If you are not getting confirmation e-mails from Oasis to complete your membership, don't hesitate to e-mail jeff at oasismag dot com. Be sure to include your username.
Recent articles
Recent journal entries
Active forum topics
- The Curse of Reparative Therapy
- First Book: 'Keeping You A Secret' By Julie Anne Peters
- A Kids Reaction To A Gay Couple
- The Importance Of Giving Feedback
- Can you envisage an any more pointless existence?
- Advice?
- Will Portman - Son of Ohio's Senator Portman: His Column on Coming Out
- Can you imagine the vitriol unleashed by Republicans…
- coming out
- Islam and Homosexuality
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 3 guests online.
Comments
Well...
Is this before or after you tell them what cisgender means? If before, their heads aren't exploding, they don't know what you're saying.
---
"Why be given a body if you have to keep it locked up in a case like a rare, rare fiddle?" - Katherine Mansfield
After...
Usually when people don't get it, it's easy to clear up. People say "what does cisgender mean?" and I say "not trans" and they go "oh." and that's that.
That's different from heads exploding
Well...
"not trans" is actually one less syllable than cisgender, and has its definition built-in, btw.
---
"Why be given a body if you have to keep it locked up in a case like a rare, rare fiddle?" - Katherine Mansfield
I have access to the Wikipedia...
definition, but I must admit my inability to appreciate the proper context for the use of the term.
To be truly utilitarian, cisgender must stand in opposition to and be more specific than the word(s) it replaces. But...
Still confused :(
There was a whole...
cis discussion in the old Lady Gaga Born This Way forum post.
---
"Why be given a body if you have to keep it locked up in a case like a rare, rare fiddle?" - Katherine Mansfield
That's because...
Most of the time it makes people seem awfully pretentious. Especially when speaking about privilege as a stagnant, god-given thing. When it's not.
-
That's redick!
Edit.
Are you saying that being cisgendered is a privilege?
Because privilege is a hard word to capture. Cisgender. Transgender. Each comes with its own set of challenges, advantages, and disadvantages. I mean yeah, I'm sure being transgendered isn't always easy, but...I dunno.
Regardless of which you are, you should be proud of it. Being cisgendered should not be considered a privilege, because that makes it sound like being transgendered is the exact opposite, like a curse or a disadvantage or something.
Also, being cisgendered doesn't feel like a privilege to me. It's just...who I am, y'know? Having blue eyes isn't a privilege. So yeah.
Is that kind of along the
Is that kind of along the lines of heterosexual privilege? I am woefully uneducated about gender despite my own confusion. But at the same time, people would get all riled up if you said that being straight was a privilege- well, being straight itself isn't, it's being with your partner and not having to deal with the bullshit that's the privilege and I'm gonna explode my own head.
Anyway! I'm just trying to draw a (potentially completely mismatched) parallel here. Hm. Point being that the privileged group doesn't get it?
Well...
I'll let Riku explain it, but my problem with the privilege discussion is that, well, it can never be one. If I'm cisgendered, and I argue there is no cisgender privilege, then that is just a form of me displaying my cisgender privilege, heh.
Privilege is a loaded word, though.
To me, if you are the minority, you have to deal with things that can be seen as unfair or privilege, or they can just make sense. Like, there are gay bars, but no straight bars. Gays are the minority, so they are saddled with the adjective. If most people are straight, they wouldn't need to say they're going to a straight bar. Similarly, if all gay people are going out, they say they're going out to the bar. If the crowd is mixed, it's a gay bar again.
If a standard pizza is dough, sauce and cheese, you can call a pizzeria and say you want a large pizza, and they will know what you mean. But you have to specify if you want a mushroom or onion pizza, because it varies from the norm.
So, when you use non-people examples, they seem pretty straightforward. When it is about people, then it becomes privilege.
---
"Why be given a body if you have to keep it locked up in a case like a rare, rare fiddle?" - Katherine Mansfield
I think a specific example would be helpful...
Hypothetically (of course), if I were a totally straight heterosexual... under what circumstances would my sexual leanings be made more explicit by labeling myself as cisgendered?
It isn't about sexuality, it is about gender...
So, if you were born with male parts, and you are fine with being male, present as male in all manner and dress, you are cisgendered, regardless of whether you are sexually attracted to men or women.
One argument is that by ONLY labeling transgender people, it is disempowering or somesuch. Whereas my argument is that 99.x% of a population doesn't need a label, so the 0.x% doesn't feel disempowered. And, that, it isn't a useful goal, seeing how it is not going to catch on outside of academic/feminist/trans circles.
---
"Why be given a body if you have to keep it locked up in a case like a rare, rare fiddle?" - Katherine Mansfield