Probably not, but used with sufficient invective I think you could make people feel like they’ve been insulted with out actually doing so. ‘You blasted multicellular mammal! What have you done this time? What are you, bipedal or something? Eukaryote!’
It’s considered a slur when you call a person that who doesn’t associate with the term. It’s no different from going around calling straight people gay. Do we or do we not respect people’s right to choose what they indentify as? It’s not like you get automatically banned for using the term. Context matters.
This article also seems to conveniently ignore the fact that all the actual slurs are considered slurs on Twitter aswell. It’s also an obviously and openly biased opinion article intented to provoke rage rather than objectional journalism.
If I were to troll people and call them white and whitey those words would not be considered a slur. Same with American, two footed, food chewer or bloodtype A+. Yet cisgender deserves special attention from Musk.
You’re not engaging with any of the arguments I’m making.
Of all the social media platforms Lemmy seems like the least likely place for me having to speak against misgendering people. Can you really not imagine how a transgender person would feel when the term CIS is forced upon them from the outside?
No you are not engaging with the arguments I am making. Respect for what people associate with is different from a word being a slur, or treated as such. Going around calling people who does not want to be <x> is disrespectful and is harrasment but it does not make <x> a slur in a general sense.
Cisgendered is a word to describe people’s gender identity, not for insulting.
Yeah it’s not a slur just like the words male and female aren’t either but they can be used with the intention to insult when directed at people not identifying as such.
I don’t agree with labeling the term as such but I do agree with the core intention which is to prevent harrasment. I don’t quite see what the issue is here. This will not cause trouble to anyone using the term appropriately.
But it will cause trouble, because it is now (treated as) a slur on Twitter. Depending on how strict they are you can’t go around saying “as a cisgender” or having it in your bio.
TechCrunch reported on Tuesday that trying to publish a post using the terms “cisgender” or “cis” in the X mobile app will pop up a full-screen warning reading, “This post contains language that may be considered a slur by X and could be used in a harmful manner in violation of our rules.” It then gives you the choice of continuing to publish the post…
Your arguments seem pretty disingenuous to me. Of course nobody is saying it’s ok to misgender someone so I’m not sure why you’re pretending that has anything to do with this. If I call someone straight when they are not or vice versa, I’m an asshole, but that doesn’t make the word straight a slur that warrants banning from the platform. The act of deliberately misrepresenting someone’s sexuality might but not the word itself.
But the person isn’t trans and being called cis, or even trans but objecting to being called trans, they’re cis and objecting to being called cis.
Can you really not imagine how a transgender person would feel when the term CIS is forced upon them from the outside?
That’s like saying the term “male” is forced upon men, or the term “human” is forced upon everyone. Cis is the defined technical term, with solid etymological roots.
How can you know? Just because a person looks and acts male it doesn’t mean that’s how they feel inside. There are plenty of closeted trans people that would find that offensive. And what does it even matter? If a person doesn’t want to be labeled then any decent person would respect that wish instead doubling down and calling them “cissy” instead.
We’re talking about a hypothetical example. What I’m saying it is only comparable to a cis person objecting to being called cis if your example is a trans person objecting to being called trans. Both would be wrong as they are factually correct technical terms, and thus they aren’t being used as slurs.
A closeted trans person would be offended that you outed them, not that you called them trans when they are. Although, if they were closeted then you’d probably have no reason to think they were trans.
Calling someone “cissy” is almost certainly meant as an insult, though, because that’s not the technical term. That’s like calling a gay person a fag, or calling a black person the n word. Calling a cis gendered person cis or cisgender is like calling a gay person gay.
Rejecting a label isn’t really valid when the label applies to you. You can’t eat pizza and then claim you’re not a pizza eater.
And, at the end of the day, the measure that matters is not whether or not you like it, it’s actual harm. Calling someone cis is very unlikely to cause them harm. Calling someone a fag could lead to harm (eg Top Gear people driving through Alabama with gay writing on their trucks).
I don’t think it necessarily matters even if the label technically does apply to them. I can very well imagine a black person for example taking issue with someone bringing attention to their skin color. Not because they’re not indeed black but because they don’t want to be described in a way that might diminish other features about them that they actually take pride over.
Or in my personal case while I’m technically part of LGBTQ I still don’t want to be associated with what I consider a political movement and when asked I’d wish not to be described in that way and would absolutely be offended with people dismissing my request and labeling me as such nevertheless. Labels often are inaccurate and overly simplifying so plenty of people rather describe themselves with sentences rather than abbreviations/generalizations.
The point isn’t really wether it’s a correct term or not but ignoring the wish to not be called that and instead doing so with the intention to insult.
Yes, I intentionally gave examples that were open. Some black people take offense to that label, others take offense to “African American”, or whatever. People take offense to all sorts of things. In the words of Stephen Fry, "So fucking what? It’s just a whine.”
