Caitlyn... Check Yourself!

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Yes. Cis means "on the same side as"

Good. I didn't know either and was too lazy to look it up.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So... you are comparing schizophrenia with being transgender?

Since white Christians are the most common type of people in western society, should we remove the labels and call all white Christians "normal" and use labels for everybody else?

You don't see the ironic sense of entitlement from complaining about this?

a reply to: berenike

The relative in question currently, and specifically has asked to be referred to as male and with male pronouns. In the OP I made every effort to use the polite pronouns literally in every tense, dependent upon this persons preferences from the beginning onward. He/him is used for the periods where he wished to be a he, and she/her is used for the periods she wished to be a she.

I don't know if there is any way to be more considerate than that.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Is it still PC to just call non-schizo folks "normal?"

Sure. The word "normal" has so many meanings, though, don't be surprised if you're misinterpreted when you call a cisgender "normal"... And don't be surprised if you're correctly interpreted either.

Normal can mean conformant, occurring in nature, average, or the majority.
Cisgender isn't so much PC as it is precise.

a reply to: Hefficide

Sounds like sane, rational behavior from an adult...........................................................................

a reply to: Cuervo

So... you are comparing schizophrenia with being transgender?

No. I'm showing how absurd the distinction is.

Since white Christians are the most common type of people in western society, should we remove the labels and call all white Christians "normal" and use labels for everybody else?

You don't see the ironic sense of entitlement from complaining about this?

Are you comparing those who experience gender dysphoria with non-christians?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Cisgender isn't so much PC as it is precise.

Precise? It's ridiculous.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Precise? It's ridiculous.

You're welcome to your opinion. I like to be specific in my speech, especially on a discussion forum.

a reply to: Dimithae

Do you feel Good saying "it'? i mean honestly does it empower you? does it make you feel good to refer to another person as "it"? above them? better than?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

You're welcome to your opinion. I like to be specific in my speech, especially on a discussion forum.

Except it's not specific. It's so indistinct as to be meaningless.

a reply to: Hefficide

I understand - but I was worried about me being perceived as offensive or insensitive.

I got a bit tied up with worrying about calling a transgender person by the pronoun referring to their original physical gender if they hadn't fully 'transitioned' back.

I support anyone's right to be who they want or need to be as far as gender goes but sometimes I think (not because of anything you said) that I'd best leave the subject alone.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

You're welcome to your opinion. I like to be specific in my speech, especially on a discussion forum.

Except it's not specific. It's so indistinct as to be meaningless.

How? If you are left-handed and somebody asked you "Hey, what hand do you write with?" and you said "I'm left-handed, how about you?" and their reply was "Oh, I'm just normal-handed"... wouldn't that kind of strike you as odd?

"Normal-handed", while reflective of the demographics, is not as specific nor as appropriate as "right-handed".

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: berenike

The relative in question currently, and specifically has asked to be referred to as male and with male pronouns. In the OP I made every effort to use the polite pronouns literally in every tense, dependent upon this persons preferences from the beginning onward. He/him is used for the periods where he wished to be a he, and she/her is used for the periods she wished to be a she.

I don't know if there is any way to be more considerate than that.

I'm getting the impression you think people are angry at you about this. In your OP, you made it clear why you chose the words you did and there shouldn't be any confusion. What more can you do other than just call a person what they would like to be called?

People who misgender on purpose (online) normally either bold the pronoun, italicize the pronoun, or simply use the word "it". They like their crass insults to be known plainly. It helps them feel more ruggedly individual, I'm guessing.

a reply to: Cuervo

While not wanting to jump into the middle of this conversation, I do want to address one aspect of it that I do have an opinion about.

This term, "cis-gendered". I have never before been expose to it and, honestly, my reaction to it was and remains negative. Particularly after I web searched the term to find out what it means and ended up watching a video where a trans person repeatedly modified it to "cissy's".

I truly do not see the positive gain to be had. I do agree that many people, from many walks of life face bigotry and I openly and fully state that I find bigotry abhorrent. Particularly if I see it in the mirror ( thus how my family member wound up being discussed. I felt strongly that I should openly address my own anger about this person and the fact that they are the visual in my minds eye when the word "trans" is used. I am aware that this is my problem and I strive not to externalize or project it ). But when bigotry and intolerance is countered by intolerance, nobody wins. It's a zero-sum prospect.

