotry and the word has fallen into disuse. CIS is being used primarily as an insult which means that soon enough any other use of the word will just fall out of fashion.
and it will fall out of fashion specifically because tumblr has turned it into such an ugly insult.
> > sure, people say "cis means straight" but really they mean "die cis scum."
> No... They really don't. I used it myself in a post before. Do I want death upon anyone who isn't transexual, now? No? Well then, it seems that the word is more than just a slur. Imagine that.
>
the same thing could be said of Negro. it's not actually a slur, like nigger is, but no one goes around calling anyone a Negro anymore because the word has a condescending tone.
> > look at it like this, pronounce "cis".
> > it sounds out as "sis" and i don't know any heterosexual males that would accept being called a sis becuase of the loaded meaning of the word sissy, which is what cis sounds like.
> People wouldn't just call other people this at random, you know. It would pretty much only come up in the context of conversations about gender identity. Like, I would imagine you don't go around referring to your straight friends as straight, unless sexuality comes up? And, you know, the word can be explained. It's unlikley that the word would be used without people willing to explain it, or people willing to ask what it means.
Unless they are using it as a slur and post, "DIE CIS SCUM," all over the internet to the point that that's the only usage of the word i've been exposed to. And no one stops to explain their insults. I've never seen "DIE CIS SCUM *CIS means heterosexual, btw", all i see is the insult.
> > to me it feels like a meme that's being used to try and "give them some of their own medicine" and tactics like that further divide idealogical groups.
> Looping back around to an earlier point, it feels that way because you're on the chan side of the internet. Now, from that position, you're pretty much only going to hear about the zealous SJWs.
because it is an insult used within that community to insult heterosexuals. The first time i heard CIS used i looked it up and found a tumblr where someone in the comments called it "perfect" because it sounds like sissy and would upset straight guys as much as fag upsets gays. i know anecdotes don't mean shit, but there you go. The times i've been exposed to it (away from minichan) it has always flowed form some kind of bigoted dialog or attached to a meme picture used to insult heterosexuals.
> Why would anyone pass along, or make fun of, somebody casually using the word CIS in a non-demeaning way? They wouldn't. This is just like how stereotypes are built up, the bad stuff being more talked about and thus becoming the default impression.
at one point the word nigger was used to just refer to black people, but then the USE of the word became primarily associated with bigotry and the word has fallen into disuse. CIS is being used primarily as an insult which means that soon enough any other use of the word will just fall out of fashion.
and it will fall out of fashion specifically because tumblr has turned it into such an ugly insult.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 25 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,926
@previous (squeegee)
> but no one goes around calling anyone a Negro anymore because the word has a condescending tone.
Let's look at the context of it, then. It was originally popular in a culture that looked down on blacks, so it carried negative connotations. It was used that way exclusively. This doesn't have to be the case with CIS, because there are many who don't use it to look down on people.
> Unless they are using it as a slur and post, "DIE CIS SCUM
Is that a problem with the word, or the person? The angry people will use whatever term that happens to describe non-trans people in their rants. So your logic doesn't present a solution. The same people would just eventually start uisng the next word to describe non-transexuals. We can accept that they're saying what they're saying and try to ignore them, or we raise them up on a pedestal and keep shifting the term around.
> because it is an insult used within that community to insult heterosexuals.
u wot m8? It has nothing to do with heterosexuality... Why on Earth are you saying that? It's about gender identity, not sexuality. Those are different things.
> i know anecdotes don't mean shit, but there you go.
No, they don't. I for one have seen it used in a non-hostile manner many a time. All we can conclude from this is that there are noticeable amounts of people using it either way. So, as I said, the problem lies in a certain group of people rather than the word itself.
> but no one goes around calling anyone a Negro anymore because the word has a condescending tone.
Let's look at the context of it, then. It was originally popular in a culture that looked down on blacks, so it carried negative connotations. It was used that way exclusively. This doesn't have to be the case with CIS, because there are many who don't use it to look down on people.
> Unless they are using it as a slur and post, "DIE CIS SCUM
Is that a problem with the word, or the person? The angry people will use whatever term that happens to describe non-trans people in their rants. So your logic doesn't present a solution. The same people would just eventually start uisng the next word to describe non-transexuals. We can accept that they're saying what they're saying and try to ignore them, or we raise them up on a pedestal and keep shifting the term around.
> because it is an insult used within that community to insult heterosexuals.
u wot m8? It has nothing to do with heterosexuality... Why on Earth are you saying that? It's about gender identity, not sexuality. Those are different things.