The point isn’t really wether it’s a correct term or not but ignoring the wish to not be called that and instead doing so with the intention to insult.
The term is not inherently an insult, though. You would have to alter it (eg “cissy”) for it to reasonably be considered an insult by default. Merely objecting to a term that any reasonable person would see as accurate and not an insult is not enough - it would just be a whine. If it was used further after an objection, then maybe intent could be proven, but that’s not what Musk is talking about here. He’s banning the term altogether and saying it is inherently insulting, when it is not.
He’s not banning the term. There’s no problem using it as long as it’s used appropriately.
TechCrunch reported on Tuesday that trying to publish a post using the terms “cisgender” or “cis” in the X mobile app will pop up a full-screen warning reading, “This post contains language that may be considered a slur by X and could be used in a harmful manner in violation of our rules.” It then gives you the choice of continuing to publish the post…
You mean we as in the Twitter moderation team? Are they banning users who misgender trans people? Somehow I assume this rule only applies to brainlets who are in fact cis but don’t want to use an inclusive word.
So a world where trans people are in the majority and all the trans governors in the southern US are obsessing about how my cis ass takes a shit at work after my morning coffee?
But “cis” isn’t an identity, it’s a way to describe the relationship between your assigned sex and your (gender) identity. I don’t identify as cis just like I don’t identify as short, it’s simply a fact of who I am.
Yeah but if a person asks not to be called that but does not elaborate on why, then there’s a chance that they may not identify as such and forcing that label on them is then potenttially misgendering them. There’s plenty of closeted trans people living their lives pretending to be someone they’re not.
Sure, but calling someone cis, even maliciously, or is very far from it being a slur. If they are harassing someone, treat them accordingly. But blanket banning the word, even when used to describe yourself or others non-maliciously, is a clear attempt to make it difficult to talk about trans issues on the platform.
Yeah I agree it’s not a slur. I never claimed it was. Just that it can be used to offend/insult people.
Also they’re not banning people from using the word. Using it just prompts a message asking if you’re sure you want to post that as is the case with actual slurs aswell.
It’s considered a slur when you call a person that who doesn’t associate with the term.
This is what you said, and what I was contesting.
And the message discourages use of the word as what is “insulting” is entirely up the the discretion of the moderators. There should be no message, because it is not a slur. There is no historic oppression of cis people. So you don’t want to be called cis? Fine, I don’t understand it but whatever. But that doesn’t make it a slur any more than calling someone “straight” is a slur. Will they put a warning on that, too?
You are mixing up several things at once, which is confusing your point that you offered to others, and causing them to react overall negatively, even though you have some correct points (as well as some incorrect ones).
For one thing, we do not get to decide what we are, and while we do somewhat get to decide what words we use to refer to ourselves, there is a line between what we personally want and what society will allow. If someone refers to me as a “human, member of the species Homo sapiens”, then I have no proper basis to claim that they are incorrect. Note that I can say that they are correct, but that does not make it so.
For another, whether something is “friendly” or not is not the sole basis for deciding what is vs. is not a “slur” - if someone sent me a message saying “you are a human, member of the species Homo sapiens”… every second of every day, in perpetuity, then that (DDOS attack) is not friendly. Though it is also not a “slur”.
“Cissy” is most definitely a slur, no matter how you look at it - the altered spelling, the similarity to “sissy”, etc. “It’s considered a slur when…” - no, it just is a slur, period. The wiktionary definition of slur includes the phrase “socially unacceptable”, not “personally unacceptable” but socially so. Note that while it does include the phrase “extremely offensive”, that is also followed by the word “and”, i.e. to be considered a slur something must be both, not one or the other.
Similarly, the other word “cis” - like Homo sapiens - is not a slur, b/c it is not “socially unacceptable” (even if someone finds it personally thus). Perhaps you meant “It’s considered unfriendly when…”? But that’s not the same thing as it being an actual “slur”.
Though you could legit have meant “socially unacceptable”, in which case you would be buying into Elon Musk’s radical alterations of existing society, as he works to mold it into what he thinks rather it should become in the future. If true though, note that calling someone “cis” - very much unlike calling a straight person gay -has not historically been considered “socially unacceptable”. This addition of the word “cis” to become a “slur” is picking and choosing who gets to define what “society” is. Elon gets to pick, and now anyone who uses it - and whatever other words he decides to add also, perhaps “Homo sapiens” will be added tomorrow? - will have to jump through additional hoops if they want to use it, on his platform.
Which btw is an obvious attention-grabbing tactic, just like the article, except he did it first, knowing that the latter would follow. Anyway, Elon did what he did, and the article did what it did, but you and I get to decide what we will do. So I hope these words help as you think about the subject.
