Posts tagged "cissexism"

lisaquestions:

hyena-punk:

maximum-soccer-revenge:

Saying that one has gender dysphoria because of internalized cissexism is like saying that one’s paralyzed arm can’t move because of internalized ableism.

I don’t know about you, but I definitely got over a lot of my dysphoria from unlearning the cissexist stuff I had been taught, so yeah. Not everyones dysphoria is caused by it but some peoples dysphoria is

Saying that one cannot have gender dysphoria because of internalized cissexism is like saying that one cannot have depression, anxiety, PTSD, and other mental illnesses as a reaction to stressful and traumatic experiences.

It is like saying that women cannot have body image and self-esteem difficulties because of how women’s bodies are presented in media.

It is like saying that people who are not straight cannot try to be straight in response to persistent social messages that promote compulsory heterosexuality.

Gender dysphoria caused by internalized cissexism fits completely with how the human mind is understood to function. Claiming otherwise is ignorant.

Truscum are completely unable to understand the effects of social pressures on self-perception and body image
And cis people believe that trans men are “female-socialized”…

Source: maximum-soccer-revenge

casualcissexism:

i think the stupidest thing about refusing to use the right pronouns is youre not even proving anything. a woman isn’t going to stop her hrt because you called her a he. a dude isn’t going to just magically stop being a dude because you called him a she. nonbinary people arent just going to be like “oops, you got me” because you misgender them

literally all it is is a petty power trip and you are nothing but a petulant child

(via fatmf)

Source: sageruto

lisaquestions:

transluminescence:

iaccidentallythepatriarchy:

transluminescence:

visambros:

tiredestprincess:

zamotdredhart:

tiredestprincess:

i just remembered people with penises can’t have multiple consecutive orgasms ohhjhhh my g OD HAHAHAHHKDFHAH

Well people with vaginas have periods so I think y’all deserve all the orgasms you want

that’s….really sweet… omfg

its really great to see a post with so many notes where people have made the effort not to be cissexist about something truly, but the thing is, this kinda thinking is basically just lumping ‘people with penises’ - a group so diverse it can include everyone from cis men to trans men to DMAB non-binary people to trans women, and ‘people with vaginas’ - an equally diverse group of people, and assuming that their sexuality is exactly the same in addition to positing cis people’s sexuality as not only the norm but the only one there is. Trans women can have multiple orgasms and plenty of cis women can’t, for example. So yeah pls keep that in mind

There’s a difference between multiple orgasms and multiple consecutive orgasms. People with penises have a refractory after orgasming, during which they can’t have another orgasm; this refractory period can last a couple minutes to several hours.

People with vaginas* don’t have a refractory period so once they have an orgasm, they can immediately have another with no waiting.

This may not be true of camab people with neovaginas though.

see again, you’re doing the same thing i was directly referring to in the actual post. 

  1. you have framed ‘people born with penises and still have them’ as ‘people with penises in general’, and that is cissexist. 
  2. The biology your argument is based on is cissexist because it posits cis bodies as being the norm and assumes that trans bodies are the same. This is ciscentric and incorrect. 
  3. Biology, especially in terms of sex, is often completely fucking wrong (e.g. ‘G spot vs clitoral orgasm’ which is misogynist garbage written by Freud and has persisted to the point of being a fallacy 
  4. Millions of people have personal experience that disagrees with this biological essentialism, myself included

Estrogen can eliminate the refractory period and trans women can achieve multiple consecutive orgasms. I also don’t think estrogen is required and surgery definitely isn’t, but tobitastic has talked about this in more detail, And it’s easier on estrogen.

Basically, using “people with vaginas” and “people with penises” is actually grossing me out. Like, there are many ways to talk about people in a way that doesn’t put their genitals (and cissexist assumptions about how they function) front and center. This strikes me as a genuine attempt at inclusive language for trans people, but one of the problems is that somehow it’s always genitals that get centered in such discussions.

Hence why terminology like SAAB, CASAB, ASAB, and DSAB were coined. Also cis and trans.

Also, making certain to refer to trans women and other CAMAB trans people who have had genital surgery as having neovaginas is also pretty gross.