> i know anecdotes don't mean shit, but there you go.
No, they don't. I for one have seen it used in a non-hostile manner many a time. All we can conclude from this is that there are noticeable amounts of people using it either way. So, as I said, the problem lies in a certain group of people rather than the word itself.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,927
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
so then there's nothing wrong with the word nigger, just the people that use it
i guess that explains why niggers can call each other niggers but whites gotta call them African Americans
(and i can use the word nigger because i'm using the older version of the word that doesn't mean sub-human)
so then there's nothing wrong with the word nigger, just the people that use it
i guess that explains why niggers can call each other niggers but whites gotta call them African Americans
(and i can use the word nigger because i'm using the older version of the word that doesn't mean sub-human)
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,928
@previous (squeegee)
I dont like the word cis because it is often used as an insult and is an assumption of gender.
I dont like the word cis because it is often used as an insult and is an assumption of gender.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,931
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
the whole thing just smacks of prejudice to me.
and to be quite honest i DO find it personally insulting. it makes me feel like they are trying to reduce me to a subset of stereotypes based on one facet of my personality, and that's fucking rude. i don't go around reducing gays to flamboyant fairies and they shouldn't reduce me to a raping psychopath or whatever the gays think heterosexuals are into.
the whole thing just smacks of prejudice to me.
and to be quite honest i DO find it personally insulting. it makes me feel like they are trying to reduce me to a subset of stereotypes based on one facet of my personality, and that's fucking rude. i don't go around reducing gays to flamboyant fairies and they shouldn't reduce me to a raping psychopath or whatever the gays think heterosexuals are into.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,933
@previous (squeegee)
I also reject the idea that feelings about gender trump the physical reality of genitalia.
I also reject the idea that feelings about gender trump the physical reality of genitalia.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,934
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
when i was a kid i really wanted to be a flying reindeer named Klaxon but no one ever validated my feelings :(
when i was a kid i really wanted to be a flying reindeer named Klaxon but no one ever validated my feelings :(
squeegee double-posted this 11 years ago, 15 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,935
@534,933 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
i do think gender dysphoria is a valid psychological issue though.
however i don't feel that surgery is necessarily the best way to deal with it. i wouldn't be one to make any decisions about that either way, though, since it absolutely doesn't effect me at all. i'll leave that one up to psychiatrists and patients.
if it were my kid, i think i'd do everything in the world to discourage it and try to foster a normal gender identity
because the life of a transexual is generally exceedingly difficult, especially once you consider everything they'll put their bodies through their entire lives.
oh, and also relationships for them are very difficult, often being used as a fetishistic sex object more than a partner in a relationship. Sure, not every relationship will be like that, but ask a tranny and they'll tell you.
i do think gender dysphoria is a valid psychological issue though.
however i don't feel that surgery is necessarily the best way to deal with it. i wouldn't be one to make any decisions about that either way, though, since it absolutely doesn't effect me at all. i'll leave that one up to psychiatrists and patients.
if it were my kid, i think i'd do everything in the world to discourage it and try to foster a normal gender identity
because the life of a transexual is generally exceedingly difficult, especially once you consider everything they'll put their bodies through their entire lives.
oh, and also relationships for them are very difficult, often being used as a fetishistic sex object more than a partner in a relationship. Sure, not every relationship will be like that, but ask a tranny and they'll tell you.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
squeegee triple-posted this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,936
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,938
@534,927 (squeegee)
> so then there's nothing wrong with the word nigger, just the people that use it
That's not what I said, squeegee. I'm saying that the word nigger/negro was a problem because it was pretty much exclusively used by a culture that looked down on blacks. Not the case for CIS, which is used by plenty of reasonable people.
But ah, of course, you've seen too many people using it negatively, haven't you? I guess that apparently anecdotes do count for shit, then.
@534,931 (squeegee)
> and to be quite honest i DO find it personally insulting. it makes me feel like they are trying to reduce me to a subset of stereotypes based on one facet of my personality,
Oh my god, that's not what the word means. It's not a stereotype... All it means is that you aren't transexual...
At this point, I can only conclude that you're being willfully ignorant. Or aren't really reading my posts. I wonder which?
@534,933 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Like you reject all of the scientific data on the matter, even after I've gone over it with you many times. I recall you once saying that you didn't respect religion because it didn't match up with science, but apparently science is less important when it comes to your own view on transexuals.
But hey, maybe you can call in some of your "many scientists" to refute my claims of transexuality having a biological basis? Because you weren't quite able to present any, last time.
