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”?
Well it certainly contributes to othering the people you don’t view as “normal”. Don’t use cis, whatever, but paired with you saying you specifically know cis is a term and you specifically choose not to use it, calling cis people normal certainly sounds transphobic. You’re following the conservative’s playbook. Don’t say cis people are the “normal” ones.
America has a majority of white people living there. Could you imagine if people started calling white people “normal”? The words you choose have consequences.
Again, I can’t make this clear enough, this isn’t some bullshit purity test. If you don’t wanna use the term cis to describe yourself, so be it, but don’t use normal. Especially when you’re already willing to use non-trans. Solidarity isn’t othering the persecuted.
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.
Lmao, but they specifically said they knew the term exists and refuse to use it and instead not only call themselves “non-trans” but also “normal”. This wasn’t someone just not knowing the word.
“Cis” is as real a word as “trans” is. They’re both Latin prefixes. Cisgender has literally no other meaning besides “not transgender”
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.
Well it certainly contributes to othering the people you don’t view as “normal”. Don’t use cis, whatever, but paired with you saying you specifically know cis is a term and you specifically choose not to use it, calling cis people normal certainly sounds transphobic. You’re following the conservative’s playbook. Don’t say cis people are the “normal” ones.
America has a majority of white people living there. Could you imagine if people started calling white people “normal”? The words you choose have consequences.
Again, I can’t make this clear enough, this isn’t some bullshit purity test. If you don’t wanna use the term cis to describe yourself, so be it, but don’t use normal. Especially when you’re already willing to use non-trans. Solidarity isn’t othering the persecuted.
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.
Lmao, but they specifically said they knew the term exists and refuse to use it and instead not only call themselves “non-trans” but also “normal”. This wasn’t someone just not knowing the word.