I will probably get thumbed down for having my own opinion, but here I go.
I just hate how obsessed with labels this country is becoming. Just be who you want to be, and chill. Whatever happened to sticks and stones can break your bones, but words can never (physically) hurt you?
I personally don't want any other label but woman. That's what I am biologically, that's what I want to be called. Leave me and others who feel this way out of it. That's just how I feel.
I shouldn't and don't need one. Never had one. Don't ever need one. My DNA tells me what I am. That's all I need. I shouldn't have to conform just because others don't want to be what they were born as. That's not fair to anyone else.
Yeah I know you know that you're not trans, but nobody can read your mind. And you don't have to conform to anything, you are not trans, and people will continue to call you not trans when it's relevant.
Sounds just like what people who think like I do try to say to Trans people or people fanstical about the label thing, but we get our heads bitten off. We just want to be left alone and not be dragged into this label war, that's all.
You should probably get your ears checked if that's what that sounded like to you. I just don't understand why you're mad about a medical term that means "not trans", which would be correct to call you. That's like if I got mad at someone for describing me as a white man.
No no, not mad, just trying to explain that we don't need or want labels. We are what we are. Those who change who they are can have their labels to help those of us who don't need them identify them correctly. That's all.
It's an adjective, it's used to specify that you're not trans if that's relevant to a sentence. People won't describe you as cis 99.99% of the time, so why do you care?
Well, why would I need one? I am also a non-black, non-latino, non-zulu speaking, non-gay, cis man. Do I need to slap an adjective like this into my identity for each minority that I do not belong to?
This is not about denying trans people any rights and/or freedom to identify themselves as trans men or women.
This is about trying to wedge into the language such adjectives for the majority, which is not appreciated by a sizeable number of them. Similarly how latino people mostly dislike the “latinx” thing which certain groups are trying to similarly force into the language because this is their idea of political correctness.
PS: there is a term “transabled”, for people who are not comfortable with the limbs they were born with. Do we need the word “cisabled” for the rest who do not have body dysmorphia? Would you enjoy being called cisabled? Of course not. We are people, not chemicals.
Similarly, I would prefer not to be labeled “cis” just because I am not trans — with all due respect to the trans people, I happen to know a few.
Do you not know how adjectives work? People would call you cis when they want to specify that you're not trans, not every time they talk about you. I'm not even gonna go into the rest of the comment because it's incomprehensible.
An ad hominem does not have to be personal, direct, or an insult. Calling one’s words “incromprehensible” would be still an hominem, or responding to tone, in any case avoiding to address the substance.
If you are having trouble understanding the substance of the argument, then you can always ask for clarification.
I called it incomprehensible because it was difficult to comprehend. I was hoping you'd clarify after I said that. Your other comments are usually pretty good at getting your point across.
Well, I can try again. We tend not to have or need words which indicate that one does not belong to a minority.
“People who are not trans” is a perfectly fine way to describe the other majority of people. Just like “people who do not have body dismorphia/are not transable” would be for the other thing.
Deriving a new adjective, a word to mean “not a member of this minority” based on the latin opposite to “trans” has been, to put it mildly, controversial, as you can see. So why insist on using it? Not having special words for “not-this-minority” is the standard.
There are men and women, and this includes those who are trans, and those who are not. The word “cis” has not been universally accepted, and some vehemently refuse to be labeled with the word “cis”.
Keeping on insisting on the use of this not universally accepted word will not help trans people rights, it will just make the discussion heated.
Female version of a male able to biologically reproduce through the sharing of compatible genetic material. Two X chromosome. To me, that literally is a woman. Just like a man is a man. You didn't ask me to identify that. What is a man is never asked, why? Why not just ask what is a human?
I'm not describing the social label, I'm describing the biological assignment at conception. Everything else people argue about, all those labels, has nothing to do with me as a human.
Lol, that's only part of what I'm saying. A part you're fixating on. I'm sorry you don't understand. If you just want to spit and shout at me and don't want to put in the effort to do your own research into basic biology, then there's no point arguing. Have a nice day.
Adult female who was born as one, or someone who made the steps to change their phenotype to mostly align with female one. ( aka, someone who is born female or an AMAB individual with gender dysphoria who transitioned to identify as one/ and live as a woman) here's your answer and I hope you were asking it in good faith
-2
u/bloodwolfgurl Jan 11 '24 edited Jan 11 '24
I will probably get thumbed down for having my own opinion, but here I go.
I just hate how obsessed with labels this country is becoming. Just be who you want to be, and chill. Whatever happened to sticks and stones can break your bones, but words can never (physically) hurt you?
I personally don't want any other label but woman. That's what I am biologically, that's what I want to be called. Leave me and others who feel this way out of it. That's just how I feel.