I am casually browsing the internet and I saw an article from Smosh, accompanied by a youtube video called "Beginners Guide to Tumblr," and both articles mention Tumblr is like the breeding ground for overly-sensitive SJW or whatever they're called. Old news, whatever.


One thing from both articles and the videos I didn't get was this-- what the heck is "cis gendered" and why does it garner so much hate from the Tumblr community? i feel like this is probably some term that some wack academic invented in the name of PC.

SJWs are causing many many more problems then they are claiming to solve, honestly.

Also- Anyone active on tumblr that often fights/debates with SJWs there? Contact me- I have a proposition for ya 


-Zach

Cisgender refers to people who identify with the gender they were born with. As opposed to transgender persons.

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 1): Cisgender refers to people who identify with the gender they were born with. As opposed to transgender persons.

so......normal people then? the vast majority of humanity.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2): so......normal people then? the vast majority of humanity.

How cissexist of you !

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter): SJWs

That is a new one to me.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2): normal people then? the vast majority of humanity.

I understand trans people having their own term. I am cool with that but why do we need our own term? I am dude who likes being a dude and I like dudes. Those are called homosexuals or gays. There are dudes who like being dudes who like chicks. Those are heterosexuals or straights. There are dudes who like being dudes who like chicks and dudes. Those are called confused. er.... excuse me: bisexuals. I won't even get into the whole pan, multi, a, flux things.

As long as people are in consensual adult relationships, who cares?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4): That is a new one to me.

Social Justice Warrior. Generally percieved as a perjorative word, used to describe persons who will seek out outrage in order to be offended on behalf of someone else, usually one who either doesn't care or doesn't know he or she is supposed to be outraged.

Cisgender is what most of us are. Transgender is what a small minority of people are.

In any minority rights fight, there will be members of the minority who start to hate all members of the majority. Can't blame them; that sort of thinking was tempting for me for a while, too. Doesn't make it right, though.

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5): Social Justice Warrior.

Yeah, ok. These, I guess, are the same folks that demand trigger warnings so as not to get offended.

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5): Generally percieved as a perjorative word,

As it should be.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4): As long as people are in consensual adult relationships, who cares?

  

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6): In any minority rights fight, there will be members of the minority who start to hate all members of the majority. Can't blame them; that sort of thinking was tempting for me for a while, too. Doesn't make it right, though.

Social Justice Warriors aren't necessarily members of any minority though, they are simply sad unreasonable individuals with a twisted world view and a need to release their inner self-hatred at someone. They find equality issues from where they really don't exist while legitimate gender / sexual minority activists prefer concentrating on real issues that actually matter.

I support legitimate activists who fight against actual discrimination based on gender or sexuality. I don't support fools who think fight against adverts or art that "objectify women" or any other rubbish like that, if we start banning things just because they might offend someone we might as well make Kim Jong Un our leader.

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 7): Yeah, ok. These, I guess, are the same folks that demand trigger warnings so as not to get offended.

Yes, I think anyone who thins trigger warnings are needed should be sent to Syria, if they survive perhaps they'll soon understand this world has REAL problems in it, not just their irrelevant first world problems. Some people suffer for real while they bitch about all kinds of meaningless things.

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5): Social Justice Warrior. Generally percieved as a perjorative word, used to describe persons who will seek out outrage in order to be offended on behalf of someone else, usually one who either doesn't care or doesn't know he or she is supposed to be outraged.

That's how the people who use the term "Social Justice Warrior" would like to define it. In reality, however, it also gets used to refer to people who happen to have different opinions when it comes to equality. It gets used by men who think that women have little place in science fiction literature except as love interests and sex symbols to refer to people who would prefer to see some examples in the genre that delve more into women's issues. Substitute "video gaming" for "science fiction literature" and you've got another excellent example. It's used by people who think that women should just accept being catcalled in the street instead of standing up for themselves and saying "we actually really don't like that and would rather you have some respect instead of treating us as sex objects". I could go on listing examples, but that should give a flavor of what we're talking about. Are there people who take things too far with the endless trigger warnings and such? Of course - there are people who take things too far in every movement. But a lot of well-meaning people have been unfairly targeted by it as well.

If you refer to someone as an SJW, it's basically equivalent to someone calling a member of the Tea Party a "teabagger" - it shows you're more interested in catchy-sounding insults than you are about the actual issues that they care about. It really says more about you than it does about them.

