HOME | DD

Description

First things first: this is not to say that people who use the term are stupid or wrong.
This is not that kind of stamp- I am thoroughly against hate stamps of any kind, as they're impolite and an eyesore.
This is just my explanation of why I feel that this term is not of much use and why I will NEVER use it.
So with that, here are my reasons.

1: The source that coined the term is unreliable

The term was coined in 1998 in an academic paper titled "The Neosexual Revolution" which cited an earlier 1991 paper titled “Transsexuals and our nosomorphic view.”
For those of you wondering what the heck "nosomorphic" is supposed to mean, there is no answer as said word is nonexistent.
As in it does not actually exist(- search it, and you'll only get back to that article.)
If that isn't enough to make you question the reliability of that 1998 article that cited that one from 1991, then keep in mind that the same source of this paper allowed a physicist by the name of Alan Sokal to put an article in the academic journal "“Social Text” called “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.”

This article argued that gravity was a social construct.
The physicist in question noted that no effort appeared to have been made to verify the information and arguments within the article- even though, you know, gravity pretty clearly exists.

Now, I don't know about you, but if a source has published papers without verifying them, I think it's safe to say that source is unreliable.

2: No one knows what it means
Most people are often completely baffled when they first see this word.
This is because the Latin root "cis" meaning "same" is very obscure.
I actually learned a fair amount of Greek and Latin roots, and I didn't even know what to make of that word.
Further complicating the problem is that when trying to find out what the word means, you will most likely
A: Find definitions stuffed with so much unnecessary crud that you end up even more confused
or B: Somehow offend someone with your ignorance of the term, never mind that most of the definitions given for it are needlessly complicated.
By the time you finally figure out that it just means "not transgender", you'll be frustrated bevond belief.

But apparently saying your "non trans" is offensive and "implies that trans people are abnormal."
Even though in every other issue non-x usually indicates that x is the norm/majority, such as referring to minorities as non-whites.

To be frank, saying that if I say I'm not trans, that I'm offending transgenders is stupid- I'm just stating a fact.
I'm not transgender- I'm female, and was born with the bits that go with being female- so how on earth would it be offensive to say that i'm not?
How is that logical? It's not- not at all.

So, here we have a term whose meaning at a glance is unclear, that has dozens of confusing and even conflicting definitions, and apparently taking the sane and logical route and just saying we're not transgender is offensive.

3: If it wasn't a slur before, it definitely is now

If one searches the term cisgender, you'll find one of two things: the previously mentioned confusing definitions and dubious articles- and "die cis scum."
This is especially true on tumblr, an otherwise ok site that has developed a large population of rabid SJWs.
And no, I do not mean "all SJWs" or "the ones I don't like"- I mean crazy people who will come at you for disagreeing with them in any capacity. That is why I do not use Tumblr- I don't have time for that.
The thing is, this "dis cis scum/truscum" nonsense was supposed to be a joke(apparently) and a social statement on all the abuse transgenders receive.
And yes, it is horrible that these people receive harassment and abuse and are even killed- but that doesn't make telling people to go DIE ok.
Which, whether it was the original intention or not, is definitely what it's become.
It wasn't exactly a good joke to begin with, as telling people to kill themselves was never all that funny to begin with, but some lunatics didn't get that memo, and so there are lovely people who actually go around telling people to go die for being cis now, some of whom are even crazy enough to argue that all cis should die- catastrophic loss of life be damned.

Look, I already have enough potential to recieve that kind of nonsense as it is.
If I mention that there's German in my family, I'm automatically a Nazi.
If I mention i'm Roman Catholic, less-than-kind Atheists will call me ignorant and brainwashed, while other Christians will argue that I'm not really a Christian.
(For people of those groups who don't do that, you are amazing.)
And by just being white, apparently I'm "priveliged"- which is total bunk(-but that's for another time and stamp).
The point is, I REFUSE to put yet another target on my back- I don't need the kind of lunacy in my life right now. Or ever.

