1498
He will weep.
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
1498 points (97.5% liked)
Microblog Memes
5324 readers
4684 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
- !whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !best_of_mastodon@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtwitter@sh.itjust.works
- !curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm of two minds:
(If you want to know who says I don't get rights, look at the downvotes. They disagree with one of those. You pick)
It literally means "not trans" my dude. Do you get offended when people call you human?
Call me human to my face. See what happens.
... ... Human
:3
How dare you?!? Vergognga! Verfuckingognga!!
Hugs you stupid homo(sapien).
I think it's disingenuous to argue that is the only usage of it. Plenty of words have colloquial meanings. There's plenty of assholes out there who use it venemously. Like a racist saying "He's black" when they mean the n word. "Fuck off and die, cishet!"
There has been a lot of shit on Twitter and Tumblr outright calling for genocide of cis people. Forced sterilization. Saying that if you are a cis white male you inherently are a bad person. A rapist. Etc. Etc.
It's bullshit lashing out, and doesn't truly amount to anything. That said, it can wear on you to be vilified for what you were born as, for things you can't control.
Huh, imagine that.
It strikes me as particularly ridiculous when this is brought up, there usually are a lot of responses along the lines of "Well now you know what we've dealt with!" "Poor majority person is suddenly hurt when they're treated the same way they've been treating the rest of us" etc.
I don't think many people miss that point. But it's still a shitty thing to do, and it can feel like gaslighting attempts when reasonable people make responses like yours.
"Negro literally means black, do you get offended when people call you the color of your skin?" ... let's start the countdown to people falling over themselves to say it's not the same. It isn't the same, but the parallels should give you pause. Hopefully cause some thought.
I might take a while to respond to this since I'm at work and theres a lot to respond to, but unlike the other commenter who just lashed out, I actually intend on responding to this, it just will take a while
Does that mean that if enough of a minority of people use a neutral word with ill intent, other people should be careful of using that word? For instance, if a bunch of racists started using the word "black" venomously day and night for months, should everyone else start considering the word "black" to be a slur? What if it's a term that's otherwise used by scholars with ample consensus? And if there's no other other to refer to it, and by avoiding it, you cannot refer to the concept at all?
That sounds like you've described the euphemism treadmill, like how moron was a medical term before it was an insult.
Welcome to the minefields of communication and the euphemism treadmill.
I'm not saying we let the assholes win. Keep using it as the original meaning, offset those who would use the term otherwise.
I just wanted to add some important perspective as to how and why some people could view it as being used as a slur. Less "don't use this term", more "If someone gets offended when you use this term, don't be condescending to them about the literal definition, bear in mind the term is also used in very negative ways"
Those people are going to do the same thing regardless of what the word is. What you're asking for is just to put it on the euphemism treadmill
Oh, 100%. Shitty people will be shitty people, regardless of whatever words they use or targets they go after.
I'm not saying no one should use the term. I just wanted to offer some perspective on how it isn't as clear cut as a lot of people make it out to be, and there are legitimate reasons that a reasonable person might take offense to it.
For the record, Jordan Peterson is not a reasonable person. He's a drama stirring shithead attempting to project a very false sense of bravado.
"There has been a lot of shit on Twitter and Tumblr outright calling for genocide of cis people. Forced sterilization. Saying that if you are a cis white male you inherently are a bad person. A rapist. Etc. Etc"
Believe me I know how crazy people on twitter can get, and I've definitely seen those crazies in action. But they are going to act crazy towards their chosen scapegoat for their problems regardless of the word we've chosen to describe those people.
"It’s bullshit lashing out, and doesn’t truly amount to anything. That said, it can wear on you to be vilified for what you were born as, for things you can’t control."
I 100% understand and empathize with this and will not argue or counter it in any way. I mean no gaslighting and I apologize if it feels like what I said was heading in that direction.
On your last point: for a while Negro WAS the appropriate word to use, and now it's Black (or if you're American "African American") and while it isnt appropriate anymore, we have a word that is that fills its usecase. People dont Identify as Cis (and on that point most dont identify as trans), they identify as Male/Female/etc, and cis and trans are categories based on whether your identity matches your sex or not. As of right now, cis is the word we have for when it matches, we dont really have any other words in common parlance that describe that in 1 word, and further the extreme end of Tumblr and Twitter doesnt care which word we use when they dehumanize the percieved majority, they are going to continue being assholes to those they dont feel dont place on their oppression heirarchy regardless of the word we use
100% agree.
I'm not trying to stop anyone from using the term. Just trying to offer some perspective as to why it can mean more than the direct dictionary definition to some people.
Generally it doesn't matter, but it's something to keep in mind when someone takes the usage of the term negatively. Don't immediately assume they're taking offense because they're transphobes. Jordan Peterson is, but there's going to be a non-zero amount of people out there where their main exposure to the term "cis" is where it was being used negatively.
Do you find all the other labels that can be used to describe yourself offensive, or just this one?
Like are you offended by being called a human or homo sapien? Are you offended by being described by your skin color or race? Sexual preference? I just find it weird to single out the one label for no apparent reason.
How would you suggest we describe people that aren't trans or non-binary in a way that wouldn't offend you for whatever reason? As uncomfortable as it may be for you, gender identity is a thing, and the rest of the world is going to use that word to describe people. It would probably be best for you to just get over it.
Reasonable, nobody should have to accept a label they don't ascribe to themselves.
I find your finding of the cis label offensive to be offensive. That's my right.