Anyway, I’m not saying people can’t talk about vaginas and penises (how would I stop anyone) I would just prefer more thought and sensitivity about how to address or reference trans people. Like not assuming that trans people’s bodies work just like cis people’s bodies. Taking exogenous hormones changes things up quite a bit, plus of course many people who have never had HRT may have atypical hormonal profiles (say like PCOS or CAIS).

Like it’s okay to say “I don’t know how this works for trans people” and probably significantly better than just running with discussing trans women in terms of positioning them as functioning like cis men.

Source: tiredestprincess

Inclusive data structures

velartrill:

One of the most aggravating things about much of the infosphere is that a majority of software is designed with a heteronormative, cisnormative, gender-binary, and usually ethnocentric worldview built into its basic operating assumptions. This is especially a problem with social media. The upshot is usually this:

  1. The gender field is a drop-down menu or pair of radio buttons with two choices.
  2. There’s a separate field for first names, last names, and sometimes middle names.
  3. There’s no way of encoding relationships with multiple people.

The naïve solution to these problems is to add choice. Instead of “male” and “female” radio-buttons, a well-meaning programmer might put in a drop-down list including male, female, questioning, queer, and agender. Great. What about bigender people? Genderfluid people? People from specific non-white cultural traditions, like two-spirits or hijra? Okay, maybe we can expand the list to include them. If you account for every discrete gender identification, you’ll eventually wind up with a very long list that’ll cover maybe 90% of people.

What about the remaining 10%?

What about people who have their own way of describing their gender? What about people who more or less fall into an established category but for whatever reason feel uncomfortable with the label the developer offers?

And for some extra fun, what in god’s name happens when you try to localize the list of genders for, say, Arabic?

The point is that this is approaching the problem in exactly the wrong way. Gender is a continuum (in more than one dimension, incidentally) and the standard approach is to refine it down into something discrete. The correct solution? Don’t fuckin’ make people tell you what their gender is.

Seriously, you really don’t need to know. The only real practical application of this data is marketing, and gender-based marketing is poisonous, corrosive muck anyway.

If it’s a social network, of course, there are some problems with that model. The service provider has no reason to know the user’s gender, but the user might want hir friends to know. There’s a fairly obvious solution to this: Add a text field in the “About Me” section. Label it “Gender.” Accept an arbitrarily long string. Allow people to leave it empty and hide it. This is actually easier than radio buttons or a drop-down menu, for chrissakes.

The other potential problem is pronouns. The simple solution is to let the user supply their own, maybe with some examples so they don’t need a linguistics degree to figure out which forms of “xe” are the nominative, accusative, genitive, and oblique. Unfortunately, while this is something that can be resolved in English, other languages aren’t so fortunate. Arabic enforces a gender binary marked on nouns, adjectives, and verbs, and it permeates the language, as do a lot of other languages. Ultimately, there’s no easy answer here. The best one is to avoid constructions that require indicating a user’s gender: instead of “داليا تحب مجلتك” , write something like “يحب شخص مجلتك: داليا.” Use icons instead of text as much as possible without damaging the UX.

(Of course, there are languages where this is a non-issue. Swahili doesn’t mark gender at all except in some lexical items, and uses “yeye” for everybody.)

What about the ethnocentrism? It’s a very European assumption that everybody is going to have a given name and a family name, or a given name and a patronymic that can be cleanly separated into a “first name” and “last name.” It also conflates given names with “first names”, so in particularly stupid designs, a Chinese person might have to put their name in backwards so the program will be able to deal with their given name.

"But," the developer will exclaim, hands wringing anxiously, "we don’t want to call somebody Jonathan Q. Tastyzots everywhere in the UI; he should show up as “Jon” or “Jonathan” to his friends, and “Mr. Tastyzots” to his business contacts! Without a distinction between first and last name, how are we supposed to know which form of the name to use in which contacts?”

Great question, imaginary developer! WHY DON’T YOU ASK THE USER?