-Mir

Quoting Mir (Reply 9): If you refer to someone as an SJW, it's basically equivalent to someone calling a member of the Tea Party a "teabagger" - it shows you're more interested in catchy-sounding insults than you are about the actual issues that they care about. It really says more about you than it does about them.

A lot of modern day "feminists" SJW's tend to be just bunch of whiners who through their own behaviour feed the stereotype of women as victims of misogynist oppression. There's no reason for any reasonable person to care about the non-issues they like to talk about, such as "objectification of women" in commercials, art and so on. Sex sells and will always continue to do that, SJW's can't change human nature any more than the communists in the USSR could.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 10): A lot of modern day "feminists" SJW's tend to be just bunch of whiners who through their own behaviour feed the stereotype of women as victims of misogynist oppression.

Speaking of feeding stereotypes....  

Quoting pvjin (Reply 10): There's no reason for any reasonable person to care about the non-issues they like to talk about, such as "objectification of women" in commercials, art and so on.

That's just simply not true.

-Mir

Quoting PHX787 (Thread starter): SJWs are causing many many more problems then they are claiming to solve, honestly.

What "problems" exactly are they causing? Presenting you with a term that you are deriding before you even have half an idea of what it means?

Quoting Mir (Reply 9): It really says more about you than it does about them.

  

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 7): Yeah, ok. These, I guess, are the same folks that demand trigger warnings so as not to get offended.

Trigger warnings... they are no way about 'not offending' people. It's about being considerate of trauma victims who can get real physical flashbacks when confronted with the wrong things. It is true that literally everything could be a trigger to someone, but if you're discussing the more prevalent types of trauma in an online forum, what's the harm in putting a trigger warning?

Quoting pvjin (Reply 8): Yes, I think anyone who thins trigger warnings are needed should be sent to Syria, if they survive perhaps they'll soon understand this world has REAL problems in it, not just their irrelevant first world problems. Some people suffer for real while they bitch about all kinds of meaningless things.

I'm going to place a trigger warning for childhood sexual abuse before my final paragraph.

Let me tell you a quick story about someone close to me. My earliest memory is me running around on a beach with my family. Her earliest memory is of her not wanting to be near a particular family member because she didn't want him to rape her again . This abuse continued for over ten years. As you should be able to tell she doesn't even know when it started. All of this happened in Australia - not exactly a third world country, right? Now, a couple of decades later, she is gradually beginning a normal life, you certainly wouldn't know about her past unless she told you. But there are times when she's not in a good headspace and on those days, seeing jokes or even hearing lived experiences can literally trigger a physical reaction - she thinks she is the 5 year old about to be abused. I've seen it, it's scary. This is the type of person that trigger warnings HELP. This is the person that "SJWs" HELP. You on the other hand are so privileged that you think the only people who have had it tougher than you are in Syria. People like you tell my friend that her abuse was a 'meaningless thing', or a first world problem.

Quoting benjjk (Reply 12): What "problems" exactly are they causing?

They're telling straight white men that they are not, in fact, experts on discrimination. No, not even when they've been a straight white guy in a foreign country.

Quoting benjjk (Reply 12): What "problems" exactly are they causing? Presenting you with a term that you are deriding before you even have half an idea of what it means?

They're part of a trend of censoring college campuses, shaming anyone from speaking their mind:
https://www.thefire.org/big-year-campus-censorship/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...lleges-conservative_n_6250308.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/07/ar...-over-a-statue-in-briefs.html?_r=1

Quoting benjjk (Reply 12): People like you tell my friend that her abuse was a 'meaningless thing', or a first world problem.

Here's a long article from a US Marine, National Guard soldier, and law enforcement officer. His trauma is real. Here's what he has to say:

"Oh, I should add: fuck my trauma too. I must be old-fashioned, but I always thought coming to terms with pain was part of growing up. I’ve never expected anyone to not knock on my door because it reminds me of that terrifying morning decades ago. I’ve never blown up at anyone for startling me with a camera flash (I’ve never even mentioned it to anyone who did). I’ve never expected anyone to not talk about Iraq or Afghanistan around me, even though some memories still hurt. I don’t need trigger warnings because a book might remind me of a murder victim I’ve seen.