4: We already have a word

Biologically- meaning of or having to do with the body.
As in, if you have boobs, a vagina, and a uterus, you are biologically female.
No unclear meanings, dubious sources, or "fun" cyberbullying nonsense attached.
Although it would be ridiculous to state that someone is "biologically male/female" 24/7, if I must clarify for some reason that I'm not trans, but am for some illogical reason(, as previously stated,) not allowed to say "non trans" or "not trans", then I will just say I'm biologically female, and you can just call me female from there.

If we already have simple, easy to understand terms like this, what good is such an unyieldy term, (and one that has gathered such nasty connotations thanks to the "diecisscum" nonsense, at that"), like cisgender?

5: When lists of the"benefits" of the use of this term are written, "checking your privilege" is always on there-
ALWAYS.

Listen here- there is no such thing as the magical "cis privilege" (or the equally mythical "white privilege"- once again, 'nother time, 'nother stamp.)
I've read more than a few lists of "privileges" that I supposedly get.
Know what's there?
Food. Water. Not living in fear of being killed for who you are. Not having to worried about losing your job just because of what you are. Proper medical care. You know what's wrong with that?
Those ARE NOT priveleges- those are RIGHTS.
Rights that we all deserve.
A privilege is something you have to earn- it's a little bit extra.
A right is something you, naturally, have a RIGHT to have.

The issue has never been that one group is "privileged"- it's been that other groups have been denied their rights.
And thus, I refuse to apply a term to myself to repent for being "privileged" because I was treated with common decency.
That would be utterly absurd.

6: If the whole point of the gender equality movement is for us all to be equal, why is it not equal?

One of many supposed benefits of this term is that it makes transgenders feel comfortable.
I have nothing against that- I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable if I can help it.
By I will NOT do that by using a term that I'm not the least bit comfortable with.
I'm NOT comfortable with a term that came out of an incredibly dubious source, I am NOT comfortable with the nasty connotations it's picked up, I am NOT comfortable with the supposed benefit of "checking your privilege" that comes with it, and I am most certainly NOT comfortable with the fact that I supposedly "have" to use it.

No, no I do not.
I don't recall signing up for this 1984-ish Brave New World nonsense.
I'm going to call myself what I want.
You can call yourself what you want, but you have no business naming me, just as I have no business naming you.

The whole point of equality is to tolerate each other- you're you, I'm me, and we go our separate ways.
By asking me to use a term to make someone else comfortable, at the expense of my own comfort, you're forcing me to accommodate them- as in "fit in with the wishes or needs of", a synonym for "oblige".
I will happily tolerate people, but I am NOT required to accommodate them.
I am not going to rearrange my life for random strangers.
And it's inherently bigoted and unfair to suggest that one group HAS to accommodate another group, whether they want to or not.

How is making me have to use a term I neither want nor need for another groups satisfaction equal?
It's not. Not at all.

7: The fact that supposedly I'm supposed to/must use it

No.
I did not choose this term, and I do not want it.
And you can not and will not make me take it.
I'm sure there are things that you do not want to be called- this is something I do not want to be called.

Maybe you know that you're female from some internal feeling- I know because I have boobs(, among other things).
Could there be such a thing as a "gender identity? "
Who knows? It's not like you can prove it beyond a doubt that it exists.
But I believe in things like souls, and heaven and hell, which are equally hard to prove.

Point is, a trans woman just wants to be called a woman.
And a woman who isn't trans would likewise want to be called a woman.

I am not cisgender.
I am female.
And if you can't accept that, then perhaps you just aren't as tolerant as you thought you were.