Instead of “First Name” & “Last Name” ask the user for all the forms of their name you need. “Full form,” “Personal form,” and “Official/business form” will be enough to handle all the needs above. So Mr. Tastyzots could reply “Johnathan Q. Tastyzots”, “John,” and “Dark Lord Thunderpants the Despoiler” (because also why are you assuming even Europeans have predictable name forms?) and Muhammed Husayn Abū ‘Umār Ibn ‘Abd ir-Rahman can answer “محمد حسين أبو عمار ابن عبد الرحمان”, Abu ‘Umār “ابو عمار، and Sayyid Husayn “سيد حسين” or whatever reflects how he uses his name. And it means the developers have less work to do! (Also, you fucking better have Unicode support, or I will wreak a terrible vengeance upon you and your next twenty descendants.)

There’s a pattern that’s beginning to become evident, isn’t there? The old way of doing things asks users for a specific set of information, and then the software assembles a model in the background which it uses to provide surface forms. What we’re doing is eliminating the middle-man, and letting users supply the backend model directly.

Can we apply this model to relationships, though? Yes. This article sums it up better than I ever could, but the basic principle to keep in mind: do not arbitrarily collect data. When you need information, instead of trying to assemble a model from pieces of user-supplied information, just ask them directly. Do you want to know who their spouse is so you know who to contact in an emergency? How about instead you just add a field labeled “Emergency Contact?”

Software should be generic. This applies every bit as much at the cultural level as it does at the engineering level.

(via lisaquestions)

Source: velartrill

itsvondell:

you use singular they all the time

someone’s knocking on the door, i wonder what they want

there’s a person waving their hands at me from over there but i can’t hear them

does mysterycop follow you? i love their username

can you tell whichever person was in the bathroom last to please close the door behind them on their way out?

they IS properly, officially used to refer to a single individual person, quite a lot, in a plethora of different scenarios

all the opposition comes when it’s suggested that you can still use they once you’ve seen the person or heard their name, because you know someone’s gender once you’ve seen them or heard their name, of course

the opposition is not grammatical

(via secretandroid)

Source: itsvondell

jackaldope:

obviously sex and gender are not the same thing. my sex is a big blurry changeable hodgepodge of hormones and organs and secondary sex characteristics and genetics and my gender is pretty evidently not “testosterone, xx sex chromosomes, breasts, etc etc”

but when people talk about Keeping Gender And Sex Separate all i hear is “i want to be able to gender trans people’s bodies differently from their actual genders”

if someone is female then so is their body. Wow

(via lisaquestions)

Source: gutcolour

sad-monster-children:

Someone was talking gender interpretation with me and gave me the ok to post this:

When it comes to characters in fiction being interpreted as trans or cis, I think people need to recalibrate how they look at the issue as a whole.

While this is probably simplifying things, I feel it may be best to look at this stuff in five categories.

First is canon trans characters. Examples would be Grell, Ruka, Birdette, Poison, and so on. Characters who are stated by the author to be trans and the story doesn’t contradict this or characters who are made explicitly 100% clear to be trans.

Second is ambiguously trans characters. Examples here would be Naoto or Chihiro. These are characters where the evidence is not solid, but in the balance leans towards the characters being trans (and before anyone says anything, don’t even try to argue against this if you’re cis. I and many other trans people I know agree there’s a lot of subtle evidence here, stuff cis people would be prone to missing due to not having life experience with it. Again, don’t even try) Characters stated by the author to be cis but where the story contradicts this would fit in here, too.

Third is totally ambiguous characters. Examples here would be Mario, Kirby, characters like that. Where there’s little evidence of a demonstrated gender identity to base anything off or little evidence to see that a character’s gender identity might match OR contradict assigned gender. People are probably going to jump about how Mario’s here, but if it were to be revealed Mario is a trans man tomorrow, I can’t think of any evidence from the games that would be contradicted at all (if there is, well, maybe he’s not on this spot but it’s still here and fairly populated)

Fourth is ambiguously cis characters. This is where most characters in fiction actually lie. It’s very common for characters in fiction to have and express a gender identity and also common for this to match up, circumstantially, with what one would presume to be their assigned birth gender. If a character here would be revealed to be trans, this might contradict a lot of implications or circumstantial evidence, but it would not require an explicit retcon. And no, just because most people are cis or cis is often (harmfully) presumed to be the default does not make this level of evidence a solid 100% clear answer. Remember also that many trans people come into their identity late in life and this would hold for fictional characters.

