Tekla, exactly my point. Perhaps I wasn't clear. Words can be contrasting without being binary. Binaries are anathema to my world view, but we use binary terminology to make comparisons along a particular apectrum, like "hard" vs. "easy", "bright" vs. "dark", "hot" vs. "cold." Of course, those words aren't sufficient, but they are certainly useful. It's all in how you use the words.

As to albedo, poorly managed cattle grazing decreases the albedo of the spring snowpack in the Rockies because of winter dust storms blowing in from the Colorado Plateau, which is awesome if you like whitewater kayaking, but crappy if you like to ski on surfaces other than dirt. (No, I didn't have to look it up.)

As to albedo, poorly managed cattle grazing decreases the albedo of the spring snowpack in the Rockies because of winter dust storms blowing in from the Colorado Plateau, which is awesome if you like whitewater kayaking, but crappy if you like to ski on surfaces other than dirt.

Kudos, I've never thought of that, but I'm sure it works out, I've seen it in action enough living in the Midwest and driving out there a few times a year.

And I'm sure you didn't have to look it up, who in the hell would even know to look that up without knowing it first.

Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2009, 04:11:48 PM
[...]
If I'm trying to explain something to you, or convince you of something, and I'm tossing around words that you've never heard in an attempt to a) make you think I'm a lot smarter than I am, or than you are or, b) confuse the issues by slathering on words that have no real meaning in an attempt to cover up the notion that I really can't even begin to explain to a total moron, much less you (somewhat smarter), what I mean.

[and I'm all about seeing it as the underlined part myself, cause, it usually is true]

I agree completely and have made the same observations.  It's particularly common when people try to project an aura of sophistication - there's certainly a difference between being articulate and plain old linguistic posturing.

Although I don't mind cis, it ultimately feels rather limiting to me, again placing things in binary terms. I happen to be trans, although my partner doesn't identify as trans, I'd have a hard time identifying hir as cis. Sie is clearly something other.

Another problem with labeling cis, trans, inter, etc., is the assumption that we actually know what gender someone is.

Z

Quote from: Zythyra on June 30, 2009, 07:14:35 AM
[...]
Another problem with labeling cis, trans, inter, etc., is the assumption that we actually know what gender someone is.

Right!  I use the term either generically (not referring to any specific individual) or self-referentially because I know what gender I am.

Both Chrome and Firefox seem to think cisgendered is hostile.  There's an angry red line underneath it every time I type it.

Mister, you can just tell 'em it's not (right click - add to dictionary) and they cool off about it

Quote from: Mister on June 30, 2009, 01:00:11 PM
Both Chrome and Firefox seem to think cisgendered is hostile.  There's an angry red line underneath it every time I type it.

I believe you'll find that that is their spellcheck that's not updated yet to handle those words as being standard English. You could prolly type pugnatious rather than pugnacious and get that same red line. I doubt that the line is angry though.

Have to agree with Tekla on the word being kinda ugly. Always make me think 'cysts' when I hear it.
But I don't think we really have another word that doesn't 'otherize' us. Bio male, genetic female, natal female, non-trans, etc just further us as being 'unnatural'. I find this offense of the word 'cis' kind of disingenuous coming from a people who don't term heterosexuals as non-gays but straights.

Quote from: Nero on June 30, 2009, 03:45:56 PM
Have to agree with Tekla on the word being kinda ugly. Always make me think 'cysts' when I hear it.
But I don't think we really have another word that doesn't 'otherize' us. Bio male, genetic female, natal female, non-trans, etc just further us as being 'unnatural'. I find this offense of the word 'cis' kind of disingenuous coming from a people who don't term heterosexuals as non-gays but straights.

Or as breeders or other such words that are hardly unloaded when they are used.

In point of fact I suspect that "lane" was a provocateur who was waiting for something of the sort so he could make the "O, I'm offended remarks" and that Autumn ate the entire bait.

Some words may not be pretty. English isn't French and words aren't coined for the beauty of their sound and sense. English usage tends to either grab whatever's available or, like German, starts to pile on words in a series without leaving spaces between them to make it's new words.

N~

so.    why can't we grab a pretty world instead of that Patriarchal.Latin crap?  Or. Is it that, in the end, they are SO HOT, for all that Lain crap, Patriarchy and all? 

Quote from: tekla on June 30, 2009, 09:41:36 PM
so.    why can't we grab a pretty world instead of that Patriarchal.Latin crap?  Or. Is it that, in the end, they are SO HOT, for all that Latin crap, Patriarchy and all? 

Who's your daddy, Kat?

