Charmed Reboot

[Duke Bushido]

7 hours ago, Cygnia said:

And that's bad how exactly...?

 

7 hours ago, Dr.Device said:

I second Cygnia's question.

 

It is one thing to be in a minority and demand respect.

 

It is another to be in any group and demand it while refusing to give it.

 

I totally believe-- and have seen, as have we all-- people happily pretend that they didn't know this was extremely offensive to people who have no interest in participating in the ten-thousand-genders discussion.  The evidence is pretty much everywhere someone tries to use the flavor-of-the-month terms outside of their preferred sounding boards.  the vast majority of traditional males and traditional females-- and yes; despite all attempts to yell it out of existence, hetero-orientation is in terms of mathematics alone the norm; historically and in sheer volume it is the "traditional" norm. An ever-increasing population points to that.

 

Traditional people of any kind-- even if they are just traditionally goofballs, do not want or need new terms created specifically to bring them into a conversation they want no part of.  No one-- absolutely no one using this term does not know that.  It's rather like when I hear the young guys at the factory talk about "huntin' up some females."  They won't say women.  They won't say girls.  The won't say ladies.  The trendy thing now-- "females."  Don't use any word that might humanize them.  It makes the rest of the conversation a prolonged rape fantasy.  Frankly, I find that offensive.  I don't know who wouldn't.  But clearly the young men hunting females aren't bothered by it, nor are the "females" they manage to capture.

 

Not men.  Not women.  Not straight men and women.  Instead, "cis-gender."  Dehumanize them.  Make them simple specimens; use words that have no meaning to _them_.  That's certainly the best way to open a dialogue.  There is absolutely no way being dehumanized can possibly offend them.

 

Does it bother me?  Nope.  Like most people, I ignore most of what I have no interest in.  It makes more sense than getting worked up about it.   Why am I even here in something I have no interest in either way?  A question was asked.(and it's always _that_ question: "how could you possibly be offended by a word we made up and decided to apply to you without regard to how you felt about it or what your preferences might be, even though we make such a hyper-dramatic deal about our own?"  This has to be the silliest question ever.  Why don't we ask an African American why the N-word bothers him.  It's the same principal.  But in all likelihood, you already knew that, too.)  Now it's answered.  Again.  Just like it is in who-knows-how-many-hundreds-ore-possibly-thousands of places on the internet.

 

I know return you to your regularly scheduled baiting of each other.

 

(I kid, of course.  This board has an unusually high percentage of decent human beings   However, I do have to get back to ignoring you, because my humor gets more and more raucous, and I don't really need a bannination.  Not about the answer itself: I'm not kidding about that.  The general saracsm, though, is just trying to come off all smarmy.  That's the teasing. ) 

 

You folks have fun.  I'm going back to the gaming.

[Bazza]

54 minutes ago, Old Man said:

 

As a cisgendered male human, I'd like to offer my cultured opinion that Doherty, Milano, and Combs were (and are) hot, and I will judge this totally unnecessary reboot on similar grounds.  *grunt*  *scratch*

 

What about Rose McGowan? 

[Bazza]

22 minutes ago, Hermit said:

 

By God, NASA needs a next gen shuttle named Danza!

 

Judith Light might be more apt name. 

[Hermit]

46 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

 

 

(I kid, of course.  This board has an unusually high percentage of decent human beings   However, I do have to get back to ignoring you, because my humor gets more and more raucous, and I don't really need a bannination.  Not about the answer itself: I'm not kidding about that.  The general saracsm, though, is just trying to come off all smarmy.  That's the teasing. ) 

 

You folks have fun.  I'm going back to the gaming.

 

Despite the fact I agree with some of your points, as a moderator I have to say thanks for the self awareness I've had to step out of a few conversations myself because it got to the point where I was feeling my personal filters drop and I wouldn't be able to hold back the sarcasm and was SURE i'd be taken wrong

[Duke Bushido]

Hey, no problem.  I spent better than twenty years running my own board; I understand misunderstandings, so to speak.

 

When did you ditch Captain America?  

[Hermit]

2 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Hey, no problem.  I spent better than twenty years running my own board; I understand misunderstandings, so to speak.

 

When did you ditch Captain America?  

 

Oh, Cap will be back.

While I enjoy Aquatic Monarchy I recognize it is, ultimately, an inferior form of government to Shield Slinging Republics.

But with the movie coming up, I thought it would make a fun avatar to show my hope for good results.

 

 

 

[Dr.Device]

15 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

It is one thing to be in a minority and demand respect.

 

It is another to be in any group and demand it while refusing to give it.

 

I totally believe-- and have seen, as have we all-- people happily pretend that they didn't know this was extremely offensive to people who have no interest in participating in the ten-thousand-genders discussion.  The evidence is pretty much everywhere someone tries to use the flavor-of-the-month terms outside of their preferred sounding boards.  the vast majority of traditional males and traditional females-- and yes; despite all attempts to yell it out of existence, hetero-orientation is in terms of mathematics alone the norm; historically and in sheer volume it is the "traditional" norm. An ever-increasing population points to that.

