I am fully aware what some people use, but it is a made-up word of the English language and I won’t apply it to myself. I don’t have a problem with people using it, but it’s not my vocabulary. It neither has an inherent sense, nor does it have any added value in most context.
I respect that it helps to normalize specifying whatever gender one associates with when “cis” people also do it, as opposed to only having trans / non-binary people to specify “what” they identify as. But my solidarity extends only to full acceptance and tolerance, not to changing how I “identify” myself :p
That’s not quite how a natural language like English works. There’s a bunch of mess and idioms and “technically correct” is almost never how things start to get used in real life. Thus often it happens that whatever is the majority becomes the default, like for instance cisgender is a concept that almost never has to be used because 99% of people are cisgender. Not that it’s not a valid term, it’s just a term that’s almost universally redundant.
No, that part (cis) is a prefix and means “on this side of”. And for “on this side of gender” to mean what cisgender is used as, is a newly agreed-upon thing in the evolution of LGBTQ culture.
But when you say things like ‘“non-trans” normal person’ it sounds like you’re saying it isn’t normal to be trans. Why not just say “non-trans” or “cis” instead of saying “normal person”?
I think he’s referring to the difference of descriptive vs prescriptive. I mean, some english words and concepts just become standard without anyone trying to make them that.
Terms like cisgender or “they” as a pronoun on identical level to “he” and “she” is an example of trying to be prescriptive. You would never have to correct people with native level language skills on the correct use of these words if they weren’t.
Singular they had been around since the 14th century. If you want to say it was prescriptive then I might be willing to agree, but we aren’t in the 14th century. We’re in the 21st century. I’m sure you’ll agree that over 500 years of precedence makes it descriptive by that point.
Gentle FYI for you today, the term for non-trans is cis or cisgender. 💜
I am fully aware what some people use, but it is a made-up word of the English language and I won’t apply it to myself. I don’t have a problem with people using it, but it’s not my vocabulary. It neither has an inherent sense, nor does it have any added value in most context. I respect that it helps to normalize specifying whatever gender one associates with when “cis” people also do it, as opposed to only having trans / non-binary people to specify “what” they identify as. But my solidarity extends only to full acceptance and tolerance, not to changing how I “identify” myself :p
“Cis” is as real a word as “trans” is. They’re both Latin prefixes. Cisgender has literally no other meaning besides “not transgender”
That’s not quite how a natural language like English works. There’s a bunch of mess and idioms and “technically correct” is almost never how things start to get used in real life. Thus often it happens that whatever is the majority becomes the default, like for instance cisgender is a concept that almost never has to be used because 99% of people are cisgender. Not that it’s not a valid term, it’s just a term that’s almost universally redundant.
No, that part (cis) is a prefix and means “on this side of”. And for “on this side of gender” to mean what cisgender is used as, is a newly agreed-upon thing in the evolution of LGBTQ culture.
But when you say things like ‘“non-trans” normal person’ it sounds like you’re saying it isn’t normal to be trans. Why not just say “non-trans” or “cis” instead of saying “normal person”?
You assume that in my world “normal” is a compliment. It’s not.
Interesting, because every word you’ve used is made-up word of the English language.
I think he’s referring to the difference of descriptive vs prescriptive. I mean, some english words and concepts just become standard without anyone trying to make them that.
Terms like cisgender or “they” as a pronoun on identical level to “he” and “she” is an example of trying to be prescriptive. You would never have to correct people with native level language skills on the correct use of these words if they weren’t.
Singular they had been around since the 14th century. If you want to say it was prescriptive then I might be willing to agree, but we aren’t in the 14th century. We’re in the 21st century. I’m sure you’ll agree that over 500 years of precedence makes it descriptive by that point.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0075424204265824
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
deleted by creator