Rule 4 - Be Nice

Alice-nice-Alice said:

but as usual the cis hets dive in to invalidate us

By lumping a large group of people together, who cannot help being what they are, and giving them all negative traits, you are committing a similar level of prejudicial thinking as those you decry. "Do as you would be done by" is a good maxim. I'm speaking as the parent of a non-binary child, whom I love greatly. I have no anti-trans axe to grind.

Actually, that's a point - I'm a 'cis-het' (more or less) and also have no axe to grind - the opposite. But I took the phrase as a short-hand for 'cis-het people - most often men - who feel the need to defend the majority as though it were under threat'. But maybe there's more precise way of putting that - the harmfully prejudiced or something. Racism would fall within that term too. But then I worry that the specific minority being spoken of by CF is getting side-lined. The intent was clear in their post even if the precise phrasing was not. 

To be honest, I do hear many podcasters and the like catching themselves in a moment of self-awareness and saying 'and of course. as a straight white male, I'm the voice that most needs to be heard on this topic'. It's done with self-deprecating irony of course. And I should probably echo that now, and step back from this discussion to let testimony of the lived experience have room to breathe. 

In other words, widespread 'permission' is given by many progressive cis-het people for that or an equivalent term to be used to refer to the unconsiously ingested prejudice/entitlement that even the most enlightened have recurring blind-spots (sometimes caught in the moment of articulating them) about. Used pegoritivley, it is a short hand for 'the people who will remaiin comparatively advantaged for the foreseeable' - so basically that's OK. It isn't punching down in any way really. So actually... it's fine. Or should be. For those of us who can't take it, maybe we should ask why.

Caelus said:

ahh so it was made by a german sexologist/sociologist... it all makes sense now... yeah that just makes me want to have that word banned even more lol

Fortunately ~ etymological and sociological wisdom has so much more credibility than gender, sexual and racial discrimination; in freer more harmonised societies at least.

Didn’t Shakespeare have to invent words to get sufficient elegance and nuance into his writing? About ways of being that had existed since the dawn of time…

ahh so it was made by a german sexologist/sociologist... it all makes sense now... yeah that just makes me want to have that word banned even more lol

I'm sorry you don't understand the heirarchy of the power structures at play but you are missing the point and I am going to sleep. Good night Sperg. Sleep well.

Now I'm going to bed because it's late and tbh I have a lot on over the weekend. But this thread better not get locked down while I'm gone too because that would be damning evidence giving extra credence to the OPs point.

And "othering" is what you get when you are in a minority of any type.

You get "othered":

For being too bright, for being too stupid.

For supporting the other team, or even for not supporting any team.

For being a cyclist, or a motorcyclist, or a car driver 

For being poor, for being rich.

For being beautiful or for being ugly.

For being white and walking through small heath park, or by the mosque in washwood heath.

For being fat, for being weak, for being sick.

For being a christian, for not supporting the latest war, for joining CND, or for not joining CND if all you mates did (ditto any activism group)

What's so special about your "othering"?

I Sperg said:

Isn't it more like a Venn diagram where we enjoy greater or lesser degrees of intersectionality?

That isn't untrue. But then in a world where variation is natural why do you feel you get to be the "normal" one and we don't?
I think there is a misunderstanding where you think I dislike you because you are "cis" or if you prefer "not trans" and that isn't it at all, what I dislike is that for some arbitrary reason based on social constructs you seem to think (or at least you heavily imply that you do) that we are abnormal or in some way broken just because we don't resonate with the gender assigned to us at birth as you do. I understand it isn't always easy to try put yourself in others shoes, but can you really say you've tried to understand us? The question is genuine.

I Sperg said:

Isn't it more like a Venn diagram where we enjoy greater or lesser degrees of intersectionality?

That isn't untrue. But then in a world where variation is natural why do you feel you get to be the "normal" one and we don't?
I think there is a misunderstanding where you think I dislike you because you are "cis" or if you prefer "not trans" and that isn't it at all, what I dislike is that for some arbitrary reason based on social constructs you seem to think (or at least you heavily imply that you do) that we are abnormal or in some way broken just because we don't resonate with the gender assigned to us at birth as you do. I understand it isn't always easy to try put yourself in others shoes, but can you really say you've tried to understand us? The question is genuine.

Now I'm going to bed because it's late and tbh I have a lot on over the weekend. But this thread better not get locked down while I'm gone too because that would be damning evidence giving extra credence to the OPs point.