Fifth is canon cis characters. I can’t think of examples off the top of my head but they definitely exist. Here we have characters outright confirmed to be cis. Where the author actually bothered to confirm it and the story matches. Where you see a character as a newborn and already gendered and this matches, or things happen in the story that would be impossible if the character were trans such as a woman reproducing sexually with someone who has a penis in a setting without magic or fancy supertech.

Currently it seems like the usual debate has people putting 3s and 4s in category 5, 2s in category 4 or even 5, and 1s often get put in category 2 but really can end up anywhere on the list. This sort of setup probably seems absurd to people who are used to that kind of analysis, but if you remove the bias of assuming cis until proven otherwise, this is really what you are left with.

Bolded for emphasis. Cis until proven otherwise isn’t just a fandom thing, it affects trans ppl in our day to day lives and it needs to stop being a thing.

I think it’s a better way of looking at things, rather than a binary of definitely cis or definitely trans. The only thing I can think of to add is that it wouldn’t be a go-ahead to be an ass to a trans person for headcanoning, say, a category 4/5 character as trans. This is fandom, we have every pairing under the sun and AUs and alt timelines and crossovers and a million other ways of making canon our own. Besides, it’s not like we have that many 1s or 2s to play with to begin with, yeah?

EDIT: reminder that a character who displays traits commonly associated with being trans stating that they are “really [designated sex at birth]” or deciding to be who they “truly” are is not definitive proof of cisness, as demonstrated by myself and a ton of other trans folk who’ve said that stuff because we needed to be closeted, because we were under pressure to say it or just because being trans and being perceived as trans can be really scary and dangerous. Again, please remember that this stuff does not go down in a vacuum and “well you said you were happy being a boy/girl before so you can’t be trans” is a real problem we have to contend with when dealing with family and medical stuff and a hundred other things.

…actually lets just add a rule of “if it would be a shitty invalidating thing to say about a real trans person then it probably shouldn’t be in your I’m Not Transphobic But Character X Is Not Trans!!! argument”

(via lisaquestions)

Source: monsterkissed
  • Trans* person: That was so transphobic, please never say that again.
  • Cis person: OH MY GOD NO IT ISN'T I'M NOT HOMOPHOBIC I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST YOUR SEXUALITY YOUR SEXUALITY OF BEING TRANSGENDER DOESNT BOTHER ME STOP CISPHOBIA!!!!!!!111!!
Source: transresource

creppyqueercommunist:

femmepunxxx:

cis ppl:  ”well i guess i go by she & her but really, i’m okay with whatever.  it’s not a big deal.”

LOL CIS PPL.

like thanks 4 rubbing your privilege all over my face

(via towriteloveonherdick)

By comparing the relative lengths of certain fingers, [Penn State archaeologist Dean] Snow determined that three-quarters of the handprints were female. “There has been a male bias in the literature for a long time,” said Snow… . “People have made a lot of unwarranted assumptions about who made these things, and why.”

Archeologists find that humanity’s first artists were female. Complement with 100 ideas that changed art and an illustrated celebration of women artists who changed culture.  (via explore-blog)

A reminder that the sciences are far from objective, logical entities divorced from social constructs, biases, and favoritism.

(via lookatthisfuckingoppressor)

and here we also see scientists who are themselves critiquing other scientists’ misogyny and its impacts on their studies, going on to immediately project their unwarranted cissexist and binarist assumptions into their studies!

~*~white cis ppl~*~

~*~wow so conscious so progress~*~

(via lisaquestions)

Source: explore-blog
Call me Imp.

She/her/hers or they/them/theirs.

I am, in no particular order: 24, baeddeling, white, anglo, USian citizen, middle-class, able-bodied, poly, intersex, somewhat debilitated w/ depression but largely neurotypical, allistic, fat, singlet, sighted, hearing, unemployed, queer, genderfluid trans woman.

I tend to follow VERY few people and often have to unfollow people briefly or permanently when I just can't handle my dash.

If you aren't comfortable with me being on your blog / contacting you / etc, you can tell me and I'll back off. If it's hard to actually say it, you can send an ask just saying "red".

view archive



Feeling nervous about talking to me?

Tildes denote sarcasm

Notes About My Gender and Sex

...and my sexuality and romance

askbox