Basically it may boil down to: does Might make Right? If not, then the work is upon us to determine what actually does. Though this is far too simplistic: b/c on “his” platform, he kinda does have the right to do as he pleases, subject to federal and international laws, though we also have the right to leave or ignore or speak poorly about his platform too - he has his rights, and we have ours. So perhaps a better question is “should Might make Right”? And again, if not then what would - e.g. should someone be allowed to call me a Homo sapiens, even if I were to be offended by such a term? Or a more apt analogy seems to be: if I were to have transitioned genders, then am I “trans” in that case? What about “tranny”?
“Real man/woman” or something inherently derogatory towards everyone else like that.
These bigots consider their own gender (and usually race and political affiliation, for that matter) the default and everything else a misguided if not dangerous aberration.
They’re like the the people Musk grew up with in apartheid South Africa in that respect.
The most critical component of “free speech” to a right-winger isn’t just the ability to say whatever they want with no repercussions, it’s also that an audience has to be forced to listen to them.
There are plenty of shithole places on the Internet where they can spout their transphobic, Great Replacement anti-Semitic shit all day long, but that’s not good enough for them. They need a “lib” to be triggered.
Jordan Peterson is the absolute king of thinking that he deserves and audience but also no one is allowed to leave a mean comment or he’ll quit Twitter again.
That’s the guy who cries about nothing, motivates incels to hate women and minorities, and goes on tirades about wanting humans to behave like lobsters or whatever, right? Utter detriment to the human species.
The guy found a way to get famous by lying that a law would put him personally in prison if he called someone “he” instead of “she.” He’s the biggest attention whore out there.
It is, and it’s a word we need there’s not a different term for it and it’s a useful concept. Close minded people just hate that it implies the existence of trans people.
Much like all words for a privileged group it has some people who really don’t like it. Transphobes in particular dislike it because it is neutral and contains no value judgement. But also because it gives people the language to talk about trans experiences without misgendering or othering trans people
I’m pretty sure Elon has no problem with antisemitism since he thinks it’s the “actual truth” that Jews (who are, apparently, not white) are oppressing white people.
You believe that cis is a slur because that’s how you use the word trans.
These people are so fragile. If you dare remind them that they’re cisgender, that they’re straight, that they’re white, that they’re able-bodied, they take it personally because to them, they’re just normal.
All of the sudden, they have to think about their place in society and it absolutely terrifies them. They are like rich people when you tell them that they’re rich. They will do this whole fucking song and dance to try and tell you about how they are not that rich and how the government taxes them and everything and how they’re just like you and so on.
They are not white, they are not cis, they are not straight, they are not able-bodied, no, they are just normal. It’s everyone else that is different. It’s them who are black, who are gay, who are trans, who are disabled. They’re different.
But my guy, you are not. You are as much a part of the society as I am. And you’re getting just a small taste of what it’s like to be a minority in said society. Someone reminded you of what you are for just a second. Now, imagine being constantly brought back to what you are and not who you are. What that would be like.
People like Elon Musk take offense to being called straight, white, cis or able-bodied because everything else is inferior to them.
On a side note: Someone should remind him of what the Nazis did to disabled people. Because the dude is clearly getting cozy with a lot of them, but I don’t think being this level of clinically stupid is going to get him far in the Fourth Reich. Besides, those South African origins… erh, that may get him in trouble. And having a trans daughter? Woof, doesn’t sound like “good genes” to me. Elon, you may want to pick better friends.
Ok, I’m going to be completely honest with you. I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not.
Are you telling me that I made a shit comment? If so, please do say so because I’m gonna be honest: I am not sure about this comment and I’ve been thinking about deleting it ever since I posted it. I rewrote it like five or six times before until I finally got fed up with it and said “fuck it” and posted it. :|
EDIT:
So, according to all of you, I worry too much. Thanks a lot for the support, and I’m glad you liked my comment. ❤️
Because obviously all compliments are actually just insults in disguise! /s
I put /s, but like, that’s often my first assumption. IME, often compliments have been mostly been intentionally a back-handed insult, are putting themselves down in the process, or they’re trying to give a genuine compliment but its about something I dislike about myself and therefore feels insulting despite the intentions.
They are being genuine. It is a terrific analysis. You are exactly right; in their minds, they are “normal”, and anyone implying any sort of equal status between them and the “abnormals” pisses them off.
Plume - I was being totally serious. I really think your comment hit home for me and I appreciate how you framed your points.
Also - please don’t let internet comments from strangers linger rent free in your head. Too much awesomeness out in the world to let randoms’ comments bring you down.
they take it personally because to them, they’re just normal.
Maybe they (including myself) might take it personally because to them you ARE normal. Regardless of your gender, skin colour or sexual orientation.