@534,934 (squeegee)
Really, man? Now you're going to mock transexuals?
Weren't you supportive of me when I defended transexuals against that "Dr" troll guy? I thought you were reasonable about this. Okay, I typed this reply before you made your next post. But still.
> so then there's nothing wrong with the word nigger, just the people that use it
That's not what I said, squeegee. I'm saying that the word nigger/negro was a problem because it was pretty much exclusively used by a culture that looked down on blacks. Not the case for CIS, which is used by plenty of reasonable people.
But ah, of course, you've seen too many people using it negatively, haven't you? I guess that apparently anecdotes do count for shit, then.
@534,931 (squeegee)
> and to be quite honest i DO find it personally insulting. it makes me feel like they are trying to reduce me to a subset of stereotypes based on one facet of my personality,
Oh my god, that's not what the word means. It's not a stereotype... All it means is that you aren't transexual...
At this point, I can only conclude that you're being willfully ignorant. Or aren't really reading my posts. I wonder which?
@534,933 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Like you reject all of the scientific data on the matter, even after I've gone over it with you many times. I recall you once saying that you didn't respect religion because it didn't match up with science, but apparently science is less important when it comes to your own view on transexuals.
But hey, maybe you can call in some of your "many scientists" to refute my claims of transexuality having a biological basis? Because you weren't quite able to present any, last time.
@534,934 (squeegee)
Really, man? Now you're going to mock transexuals?
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,939
@534,935 (squeegee)
> if it were my kid, i think i'd do everything in the world to discourage it
What if they were gay?
I know you mean well, since it might make their life more difficult, but I don't think it's healthy to try and make someone repress themselves like that. And, really, it's society that should be changing, not the child.
> if it were my kid, i think i'd do everything in the world to discourage it
What if they were gay?
I know you mean well, since it might make their life more difficult, but I don't think it's healthy to try and make someone repress themselves like that. And, really, it's society that should be changing, not the child.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 7 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,940
@534,938 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
People who have brains similar to the opposite sex, are still not the opposite sex and shouldn't be treated as such. They certainly arent socialized as the opposite sex, and experience vastly different problems.
Also, many trans people now reject thw idea that trans people need to have dysphoria, or that it should even be treated as a medical condition. I believe that many people who claim to be trans should have complete hormonal workups because the results would be interesting. I dont think many will though, because what is found would make them uncomfortable.
Even Catherine refuses to have his hormones tested, because he believes that if he had the normal amount of testosterone as a regular male, it would make him a meat head.
Gender, even the idea of gender fluidity is pointless, and is just a way to maintain outdated gender roles, while getting the chance to feel smug and progressive at the same time.
People who have brains similar to the opposite sex, are still not the opposite sex and shouldn't be treated as such. They certainly arent socialized as the opposite sex, and experience vastly different problems.
Also, many trans people now reject thw idea that trans people need to have dysphoria, or that it should even be treated as a medical condition. I believe that many people who claim to be trans should have complete hormonal workups because the results would be interesting. I dont think many will though, because what is found would make them uncomfortable.
Even Catherine refuses to have his hormones tested, because he believes that if he had the normal amount of testosterone as a regular male, it would make him a meat head.
Gender, even the idea of gender fluidity is pointless, and is just a way to maintain outdated gender roles, while getting the chance to feel smug and progressive at the same time.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,941
@534,939 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
If I had a gay son, I would warn him that acting in a flamboyant manner would make him a target. Because that would be the truth. If my son was a trans woman, I would tell him that males or anyone should be able to dress as they wish without taking on a gender. I would also tell him that when males dress as females it marks them as easy targets for other males. Which is also true.
If I had a gay son, I would warn him that acting in a flamboyant manner would make him a target. Because that would be the truth. If my son was a trans woman, I would tell him that males or anyone should be able to dress as they wish without taking on a gender. I would also tell him that when males dress as females it marks them as easy targets for other males. Which is also true.
(Edited 20 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,942
@534,940 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> are still not the opposite sex and shouldn't be treated as such.
They clearly don't agree. Hence, you know, transexualism being a thing in the first place.
As I've pointed out a few times, now, it clearly does matter. There are many incidents of transexual children acting differently to non-trans kids. They should be treated differently, because they are different.
> Also, many trans people now reject thw idea that trans people need to have dysphoria, or that it should even be treated as a medical condition.
That's great and all, but legitimate transexuals definitely still exist. One faction saying that changes nothing.