Generations of Americans experienced actual trauma. Our greatest generation survived the Depression, then fought the worst war in humanity’s history, then built the United States into the most successful nation that has ever existed. They didn’t accomplish any of that by being crystal eggshells that would shatter at the slightest provocation, they didn’t demand society change to protect their tender feelings. They simply dealt with the hardships of their past and moved on. Even my great uncle, the Korea Marine, never expected us to tiptoe around him. He wouldn’t talk about his experience, but he didn’t order us not to.

So again, fuck your trauma. If your past bothers you that much, get help. I honestly hope you come to terms with it. I hope you manage to move forward. I won’t say anything meant to dredge up bad memories, and don’t think anyone should intentionally try to harm your feelings.

But nobody, nobody, should censor themselves to protect you from your pathological, and pathologically stupid, sensitivities."

http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2015...ngs-and-the-new-meaning-of-trauma/

If you can't handle life, get help.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 13): They're telling straight white men that they are not, in fact, experts on discrimination. No, not even when they've been a straight white guy in a foreign country.

First of all, the person who speaks in absolutes is already wrong. That goes both ways.

But as a straight white guy myself I would agree that, generally, we cannot be experts on discrimination. It's debatable that even being a white guy in a predominately non-white country, with perhaps a few exceptions in the world we can't face true discrimination. Prejudice, absolutely, but not discrimination. They are different things but I don't have the desire to explain them here.

Quoting opethfan (Reply 14): They're part of a trend of censoring college campuses, shaming anyone from speaking their mind:

Putting a statue up in public where others can't avoid it isn't speaking your mind... and if people object to that statue isn't that their right? Chris Rock doesn't like the atmospheres at college... I assume the SJWs are censoring everyone from laughing then.

Quoting opethfan (Reply 14): If you can't handle life, get help.

Oh if only it were that simple.... people can be in therapy for years before some sort of 'progress' happens. In the meantime they try to live normal lives and if putting a couple of words before your posts helps them then why the hell wouldn't you?

I think I get where this marine is coming from - he sees his trauma as worse than microagressions. Which is a poor comparison to make (they are called 'micro' for a reason). In any case it's not a competition.

But he says:

Quoting opethfan (Reply 14): I won’t say anything meant to dredge up bad memories, and don’t think anyone should intentionally try to harm your feelings. But nobody, nobody, should censor themselves to protect you from your pathological, and pathologically stupid, sensitivities."

He basically says "I'll be nice" and proceeds to do the exact opposite.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 3): How cissexist of you !

  

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4): That is a new one to me.

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 5): Social Justice Warrior. Generally percieved as a perjorative word,

Tumblr SJW's seem to embrace it though.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 4): I am cool with that but why do we need our own term? I am dude who likes being a dude and I like dudes.

I just don't like all the excessive labeling.
Are you a man who is into men? You're gay! Congratulations.
Are you a man who is into women? You're straight! Congratulations.
Were you born a man but identify as a women? You're transgender, congratulations.

That's all we really need, IMO.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6): Cisgender is what most of us are.

Wait are gay men cisgender too? That's why I'm confused.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16): That's all we really need, IMO.

According to your definitions we don't even need straight as a label because we should assume that anyone who is white, male, and heterosexual is "normal". If you are outside of this "normal", only then do you get a label.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16): Quoting DocLightning (Reply 6): Cisgender is what most of us are. Wait are gay men cisgender too? That's why I'm confused.

Gender identity has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Cis refers to anyone whose gender identity is the same as their born, biological sex. Transgender is anyone whose gender identity is different from their born, biological sex.

Gay, or homosexual, is anyone whose sexual orientation is the same as their gender identity.
Straight, or heterosexual, is anyone whose sexual orientation is different from their gender identity.

You can have a transgendered heterosexual man. This is a person who was born of female sex, but identifies as a man, and is attracted to women. Equally you can have a transgendered homosexual man, who is a person who was born of female sex, but identifies as a man, and is attracted to women.

Again, gender identity is completely separate from sexual orientation.

[Edited 2015-05-26 05:04:14]

Quoting opethfan (Reply 14):

Man everyone born in the last 2 centuries are real wimps. They didn't have to deal with the plague or serfdom or life expectancies in the 30s. Everyone should quit their wining, people back in the dark ages, now they had problems.

This is how societies work. As we advance, progress, and eliminate problems, we can focus our attention on other problems. Just because they aren't the same problems as we faced previously, or of a different scale, doesn't mean they aren't valid problems. Just because you want to go live in the past doesn't mean we as a society should.

