• 156 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#151 Posted by SpunkyHePanda (1665 posts) -

But how soft is your skin really? Like baby soft? GIVE ME ALL YOUR SOFT SKIN I NEED TO KNOW HOW SOFT IT IS

...Whoa, that got weird. Uh, congratulations on your amazing transformation.

#152 Edited by cloudymusic (1117 posts) -

Congratulations!

@artelinarose said:

[...] not every trans person wants or even needs to be an ambassador for "their people" and expecting them to be is a little ridiculous. [...] we are not encyclopedias to be poked and prodded at your convenience, we are human beings just the same as everyone else [...]

I think that, in the end, this is a important point for everyone to remember. We're all human beings, even if we're different in some ways. Let's all treat each other like it.

Lina is being gracious by fielding some questions in this comment thread, but try not to abuse that goodwill. If you have an extremely basic Transgenderism 101 question, you can probably find that information for yourself. If you have an overly blunt or intimate personal question, first ask yourself: would you ask that question to a person's face in real life?

#153 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3734 posts) -

@artelinarose said:

Nyx did a really really good job of explaining things without coming off as a jerk. Should listen to her.

If you come in and try to tell two trans women that they are using their community's language wrong and they don't know what they're talking about, surprise! You are exactly the kind of person they are talking about when they say "fucking cis people" because in this context, it means "those who are famously ignorant of gender minority issues and don't bother recognizing it."

1 to 2 percent of the world's population are born with green eyes. Imagine for a second that someone is doing research on the topic of people with green eyes. They would have to come up with a term to describe those people, and they would need another term to describe people with any other eye color besides green. This makes sense that researchers would need both terms, but most people would only need to use the term that was associated with the outlier.

So if ignorant people would be asking stupid and / or rude questions about what it's like to be a *term for green eyed people*, I can easily see why a person with green eyes might want to use *term for non-green eyed people* as a way to describe them, along with some other colorful language. But using the word this way is a clearly a slur, because it's completely unnecessary. You can word a hostile reply as a personal attack directed to an individual. There's no need to associate an entire group along with your attack, unless the entire group is the target of attack.

"Fucking cis people" isn't any different than "fucking black people" or "fucking gay people." It includes everyone a group, without exception. So when you say...

"There are a list of insensitive questions that cis people seem to loooove asking transgender individuals, and this is one of them."

and

"Cis people have a weird preoccupation with trans people's genitals, it seems. I don't get it."

Does that mean that ALL non-transgender people love asking insensitive questions? Does that mean that ALL non-transgender people have a weird preoccupation with trans people's genitals?

The fact is, you can't say "cis people..." and follow it up with anything other than "identify with the gender of the sex they were born as" without speaking in a generalization. How is that any different than "black people" [insert stereotype here]?

Rather than saying "cis people" why not say "some people" or "many people" or even "most people"? Or basically anything else besides something that means "everyone who isn't a transgender person [insert generalization here]".

With that all having been said, I really am very happy to read that everything is going so well for you. Congratulations on everything so far, and I wish you all the best in the future.

#154 Posted by DrxLecter (122 posts) -

@spaceinsomniac: Thank you, this is exactly what I was talking about by saying that it came off as aggressive. Unfortunately some people get hyper defensive and try to over think it.

#155 Posted by VoshiNova (1688 posts) -

@wampa1 said:

@artelinarose: "I'm pretty now, and I love it" Put a real smile on my face, I usually hate anything "sappy" but I'm glad this all worked out internet stranger!

#156 Edited by JBG4 (414 posts) -

Keep doing what makes you happy...

There's nothing worse than walking around on Earth not liking who you are.

Congratulations...

#157 Posted by Brodehouse (9949 posts) -

Can I come out in favor of !the continued, sensible use of 'cis'. If someone makes you feel shitty with the way they refer to you as 'cis', especially if you think they're doing it on purpose, the problem is with that person and not the word. The word is innocent, the word means what it means. It's the asshole using it to make you feel like shit that you should worry about.

Think of it the difference between "that's my gay friend" and "that's that fucking gay guy lets get em". The problem in the second example is not the word "gay".

#158 Posted by deadmoscow (262 posts) -

I wish more people knew the difference between gender and sex.

Sex refers to a set of biological and physiological characteristics.

Gender is a set of socially constructed behaviors, roles, and activities that a given society considers appropriate for men and women.

Once you separate these two concepts you can see the extremely wide variety of human sexual and gender expressions that make us all so neat. There was an interesting article on Polygon recently about using the Oculus Rift to see yourself with different sex characteristics than you're used to. It's an incredible way of building empathy, and understanding the sensation that the body you experience physically is not the one you possess mentally.

#159 Posted by ArtelinaRose (1852 posts) -

@spaceinsomniac

I had a really big thing typed up but I figured this would suffice

Congratulations, you've won the "shitty things cis people say and do to delegitimize the experiences of trans people" bingo in this thread! You only missed two or three squares!

#160 Posted by thatpinguino (999 posts) -

Congratulations on your happiness! I hope your hormone stuff keeps going well!

Online
#161 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3734 posts) -

@artelinarose said:

@spaceinsomniac

I had a really big thing typed up but I figured this would suffice

Congratulations, you've won the "shitty things cis people say and do to delegitimize the experiences of trans people" bingo in this thread! You only missed two or three squares!

Did you reply to the wrong post or something?

Here I specifically did legitimize the experiences of trans people, along with the general concept of minorities dealing with rude people, and wanting to verbally attack them:

@spaceinsomniac said:

1 to 2 percent of the world's population are born with green eyes. Imagine for a second that someone is doing research on the topic of people with green eyes. They would have to come up with a term to describe those people, and they would need another term to describe people with any other eye color besides green. This makes sense that researchers would need both terms, but most people would only need to use the term that was associated with the outlier.

So if ignorant people would be asking stupid and / or rude questions about what it's like to be a *term for green eyed people*, I can easily see why a person with green eyes might want to use *term for non-green eyed people* as a way to describe them, along with some other colorful language. But using the word this way is a clearly a slur, because it's completely unnecessary. You can word a hostile reply as a personal attack directed to an individual. There's no need to associate an entire group along with your attack, unless the entire group is the target of attack.

Here I specifically support you and the experience that you're currently going through:

@spaceinsomniac said:

With that all having been said, I really am very happy to read that everything is going so well for you. Congratulations on everything so far, and I wish you all the best in the future.

And the rest of my post was an argument of why using "cis people" as a generalization or way of attacking a group is no better than using any human characteristic to make a generalization or attack a group. There was nothing about delegitimizing the experiences of trans people about it. You can reread the whole post, but the basic crux of the argument is this:

@spaceinsomniac said:

The fact is, you can't say "cis people..." and follow it up with anything other than "identify with the gender of the sex they were born as" without speaking in a generalization. How is that any different than "black people" [insert stereotype here]?

Rather than saying "cis people" why not say "some people" or "many people" or even "most people"? Or basically anything else besides something that means "everyone who isn't a transgender person [insert generalization here]".

If you care to respond to these specific questions, I would still be interested in hearing what you have to say.

#162 Posted by medacris (660 posts) -

You look fantastic! Congrats, bud.