> and is just a way to maintain outdated gender roles
No it's not. Just identifying as woman doesn't mean you want to be subservient to a man or develop an interest in housekeeping. Gender identity can be seperate from ye olde gender roles.
> are still not the opposite sex and shouldn't be treated as such.
They clearly don't agree. Hence, you know, transexualism being a thing in the first place.
As I've pointed out a few times, now, it clearly does matter. There are many incidents of transexual children acting differently to non-trans kids. They should be treated differently, because they are different.
> Also, many trans people now reject thw idea that trans people need to have dysphoria, or that it should even be treated as a medical condition.
That's great and all, but legitimate transexuals definitely still exist. One faction saying that changes nothing.
> and is just a way to maintain outdated gender roles
No it's not. Just identifying as woman doesn't mean you want to be subservient to a man or develop an interest in housekeeping. Gender identity can be seperate from ye olde gender roles.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,943
@534,941 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
That's reasonable enough, I suppose. If you think you're in an area where they could be endangered. Were I in a bad part of the southern part of the USA, I might also advise them to try and keep it out of public.
That's reasonable enough, I suppose. If you think you're in an area where they could be endangered. Were I in a bad part of the southern part of the USA, I might also advise them to try and keep it out of public.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,944
@534,942 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Its interesting how you downplay the whole truscum movement.
Saying that acting in an effeminate manner, or style of dress makes you a woman, is practicing gender roles. Males can be effeminate or females can be masculine. Of course they dont agree, but that doesnt change anything. Its interesting that both trans men and trans women dont want to share facilities with "cis" males. You would think think that birds of a feather would flock together.
There was a mother a few years ago that was fighting to have her retarded adult son be kept with the other children because he had the mind of a child. I didn't agree with that either.
Its interesting how you downplay the whole truscum movement.
Saying that acting in an effeminate manner, or style of dress makes you a woman, is practicing gender roles. Males can be effeminate or females can be masculine. Of course they dont agree, but that doesnt change anything. Its interesting that both trans men and trans women dont want to share facilities with "cis" males. You would think think that birds of a feather would flock together.
There was a mother a few years ago that was fighting to have her retarded adult son be kept with the other children because he had the mind of a child. I didn't agree with that either.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,945
@534,943 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
But wait, how could a trans woman keep it out of public? Shouldnt society change for them instead?
But wait, how could a trans woman keep it out of public? Shouldnt society change for them instead?
(Edited 27 seconds later.)
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ triple-posted this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,946
A question: if I were to have a brainscan right now, and it showed that my brain is more similar to a males, should I be forced to use male facilities? By that I mean, male restrooms, locker rooms, prisons, or be forced to have male roommates in the hospital?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,947
@534,939 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
i see a difference between gay and trans. you can be gay and not proclaim to be the opposite sex. You can have gay feelings without requiring everyone else to identify you as something you don't appear to be. Also you can be gay without requiring you undergo massive physical changes due to the introduction of foreign hormones and plastic surgery. Being gay is "natural," but being a fully fleshed out modern transexual requires a lot of intervention.
if my kid turned out to be gay then i would probably do like swamplights and try and highlight the dangers.
and maybe "being trans" isn't a choice, but there is a lot more "choice" involved about how you present yourself and live your life, and i would attempt to discourage the kind of choices that are... irrevocable.
i see a difference between gay and trans. you can be gay and not proclaim to be the opposite sex. You can have gay feelings without requiring everyone else to identify you as something you don't appear to be. Also you can be gay without requiring you undergo massive physical changes due to the introduction of foreign hormones and plastic surgery. Being gay is "natural," but being a fully fleshed out modern transexual requires a lot of intervention.
if my kid turned out to be gay then i would probably do like swamplights and try and highlight the dangers.
and maybe "being trans" isn't a choice, but there is a lot more "choice" involved about how you present yourself and live your life, and i would attempt to discourage the kind of choices that are... irrevocable.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,948
@534,944 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> Its interesting how you downplay the whole truscum movement.
It's even more interesting how you try to downplay transexuals even existing, IMO.
Anyway, I've never denied there being harmful, radical movements in the transexual community. Do they invalidate transexualism in some way? Do they represent all transexuals? No. It is naive to act like they are representative, as it would be to act like the Tea Party is representative of the USA, or something like that.
> Saying that acting in an effeminate manner, or style of dress makes you a woman, is practicing gender roles.
They're not saying that just acting like a woman makes you a woman, they have an innate urge to identify as one (as shown in the brain scans, lest you forget). And society's own views on gender might shape how that manifests, somewhat.