I must say, I actually learned something on the Non-Av forums today...cisgender and [trigger warnings].

Thanks non-av.

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 18): Man everyone born in the last 2 centuries are real wimps. They didn't have to deal with the plague or serfdom or life expectancies in the 30s. Everyone should quit their wining, people back in the dark ages, now they had problems. This is how societies work. As we advance, progress, and eliminate problems, we can focus our attention on other problems. Just because they aren't the same problems as we faced previously, or of a different scale, doesn't mean they aren't valid problems. Just because you want to go live in the past doesn't mean we as a society should.

I think you nailed it. It is not that we have become wimpier, it is that we have become more aware and have a better understanding of how things work. Yes some people do take it to the extreme, and this undermines the real work being done. However, the fact that we are now better able to recognize and treat PTSD, we have a better understanding of Autism, even our own sexuality and gender identities.

These are all things that have existed since the beginning of time (and at one time were no big deal), but now we have a better understanding and are working to further understand ourselves as a people and species.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16): Wait are gay men cisgender too?

The word "man" is the giveaway. I am not a woman in a man's body. I am a man through-and-through.

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 17): . Equally you can have a transgendered homosexual man, who is a person who was born of female sex, but identifies as a man, and is attracted to women.

Correction: attracted to *men*. Had a typo in that post, but for some reason I can't edit my post? Not sure why

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 17): Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16): That's all we really need, IMO. According to your definitions we don't even need straight as a label because we should assume that anyone who is white, male, and heterosexual is "normal". If you are outside of this "normal", only then do you get a label.

No, he is saying we don't need all the labels we have now. I think there are way too many as it is. All of them are "normal" (whatever that means). There should just be fewer.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 22): Quoting akiss20 (Reply 17): Quoting PHX787 (Reply 16): That's all we really need, IMO. According to your definitions we don't even need straight as a label because we should assume that anyone who is white, male, and heterosexual is "normal". If you are outside of this "normal", only then do you get a label. No, he is saying we don't need all the labels we have now. I think there are way too many as it is. All of them are "normal" (whatever that means). There should just be fewer.

We need words to describe various aspects of human life, be that sexuality, gender identity, or food preference. "Labels" only become an issue when they are used to deride or constrain human expression. I have no issue being labelled as gay, for I am gay. I do have issues with being constrained *because* I am gay.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2): so......normal people then? the vast majority of humanity.

Actually, I think what you just said is why they came up with "cis." The thought was there aren't trans people and "normal" people because that implies trans people are abnormal. All gender identities are normal, some people are just cis and some trans.

Now I don't go around using cis- but I try and avoid saying that "we're normal" out of respect. Hopefully a trans individual will politely point that out or let it slide instead of jump down your throat. I hate seeing people be bashed and yelled at aggressively for being on their side and trying to do the right thing but making a common mistake.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 24): Now I don't go around using cis- but I try and avoid saying that "we're normal" out of respect. Hopefully a trans individual will politely point that out or let it slide instead of jump down your throat. I hate seeing people be bashed and yelled at aggressively for being on their side and trying to do the right thing but making a common mistake.

I don't use it often either, only when in the context of discussing a specific transgender issue or where it is relevant to point out my/others' non-transgender-ness (two hyphens!). I occasionally say "normal" when discussing sexuality too. The annoying thing is that people like you and I mean normal in the "vast majority of people" sense, not "anything else is abnormal and weird" sense, but the world normal carries a lot of baggage with it.

Quoting benjjk (Reply 15): Oh if only it were that simple.... people can be in therapy for years before some sort of 'progress' happens. In the meantime they try to live normal lives and if putting a couple of words before your posts helps them then why the hell wouldn't you? I think I get where this marine is coming from - he sees his trauma as worse than microagressions. Which is a poor comparison to make (they are called 'micro' for a reason). In any case it's not a competition.

Cards on the table: I attempted suicide during my teenage years. I was very lonely and in a place (mentally / geographically) I didn't want to be, and I hated almost everything about my life at that point. My attempt failed miserably, and I felt like Tom Hanks in Castaway. I didn't tell anyone.

But I also didn't expect anyone to step around me because of my issues. That's why they're MY issues. By projecting them onto others, blaming them for being "insensitive" or expecting others to coddle you, you are turning your problems into theirs. That's selfish, it's aggressive itself, and it's ineffective.