This "cis" word honestly strikes me as feeling derogatory.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Cuervo

While not wanting to jump into the middle of this conversation, I do want to address one aspect of it that I do have an opinion about.

This term, "cis-gendered". I have never before been expose to it and, honestly, my reaction to it was and remains negative. Particularly after I web searched the term to find out what it means and ended up watching a video where a trans person repeatedly modified it to "cissy's".

I truly do not see the positive gain to be had. I do agree that many people, from many walks of life face bigotry and I openly and fully state that I find bigotry abhorrent. Particularly if I see it in the mirror ( thus how my family member wound up being discussed. I felt strongly that I should openly address my own anger about this person and the fact that they are the visual in my minds eye when the word "trans" is used. I am aware that this is my problem and I strive not to externalize or project it ). But when bigotry and intolerance is countered by intolerance, nobody wins. It's a zero-sum prospect.

This "cis" word honestly strikes me as feeling derogatory.

If somebody is using the term "cisgender" derogatorily, then that person is being a jerk. "Democrat", "republican", "liberal", "transgender", etc, can (and are) all altered to be used in such ways ("libtards", "fundies", "trannies", etc).

Saying "cissies" is no different than saying "trannies". It doesn't make "transgender" a bad word nor should it make "cisgender" feel offensive.

I'm constantly in contact with transgender people and I've honestly never heard the term used that way. It is normally used to reference family members and friends, to clarify that you are not talking about another transgender person. It is important when speaking about medical issues, social issues, and legal issues.

When I (and from what I can tell, most others) use the term "cisgender", nothing derogatory is meant in the slightest. I'm sorry if somebody made you feel that way.

a reply to: Cuervo

How? If you are left-handed and somebody asked you "Hey, what hand do you write with?" and you said "I'm left-handed, how about you?" and their reply was "Oh, I'm just normal-handed"... wouldn't that kind of strike you as odd?

"Normal-handed", while reflective of the demographics, is not as specific nor as appropriate as "right-handed".

Then the term cisgendered is no different than calling someone normal. It doesn’t suggest any biological or genetic conditions, any medical diagnosis or any social marginalization.

a reply to: Hefficide

This "cis" word honestly strikes me as feeling derogatory.

It is. It is a blanket term for "people who are not like me".

For instance, from an earlier comment directed at you:

"...not on an already established foundation that is accepted and understood like you cisgender people are. "

Sorry for deviating off-topic

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Cuervo

How? If you are left-handed and somebody asked you "Hey, what hand do you write with?" and you said "I'm left-handed, how about you?" and their reply was "Oh, I'm just normal-handed"... wouldn't that kind of strike you as odd?

"Normal-handed", while reflective of the demographics, is not as specific nor as appropriate as "right-handed".

Then the term cisgendered is no different than calling someone normal. It doesn’t suggest any biological or genetic conditions, any medical diagnosis or any social marginalization.

It does suggest a designation. It is used for those whose gender matches the one they were assigned at birth. The term has been around since the 90's and it's not new. The only reason it seems new to most people is because all things about transgender people that aren't based on Hollywood cliches seem new to most people. The media is becoming educated on the subject and a lot of "new" information is becoming more common knowledge.

And no, "cisgender" does not denote any medical diagnosis or social marginalization. Are you saying we should only apply labels to socially-marginalized people?

a reply to: Hefficide

no you are getting angered here because like most progressive liberals, you just want people to do whatever the left tells them to and to not think for themselves. The nerve of him/her/it to not kowtow to every leftist ideology when the leftists all defended him/her/it.

Jaden

a reply to: Cuervo

It does suggest a designation. It is used for those whose gender matches the one they were assigned at birth. The term has been around since the 90's and it's not new. The only reason it seems new to most people is because all things about transgender people that aren't based on Hollywood cliches seem new to most people. The media is becoming educated on the subject and a lot of "new" information is becoming more common knowledge.

And no, "cisgender" does not denote any medical diagnosis or social marginalization. Are you saying we should only apply labels to socially-marginalized people?

In other words, “cisgendered” is a term for people whose doctors got the gender right at birth, and “transgendered” is a term for people whose doctors got the gender wrong at birth?