F*ck the Tories: a Thread Dedicated to Suella Braverman

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
The English language changes over time. We know that you don’t believe in gender and use woman and man to mean someone’s sex. Not everyone uses those words the same way and that’s fine. No one is forcing you to describe yourself as a cis woman (though if someone wanted to use that term to refer to themselves that’s up to them)
In a discussion where the speaker wants to make it clear to the whole audience that they mean “a woman who is not trans” then cis is a perfectly adequate adjective.
We use adjectives to describe subsets of categories all the time. Cis black is obviously a meaningless term but someone might use the term Black African if it was necessary to refer to a specific group of people.
If you have lobbygroups, government advices etc. etc. children's education telling that there are over 200 different genders your ''no one's forcing you'' argument goes out of the window. Because the change is in fact being forced.
 
The English language changes over time. We know that you don’t believe in gender and use woman and man to mean someone’s sex.
We use adjectives to describe subsets of categories all the time. Cis black is obviously a meaningless term but someone might use the term Black African if it was necessary to refer to a specific group of people.

Language does change over time but this isn't an evolving use of language. It's an imposed change in order to provide validation for a small number of people.

'Black African' adds additional information to the term 'Black'. It tells you where someone is from, like 'French woman'. 'Cis' adds nothing because the term 'Woman' already tells you everything you need to know about people who fall into this immutable category. People who don't fall into the category 'Woman' already have words to describe themselves. To follow your logic means Rachel Dolezal can reasonably describe herself as Trans Black.

You are free to label yourself as whatever you like and you can view yourself as a sub set of your own sex if you wish, but words are important. They impart meaning. They are tools to accurately describe our reality. 'Cis' is a nonsense word.

Bringing 'cis women' into common usage is demeaning to those who fought for so long to have women recognised as actual human beings with rights, as a separate sex class with distinct needs, as something more than 'non men'. It's depressing that some women will so quickly give away a word that others worked so long to give meaning to.

FPVB-IdWYAY6CYS.jpeg
 
D

Deleted member 28

Guest
Because it may be necessary for clarity and as part of a discussion to refer to people who are not trans.
What part of my post to which you are replying is unclear?

Simple really, why do people who haven't changed their sexuality need to have a 'tag ' to explain it.
 
D

Deleted member 28

Guest
I literally just told you.

No you haven't,
Because it may be necessary for clarity and as part of a discussion to refer to people who are not trans.
What part of my post to which you are replying is unclear?

Why would it ever be necessary to clarify if a person was born a Man/woman?

Or maybe when having a drink in a pub you feel the need to say " oh, by the way I'm actually a 'cis' male/female just in case you were wondering ".

Are you people for real?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
Bromptonaut

Bromptonaut

Rohan Man
No you haven't,

Why would it ever be necessary to clarify if a person was born a Man/woman?

Or maybe when having a drink in a pub you feel the need to say " oh, by the way I'm actually a 'cis' male/female just in case you were wondering ".

Are you people for real?

It's a 'term of art' used in discussion rather than a label.

But you know that.
 

theclaud

Reading around the chip
It's a 'term of art' used in discussion rather than a label.

But you know that.

Don't forget that there is only one Real World, and that is a flatulent corner of the public bar at The Swan.
 

winjim

Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
No you haven't,

Why would it ever be necessary to clarify if a person was born a Man/woman?

Or maybe when having a drink in a pub you feel the need to say " oh, by the way I'm actually a 'cis' male/female just in case you were wondering ".

Are you people for real?

You might not ever feel the need to clarify but if you do, there's a term for it. That's all.
 
Evidence for the bolded bit please.

Yes, you are quite correct, there aren't 200 obviously. That would be daft. it's only 'over a hundred' genders according to material taught in UK schools.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...-programme-tells-9-year-olds-100-genders.html

The guy who invented the term 'gender identity' was John Money. His second most famous act is a notorious and horrific experiment on a child, forcing him to adopt the social role of a girl, and which ended in suicide.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money
 

qigong chimp

Settler of gobby hash.
You are free to label yourself as whatever you like and you can view yourself as a sub set of your own sex if you wish, but words are important. They impart meaning. They are tools to accurately describe our reality. 'Cis' is a nonsense word.

You've a head of steam up for sure, but I'm not sure about this.
The relationship between our philological representations and the un-represented towards which they grope - or with which they dance - is a lot more nuanced than you're letting on.

https://www.fnatural.co.jp/wp_blog/?p=1708
 
When you're talking about material reality though, you aren't poetically describing an esoteric experience. You are looking for words that accurately and meaningfully describe something that already exists in objective reality. Gravity exists in objective reality. It existed before someone called it 'gravity'. The 2 immutable sexes of mamals exist in material reality and have done long before humans arrived to find words to name them.

The groping has long been done and there were only ever 2, mutually exclusive, possible outcomes.
 
Top Bottom