Articles:
www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/s…
www.nationalreview.com/article…
www.dailykos.com/story/2015/6/…
rebeccarc.com/2014/08/04/am-i-…

Stamp Base by WinglessButterfly55 wingless-butterfly55.deviantar…

Description

First things first: this is not to say that people who use the term are stupid or wrong.
This is not that kind of stamp- I am thoroughly against hate stamps of any kind, as they're impolite and an eyesore.
This is just my explanation of why I feel that this term is not of much use and why I will NEVER use it.
So with that, here are my reasons.

1: The source that coined the term is unreliable

The term was coined in 1998 in an academic paper titled "The Neosexual Revolution" which cited an earlier 1991 paper titled “Transsexuals and our nosomorphic view.”
For those of you wondering what the heck "nosomorphic" is supposed to mean, there is no answer as said word is nonexistent.
As in it does not actually exist(- search it, and you'll only get back to that article.)
If that isn't enough to make you question the reliability of that 1998 article that cited that one from 1991, then keep in mind that the same source of this paper allowed a physicist by the name of Alan Sokal to put an article in the academic journal "“Social Text” called “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.”

This article argued that gravity was a social construct.
The physicist in question noted that no effort appeared to have been made to verify the information and arguments within the article- even though, you know, gravity pretty clearly exists.

Now, I don't know about you, but if a source has published papers without verifying them, I think it's safe to say that source is unreliable.

2: No one knows what it means
Most people are often completely baffled when they first see this word.
This is because the Latin root "cis" meaning "same" is very obscure.
I actually learned a fair amount of Greek and Latin roots, and I didn't even know what to make of that word.
Further complicating the problem is that when trying to find out what the word means, you will most likely
A: Find definitions stuffed with so much unnecessary crud that you end up even more confused
or B: Somehow offend someone with your ignorance of the term, never mind that most of the definitions given for it are needlessly complicated.
By the time you finally figure out that it just means "not transgender", you'll be frustrated bevond belief.

But apparently saying your "non trans" is offensive and "implies that trans people are abnormal."
Even though in every other issue non-x usually indicates that x is the norm/majority, such as referring to minorities as non-whites.

To be frank, saying that if I say I'm not trans, that I'm offending transgenders is stupid- I'm just stating a fact.
I'm not transgender- I'm female, and was born with the bits that go with being female- so how on earth would it be offensive to say that i'm not?
How is that logical? It's not- not at all.

So, here we have a term whose meaning at a glance is unclear, that has dozens of confusing and even conflicting definitions, and apparently taking the sane and logical route and just saying we're not transgender is offensive.

3: If it wasn't a slur before, it definitely is now

If one searches the term cisgender, you'll find one of two things: the previously mentioned confusing definitions and dubious articles- and "die cis scum."
This is especially true on tumblr, an otherwise ok site that has developed a large population of rabid SJWs.
And no, I do not mean "all SJWs" or "the ones I don't like"- I mean crazy people who will come at you for disagreeing with them in any capacity. That is why I do not use Tumblr- I don't have time for that.
The thing is, this "dis cis scum/truscum" nonsense was supposed to be a joke(apparently) and a social statement on all the abuse transgenders receive.
And yes, it is horrible that these people receive harassment and abuse and are even killed- but that doesn't make telling people to go DIE ok.
Which, whether it was the original intention or not, is definitely what it's become.
It wasn't exactly a good joke to begin with, as telling people to kill themselves was never all that funny to begin with, but some lunatics didn't get that memo, and so there are lovely people who actually go around telling people to go die for being cis now, some of whom are even crazy enough to argue that all cis should die- catastrophic loss of life be damned.

Look, I already have enough potential to recieve that kind of nonsense as it is.
If I mention that there's German in my family, I'm automatically a Nazi.
If I mention i'm Roman Catholic, less-than-kind Atheists will call me ignorant and brainwashed, while other Christians will argue that I'm not really a Christian.
(For people of those groups who don't do that, you are amazing.)
And by just being white, apparently I'm "priveliged"- which is total bunk(-but that's for another time and stamp).
The point is, I REFUSE to put yet another target on my back- I don't need the kind of lunacy in my life right now. Or ever.