To answer your question we have this strange notion in America that Roman/Latin means educated and good and right, apparently.

I mean the "founders" weren't really bashful about setting things up to look and follow Roman republican usages. And science has always had that penchant for things like Canis canis or Canis ordinare or other such Latinate designations for it's meanings and terms -- or add a bit of Greek with the Latin and you really have the pinnacle of learning exposed as being your own ability.

So, I suspect that a biologist like Serano, prolly thought "cis" was a pretty good idea and used it. Others used it because she used it and they liked it as well. Afterall, it sounds scientific, eh? I mean "third gender" or "women born trans" (again, no great terms for men born trans, prolly because the women have most of the computer techie type jobs and the men are school teachers or some other occupation.

You know how all of that works. OK, lets start working on a beautiful and flowing term for transsexuals or for androgynes or for cross-dressers, etc, etc, etc. I mean, when it comes right down to it not much sounds very flow-y when dealing with sex/gender, does it? I mean, even "man" and "woman" aren't all that "beautiful."

N~

Who's your daddy, Kat?

Oh mama Nichole, you are my daddy.  Really.  Please stop spanking me (over your knee) and I'll tell you all the bad things I've done.  Oh mommy. Please.

I mean the "founders" weren't really bashful about setting things up to look and follow Roman republican usages.

Of couse, the 'founders' read Greek too.  But somehow, well, Latin sounded so much more, like, offical.

And science has always had that penchant for things like Canis canis or Canis ordinare or other such Latinate designations for it's meanings and terms

Because science, like its antithesis, is Latin in base.


Everybody sing:
Worn out, wasted
Like a bird with broken wings
Sometimes grace reminds me
I don't get to be the king

But love it washes over
Love it pulls me closer
Love it changes everthing

Everything is beautiful
Even when the tears are falling
I don't need a miracle to believe
Even in the crashing down
I can hear redemtion calling
And everything is beautiful to me

Sweetly, You release me
From the weight of what I've done
The trigger trips the hammer
But the bullets never come

And love it washes over
Love it pulls me closer
Love it changes everything

Everything is beautiful
Even when the tears are falling
I don't need a miracle to believe
Even in the crashing down
I can hear redemption calling
And everything is beautiful to me

And love like a landslide
Like the wind
Spins around me pulls me in
At it's unveiling, I begin

Everything is beautiful
Even when the tears are falling
I don't need a miracle to believe
Even in the crashing down
I can hear redemption calling
And everything is beautiful to me

I don't mind the term cisgender.  I've known the word for a few years now, and I have no problem referring to myself as such.  I would, however, prefer not to be called a cissie.

If you are using a world to explain something to a bunch of idiots that they do not understand - then, congratulations, your much more than an idiot, you're a moron.

Quote from: Zythyra on June 30, 2009, 07:14:35 AM
Another problem with labeling cis, trans, inter, etc., is the assumption that we actually know what gender someone is.

Z

I don't think this is really that big a problem. We use ethnic terms to identify people as belonging to a culture or not, even though we can't reliably tell whether someone is really the ethnicity we assume. I don't label a person as "cis" or "trans" except in a tentative way to myself, until I find out for certain from the person. I just go with whatever gender a person is presenting, and if it's ambiguous, I'll ask.

I like to use 'names' but then again, I'm stupid.

Exactly. But sometimes I use pronouns too. She, him, herself, their, whatever.

The whole trans/cis thing is totally irrelevant unless the topic comes up for some reason. Kind of like ethnicity.

That is what I love about my job.  I tell people (regardless of gender) to do this, or do that.  If they can't.  Then off the deck.  Regardless of gender.

Quote from: tekla on June 30, 2009, 11:19:31 PM
I like to use 'names' but then again, I'm stupid.

No, but you do like sometimes to claim that you are.

Let's see, Serano, and in that case even Autumn, were both using the term in, for one, learned discourse and the other in what she calls journalism. The words were not used in conversation.

Toni was using the terms to define what she saw as the topic of discussion. Again, not a conversation.

The use of the terms in all of those cases was general and not directed at a single or even a few individuals. No, "hey, lane, you cissexual gay-male blah, blah, blah."

Lane protested that he felt offended by the use of the term -- in general -- and took umbrage with it's use. Much as I might term you both as caucasian. Now, really, does that mean that I have slurred either of you by using that general term into which I can be catagorized as well?

There are some legitimate reasons for not liking the terms. Zythyra has related one of those and tekla another. That you don't like the usage is all well and good. But, I think the point of the entire deal was: are the terms used as slurs?

N~