> There was a mother a few years ago that was fighting to have her retarded adult son be kept with the other children because he had the mind of a child.
What do you mean by this, "be kept with the other children"? Kept in school? In daycare?
> Its interesting how you downplay the whole truscum movement.
It's even more interesting how you try to downplay transexuals even existing, IMO.
Anyway, I've never denied there being harmful, radical movements in the transexual community. Do they invalidate transexualism in some way? Do they represent all transexuals? No. It is naive to act like they are representative, as it would be to act like the Tea Party is representative of the USA, or something like that.
> Saying that acting in an effeminate manner, or style of dress makes you a woman, is practicing gender roles.
They're not saying that just acting like a woman makes you a woman, they have an innate urge to identify as one (as shown in the brain scans, lest you forget). And society's own views on gender might shape how that manifests, somewhat.
> There was a mother a few years ago that was fighting to have her retarded adult son be kept with the other children because he had the mind of a child.
What do you mean by this, "be kept with the other children"? Kept in school? In daycare?
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,949
@OP
Is that the tranny who lives 15 minutes from Syntax?
Is that the tranny who lives 15 minutes from Syntax?
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 48 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,950
@534,945 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> But wait, how could a trans woman keep it out of public? Shouldnt society change for them instead?
you're asking all of society to change for one person who refuses to accept the biological nature of... themselves. Why not just ask the one person to change rather than all of society. surely that's easier? changing one mind rather than billions?
> But wait, how could a trans woman keep it out of public? Shouldnt society change for them instead?
you're asking all of society to change for one person who refuses to accept the biological nature of... themselves. Why not just ask the one person to change rather than all of society. surely that's easier? changing one mind rather than billions?
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,951
@534,948 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I dont deny that transexuals exist, I just dont believe that they should be treated as the opposite sex.
He was in second grade with children.
I dont deny that transexuals exist, I just dont believe that they should be treated as the opposite sex.
He was in second grade with children.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 24 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,952
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 51 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,953
@534,946 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Do you identify as male? No, you don't, do you?
There's your answer.
@534,947 (squeegee)
> Also you can be gay without requiring you undergo massive physical changes due to the introduction of foreign hormones and plastic surgery. Being gay is "natural," but being a fully fleshed out modern transexual requires a lot of intervention.
Not necessarily. Not all trans people feel that that stuff is the best way to go about it. Some certainly do, but not all.
But I see your point. While I think that the surgeries should be an option, it is definitely a good idea to be damn sure it's what you want beforehand.
Do you identify as male? No, you don't, do you?
There's your answer.
@534,947 (squeegee)
> Also you can be gay without requiring you undergo massive physical changes due to the introduction of foreign hormones and plastic surgery. Being gay is "natural," but being a fully fleshed out modern transexual requires a lot of intervention.
Not necessarily. Not all trans people feel that that stuff is the best way to go about it. Some certainly do, but not all.
But I see your point. While I think that the surgeries should be an option, it is definitely a good idea to be damn sure it's what you want beforehand.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,955
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Why does that matter? I thought that the most important thing was the brain scans.
I dont dont identify as having a gender, because its meaningless.
Why does that matter? I thought that the most important thing was the brain scans.
I dont dont identify as having a gender, because its meaningless.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,956
@534,953 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
it's just that if i went to the doctor and told them i identify as a paraplegic and wanted them to sever my spinal cord they would not do it.
i don't know why there is this exception to genital mutilation.
a doc wouldn't amputate my arm because i feel it would improve my psychological outlook...
a doc wouldn't even give me a colostomy bag just because i want one. they don't do amputations of organs and parts unless it's a medical requirement, and i have no idea how castration and genital mutilation became approved therapies for cognitive dissonance.
it's just that if i went to the doctor and told them i identify as a paraplegic and wanted them to sever my spinal cord they would not do it.
i don't know why there is this exception to genital mutilation.
a doc wouldn't amputate my arm because i feel it would improve my psychological outlook...
a doc wouldn't even give me a colostomy bag just because i want one. they don't do amputations of organs and parts unless it's a medical requirement, and i have no idea how castration and genital mutilation became approved therapies for cognitive dissonance.
Anonymous C replied with this 11 years ago, 20 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,957
@534,950 (squeegee)You seem to be under the impression that meat bodies define what it means to be human.
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 57 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,958
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 8 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,959
@534,950 (squeegee)
> you're asking all of society to change for one person who refuses to accept the biological nature of... themselves.