4: We already have a word

Biologically- meaning of or having to do with the body.
As in, if you have boobs, a vagina, and a uterus, you are biologically female.
No unclear meanings, dubious sources, or "fun" cyberbullying nonsense attached.
Although it would be ridiculous to state that someone is "biologically male/female" 24/7, if I must clarify for some reason that I'm not trans, but am for some illogical reason(, as previously stated,) not allowed to say "non trans" or "not trans", then I will just say I'm biologically female, and you can just call me female from there.

If we already have simple, easy to understand terms like this, what good is such an unyieldy term, (and one that has gathered such nasty connotations thanks to the "diecisscum" nonsense, at that"), like cisgender?

5: When lists of the"benefits" of the use of this term are written, "checking your privilege" is always on there-
ALWAYS.

Listen here- there is no such thing as the magical "cis privilege" (or the equally mythical "white privilege"- once again, 'nother time, 'nother stamp.)
I've read more than a few lists of "privileges" that I supposedly get.
Know what's there?
Food. Water. Not living in fear of being killed for who you are. Not having to worried about losing your job just because of what you are. Proper medical care. You know what's wrong with that?
Those ARE NOT priveleges- those are RIGHTS.
Rights that we all deserve.
A privilege is something you have to earn- it's a little bit extra.
A right is something you, naturally, have a RIGHT to have.

The issue has never been that one group is "privileged"- it's been that other groups have been denied their rights.
And thus, I refuse to apply a term to myself to repent for being "privileged" because I was treated with common decency.
That would be utterly absurd.

6: If the whole point of the gender equality movement is for us all to be equal, why is it not equal?

One of many supposed benefits of this term is that it makes transgenders feel comfortable.
I have nothing against that- I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable if I can help it.
By I will NOT do that by using a term that I'm not the least bit comfortable with.
I'm NOT comfortable with a term that came out of an incredibly dubious source, I am NOT comfortable with the nasty connotations it's picked up, I am NOT comfortable with the supposed benefit of "checking your privilege" that comes with it, and I am most certainly NOT comfortable with the fact that I supposedly "have" to use it.

No, no I do not.
I don't recall signing up for this 1984-ish Brave New World nonsense.
I'm going to call myself what I want.
You can call yourself what you want, but you have no business naming me, just as I have no business naming you.

The whole point of equality is to tolerate each other- you're you, I'm me, and we go our separate ways.
By asking me to use a term to make someone else comfortable, at the expense of my own comfort, you're forcing me to accommodate them- as in "fit in with the wishes or needs of", a synonym for "oblige".
I will happily tolerate people, but I am NOT required to accommodate them.
I am not going to rearrange my life for random strangers.
And it's inherently bigoted and unfair to suggest that one group HAS to accommodate another group, whether they want to or not.

How is making me have to use a term I neither want nor need for another groups satisfaction equal?
It's not. Not at all.

7: The fact that supposedly I'm supposed to/must use it

No.
I did not choose this term, and I do not want it.
And you can not and will not make me take it.
I'm sure there are things that you do not want to be called- this is something I do not want to be called.

Maybe you know that you're female from some internal feeling- I know because I have boobs(, among other things).
Could there be such a thing as a "gender identity? "
Who knows? It's not like you can prove it beyond a doubt that it exists.
But I believe in things like souls, and heaven and hell, which are equally hard to prove.

Point is, a trans woman just wants to be called a woman.
And a woman who isn't trans would likewise want to be called a woman.

I am not cisgender.
I am female.
And if you can't accept that, then perhaps you just aren't as tolerant as you thought you were.

Articles:
www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/s…
www.nationalreview.com/article…
www.dailykos.com/story/2015/6/…
rebeccarc.com/2014/08/04/am-i-…

Stamp Base by WinglessButterfly55 wingless-butterfly55.deviantar…