If you need a world that's covered in bubble wrap and cotton wool, you can't expect the rest of the world to walk 3 steps ahead and wrap everything up for you.

Quoting benjjk (Reply 15): He basically says "I'll be nice" and proceeds to do the exact opposite.

Whether he says "fuck your trauma" or "while I sympathize greatly for the issues and mental hardship you are encountering, your anguish is not particularly relevant to myself or to your peers" the message is the same. He has spent his life in real, unexplainable horror from war and law enforcement, as have his peers. Rather than act wronged and expect anything from the world, he handles it himself. Partially through his writing, I assume, or through his support network. Even when an external factor affects him, he doesn't mention it to the others because it's not right for him to project his trauma upon others.

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 18): This is how societies work. As we advance, progress, and eliminate problems, we can focus our attention on other problems. Just because they aren't the same problems as we faced previously, or of a different scale, doesn't mean they aren't valid problems. Just because you want to go live in the past doesn't mean we as a society should.

I don't want to live in the past. I want to live in the future, where we have found workable solutions to life's woes and hardships. Whining about them on the internet isn't a particularly effective method, I've experienced. Nor is having a chip on my shoulder and blaming the world, or feeling owed.

Quoting benjjk (Reply 15): Putting a statue up in public where others can't avoid it isn't speaking your mind... and if people object to that statue isn't that their right?

A statue could be deemed free expression, as could any vocal opposition to it. But attempting to remove it would be akin to trying to silence anyone who speaks up against it.

Quoting opethfan (Reply 26): I don't want to live in the past. I want to live in the future, where we have found workable solutions to life's woes and hardships. Whining about them on the internet isn't a particularly effective method, I've experienced. Nor is having a chip on my shoulder and blaming the world, or feeling owed.

Are there some people who simply post things without doing much good for their cause? Absolutely there are. But at the same time, social media and the internet have proven to be very useful tools for real social reform and change, and there is plenty on social media that is a legitimate attempt to change things. I find that very often the "old order" likes to dismiss the latter and try and paint them as the former. I am not saying that you do, but simply that it is often done, so you can see how people can get defensive about whole-sale dismissals of activism on social media platforms (which should really only be a part of your overall campaign).

Tumblr is the place fat hairy feminists go to hate the rest of us that arent fat, hairy or feminist. Best avoided.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 24): Actually, I think what you just said is why they came up with "cis." The thought was there aren't trans people and "normal" people because that implies trans people are abnormal. All gender identities are normal, some people are just cis and some trans.

Actually, this is a point where I respectfully and logistically disagree with the trans community.

Gender dysphoria needs to continue to be an "abnormal state" or a "disorder." Here's why: If it's a variant of normal, then it doesn't need any treatment, does it? If it doesn't need any treatment then sex reassignment surgery isn't necessary and is purely elective and certainly needn't be covered by insurance. I don't like that implication at all; by keeping it classified as a disorder we aren't mandating that anyone with gender identity disorder must get SRS (since adults may choose to reject medical therapy that they do not) but we are leaving that option open.

So while I sympathize with the sentiment of "I am not sick!" I would answer, "But you are, because there's a cure if you want it, but you're under no obligation to take it."

Quoting opethfan (Reply 26): I don't want to live in the past. I want to live in the future, where we have found workable solutions to life's woes and hardships. Whining about them on the internet isn't a particularly effective method, I've experienced.

Really? Due to "whining," I've had my eyes opened to so many issues.

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 17): According to your definitions we don't even need straight as a label because we should assume that anyone who is white, male, and heterosexual is "normal". If you are outside of this "normal", only then do you get a label.

I don't think i was trying to say that the label "straight" was unnecessary.

What I think is unnecessary is calling someone "cis" because they identify with the junk they have.

Quoting akiss20 (Reply 17): Gender identity has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Cis refers to anyone whose gender identity is the same as their born, biological sex

Hmmm i see.

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 19): I must say, I actually learned something on the Non-Av forums today...cisgender and [trigger warnings].

I hate trigger warnings. Much too overused. Especially on campus. Campuses are places to learn and be challenged in your ideology.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20): The word "man" is the giveaway.

Ohhhhhhhhhhh

Quoting seb146 (Reply 22): No, he is saying we don't need all the labels we have now. I think there are way too many as it is. All of them are "normal" (whatever that means). There should just be fewer.

^ Thank you.