All I'm asking is for society to not verbally abuse or physically assault someone who dresses and acts a little different. I think that's a reasonable thing to ask.
It would've been exactly the same logic for gays who wanted to be out in public, just a few years ago. Still is, in some parts of the world.
@534,951 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> I just dont believe that they should be treated as the opposite sex.
Your opinion doesn't matter. They are the ones who want it.
> He was in second grade with children.
Then that's a matter of practicality, isn't it? A grown man, who will never actually be able to intellectually progress beyond that grade anyway, isn't the same thing.
> you're asking all of society to change for one person who refuses to accept the biological nature of... themselves.
All I'm asking is for society to not verbally abuse or physically assault someone who dresses and acts a little different. I think that's a reasonable thing to ask.
It would've been exactly the same logic for gays who wanted to be out in public, just a few years ago. Still is, in some parts of the world.
@534,951 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> I just dont believe that they should be treated as the opposite sex.
Your opinion doesn't matter. They are the ones who want it.
> He was in second grade with children.
Then that's a matter of practicality, isn't it? A grown man, who will never actually be able to intellectually progress beyond that grade anyway, isn't the same thing.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 14 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,960
The trans issue reminds me of the fat acceptance movement. In order to avoid triggering people, we need to pretend that you can be healthy at any size. In order to avoid triggering people we need to pretend that women can have penises.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,961
@534,959 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
My opinion matters as much as theirs.
You'd actually be okay with a grown male being kept with children?
My opinion matters as much as theirs.
You'd actually be okay with a grown male being kept with children?
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 25 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,962
@534,955 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
And whether they identify as male.
It's not as simple as just having your brain apear to be a certain way. It's whether you have the urge to be transexual in the first place.
Motherfuck, this has kept me up until half three. I really must sleep now.
And whether they identify as male.
It's not as simple as just having your brain apear to be a certain way. It's whether you have the urge to be transexual in the first place.
Motherfuck, this has kept me up until half three. I really must sleep now.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 45 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,963
A question: in your opinion, do you need dysphoria in order to count as being trans?
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 54 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,964
@534,962 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Why do the urges matter? This is strictly about brain similarities.
Why do the urges matter? This is strictly about brain similarities.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ triple-posted this 11 years ago, 30 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,965
squeegee replied with this 11 years ago, 59 seconds later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #534,966
dw replied with this 11 years ago, 8 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #535,050
Butts
WSD !VBNtXmsnv. replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #535,051
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #535,058
@534,960 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
It's not the same at all... They don't think that they're legitimately the same as a biological woman. They just choose to identify as women. They're not trying to bend facts like the fat acceptance people, because there's a legitimate reason for them to feel that way- they have an innate urge to do so.
@534,961 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> You'd actually be okay with a grown male being kept with children?
Art thou haveth a chuckle, m8? I said I wouldn't support him staying in second grade, and gave my reasons why.
@534,963 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
You are mixing your terms, a little. Gender dysphoria just refers to being uncomfortable with one's gender, not the brain differences themselves. If a person is uncomfortable with their biological sex then they, by definition, have gender dysphoria.
To clarify, I could believe that "fake" transexuals might exist, sure. But so to do real ones, and that's what's more important.
@534,964 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Because it might not be as cut-and-dry as just brain differences. There are other biological factors that have also been associated with transexualism.
I only harp on about the brain differences so much because they're iron-clad proof that transexualism is legit. Since, before, you were trying to claim that transexuals weren't actually real.
It's not the same at all... They don't think that they're legitimately the same as a biological woman. They just choose to identify as women. They're not trying to bend facts like the fat acceptance people, because there's a legitimate reason for them to feel that way- they have an innate urge to do so.
@534,961 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> You'd actually be okay with a grown male being kept with children?
Art thou haveth a chuckle, m8? I said I wouldn't support him staying in second grade, and gave my reasons why.
@534,963 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
You are mixing your terms, a little. Gender dysphoria just refers to being uncomfortable with one's gender, not the brain differences themselves. If a person is uncomfortable with their biological sex then they, by definition, have gender dysphoria.
To clarify, I could believe that "fake" transexuals might exist, sure. But so to do real ones, and that's what's more important.
@534,964 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Because it might not be as cut-and-dry as just brain differences. There are other biological factors that have also been associated with transexualism.
I only harp on about the brain differences so much because they're iron-clad proof that transexualism is legit. Since, before, you were trying to claim that transexuals weren't actually real.
(Edited 9 minutes later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 week later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #537,082
tranny bumps, they just aren't the same...