So, if I’m treating everyone the same, why is it wrong to ask for other people to do it as well? For example, if I’m trying to talk about a certain topic and your opinion is discarded simply because “you’re cis” then yeah, I have every right to be offended. Just because I’m white and a man it doesn’t mean that I’m necessarily part of the problem.
And no, I wouldn’t presume to know how if feels to be part of a minority that has to face constant violence and discrimination but that’s precisely why I want to have the conversation, I want to better understand what other people are going through. Although, that doesn’t mean that I will (or should) agree with everything the other person says. Being part of a minority doesn’t magically make you right about everything. Just like I might be biased due to my personal context, you can be biased because of yours.
I’m afraid you are putting a lot of words into my mouth and making lots of assomptions about what I’m saying here. I don’t really know how to answer to this because, well, you’re debating against things I didn’t say.
I’m calling you cis, because it’s simply a descriptive term. You are white, you are a man, you are cisgender. That’s not a problem. I’m white, I’m a woman, I’m transgender. That’s not a problem. These, on their own, are simply descriptors. No one here is saying that you’re a problem. I’m talking about people who specifically take offense to these terms, like Musk here does, like, if you tell this man that he is “cis”, he will genuienly get upset.
You misunderstood my point. Context is important and, in this case, the context is using these terms in a platform for discussion (which are usually not very friendly). In my comment, I was thinking of why calling someone “cis” or “trans” or any other thing in a conversation can often be to insult or discredit the other person and why that’s wrong.
not understanding your point is the point. you are not human. you are the evil majority who can’t ever experience bad things… and if you do… you deserve it.
the irony of so many oppressed people is that they dont’ want freedom from oppression, they want to oppress. they want revenge not harmony.
and no better way to tell it when you express yourself politely and they ATTACK you for doing so and are unable to admit that trans folks can also be oppressors of each other and other people. oppression doesn’t make you a saint.
By “post” do you mean the comment I replied to or the actual OP? Because I believe that the intent behind classifying “cis” as an insult is more aligned with my interpretation.
If using the word “cisgender” is a ban-worthy offense, it’s not being considered “a word that can sometimes be insulting”, it’s being considered “a word that is inherently harmful to use in almost any situation”
I don’t think that terms that can get you banned would do so in any context. You’d have to use it and then someone else would have to report you. Might be wrong though.
I have never been excluded from truth seeking conversations because I am cis. Everyone likes an ally. Some people actually like them a little too much in my experience.
If you are in a queer safe space you should treat it like you are at your in-laws house. You don’t need to be expressing every diverging opinion or challenging every cultural assumption. In my experience, if you are being met with hostility, it’s because you are projecting it.
I have never been excluded from truth seeking conversations because I am cis.
Congrats. Unfortunately, it has not been my experience.
if you are being met with hostility, it’s because you are projecting it.
I honestly don’t think I am but it is something that I could ask if it happens again.
In my past experiences where my questions or disagreements, etc have been met with hostility, the reason seems to be that if I don’t 100% agree with what the other person is saying, it’s simply because I’m a straight white man and don’t know any better. Which, as you may guess, doesn’t lead to a very productive discussion.
that’s because of purists and nutjobs any disagreement whatsoever is hostile to them. the notion of civil disagreement, or just polite disagreement is met with violence, because tehy are passive aggressive nut jobs. they don’t want you to be an ally, they dont’ want to work with you to improve things, they want to you submit to their crazy.
just like if you go into your in laws, they ask you for a cup of tea, and you know they serve shitty tea, so you decline it politely, and they go ‘oh so what is our tea not good enough for you?’
i keep trying to be on the side of these people, but they keep telling me i’m a shit person because of my skin color, my gentials, my education, etc. and ironically… most of these people are WAY more privileged than will ever be. I’m so sick of trans/feminist peopel telling me off that i’m a POS who got all the advantages in life… while they often got free-rides on the life train due to parental wealth and exploiting other people where as i had to struggle to get into college and pay off my debts and didn’t get a tsate of this so called of ‘privileged’ until iwas well into my 30s. all the while being constantly harassed for not being a ‘real man’ and also ‘being a man’. all i ever wanted was to be left alone to do my own thing… but no. the second i want ot empathize about being beating for my non-gender conformity, i’m told to STFU and that I’m ‘stealing’ or whatever, because apparently my expereince of my gendered life and gender violence doesn’t exist or is all lies and falsehoods because i’m not trans, or a woman. and oh by the way, if it did really happen… i clearly deserved it because of the debt i own gender minorities or something.
like… ok i won’t be on your side anymore then. i’ll just leave you to your own bitterness and focus on folks who treat me well who aren’t pathologically violent against anyone who is different than them and who take offense at every perceived slight.
Because they are normal. If most of the species is the same in these aspects, it’s normal. But you know, we can also simply switch what word we use, and instead of normal use…common or average. So, they are average. :p
engadget.com
Oldest