10

6 comments

[–] Salixj 4 points Edited

The whole issue with CIS is less offense than absurdity. The word woman loses its meaning when used to describe anyone who deems themselves to be a woman. I finally described myself as a dragon to someone. When she asked if I were joking my response was no, which caused her to basically shut up. Because if woman can mean anyone who just feeeels like a woman, then one can say the same about any descriptor.

What I find particularly amusing, for lack of a better word, is when people say a transwoman is a woman. Okay, if so, why do you put trans in front? Why point out a distinction that is not necessary to point out.

I think it is important to stop the strawman arguments. I am not transphobic. If a person in the stall next to me comes out and looks like theynwere once a man, I don't freak out and run from the bathroom as if pursued by a demon. I might look twice, but then I will wash my hands and leave.

But if a man is walking naked about the locker room with all parts showing and "too bad I'm a woman" well screw that. Get out. I have enough brains in my head to know the difference between a man and woman.

I also hate the pretense of dead naming, and so and so was always a woman or man. Or thwt biology is nothing.

I am fairly easy-going but there are limits, and the falseness of the trans movement is what gets me.

The whole issue with CIS is less offense than absurdity. The word woman loses its meaning when used to describe anyone who deems themselves to be a woman

I do find it offensive, for exactly the reason that it removes meaning from the word 'woman' and to erase the meaning of my sex-class offends me, yes. Because my sex class is already oppressed and erased from so many spheres of public and cultural life. To have it erased from language as well is super-offensive to me.

Why can't trans people just have their own descriptors? Why does it have to involve changing everyone else's words?