 

Traditional people of any kind-- even if they are just traditionally goofballs, do not want or need new terms created specifically to bring them into a conversation they want no part of.  No one-- absolutely no one using this term does not know that.  It's rather like when I hear the young guys at the factory talk about "huntin' up some females."  They won't say women.  They won't say girls.  The won't say ladies.  The trendy thing now-- "females."  Don't use any word that might humanize them.  It makes the rest of the conversation a prolonged rape fantasy.  Frankly, I find that offensive.  I don't know who wouldn't.  But clearly the young men hunting females aren't bothered by it, nor are the "females" they manage to capture.

 

Not men.  Not women.  Not straight men and women.  Instead, "cis-gender."  Dehumanize them.  Make them simple specimens; use words that have no meaning to _them_.  That's certainly the best way to open a dialogue.  There is absolutely no way being dehumanized can possibly offend them.

 

Wow, there's a lot to unpack here, along with a lot of misunderstanding. CIs is not meant to be disrespectful. It's literally just the opposite of trans. Its shorthand for differentiating people whose gender matches the gender they were assigned at brith from those of us who weren't so lucky. The only people I have previously seen taking offense at the term cis are anti-trans activists, who almost always insist on no label other than "man" or "woman."  In most cases, the terms "man" and "woman" are fine. But when one is talking about situations where there is a distinction between trans people and people who aren't trans, it' handy to have a term for each.  That's really all it is to the vast majority of people who use the term. None of your other terms cover this. "Traditional" doesn't cover it. Trans folk have been around practically forever. We're not some new phenomenon under the sun. Straightness isn't helpful in this situation, since it is a descriptor of orientation, not gender identity. There are many straight trans people, and plenty of gay and bi ones, too.

 

Cis gender is no more meant to dehumanize than trans gender. 

 

33 minutes ago, Duke Bushido said:

Does it bother me?  Nope.  Like most people, I ignore most of what I have no interest in.  It makes more sense than getting worked up about it.   Why am I even here in something I have no interest in either way?  A question was asked.(and it's always _that_ question: "how could you possibly be offended by a word we made up and decided to apply to you without regard to how you felt about it or what your preferences might be, even though we make such a hyper-dramatic deal about our own?"  This has to be the silliest question ever.  Why don't we ask an African American why the N-word bothers him.  It's the same principal.  But in all likelihood, you already knew that, too.)  Now it's answered.  Again.  Just like it is in who-knows-how-many-hundreds-ore-possibly-thousands of places on the internet.

 

 

It certainly seems to have bothered you enough to go on at length about it. Especially comparing cis to the "n" word. Seriously? The "n" word has always been a pejorative, meant to denigrate those it is used against (except by those blacks who have chosen to reclaim it for themselves). It is a word used by the oppressor against the oppressed. To compare a simple, non-pejorative,  technical term  like cis to the n word is frankly offensive. And all words are made up at some point (just ask Thor). When they get made up no one goes around and asks every person they might apply to if they have a problem with the new term. Language evolves. 

 

What is it about the term cis (or cisgender) itself that you find offensive? Is it just that there's a term for it at all? Or is there a term that you would prefer?  I'm really not out to offend anyone here.

 

1 hour ago, Hermit said:

Does it bother me?  Nope.  Like most people, I ignore most of what I have no interest in.  It makes more sense than getting worked up about it.   Why am I even here in something I have no interest in either way?  A question was asked.(and it's always _that_ question: "how could you possibly be offended by a word we made up and decided to apply to you without regard to how you felt about it or what your preferences might be, even though we make such a hyper-dramatic deal about our own?"  This has to be the silliest question ever.  Why don't we ask an African American why the N-word bothers him.  It's the same principal.  But in all likelihood, you already knew that, too.)  Now it's answered.  Again.  Just like it is in who-knows-how-many-hundreds-ore-possibly-thousands of places on the internet.

 

If I ever have cause to refer to your gender identity, personally, as distinct from trans men, I will use that term. In the general case, though, I will continue to use cis, or cisgender, for a couple of reasons.

1. It's generally considered disrespectful to refer to someone by what they are not, when there is a reasonable not negating term to use. (e.g., now that the term person of color is available, it's rude to refer to the grouping of people who aren't white as non-white people, rather than as people of color.) 

2. Nontrans isn't specific enough. Some agender people, and some intersex people consider themselves neither trans nor cis.

 

I have a similar question for you as I have for Duke above. Why is nontrans any better than cis? What is is about the term cis that you don't like? Assuming that you're white,  how is this different from being called white, if issues of race come up? If you're straight, would you prefer to be called non-gay when issues of orientation arise? These aren't rhetorical questions. I'm truly curious what it is about this term that offends you. I respect you, and do not wish to offend.

[Duke Bushido]

Yeah, I have to admit, as ridiculous as I always found aquaman to be, at least as part of a non-water-based team, I did sort of enjoy him in the last movie.  (not the falling a thousand feet, crashing through a building, and coming out totally unharmed, surfing on corpse part.  That was writer, producer, and director-smackingly bad). 

 

And not the frat bou tough guy personality, either.  I put that down to lazy script writing, as macho lowbrow is only one step above a random argument in terms of dialogue difficulty.   I liked the look they gave him, and I like that they managed to both make him effective out of water (by apparently removing his need to be wet every couple of hours) and not talk to fish.  That last part especially.  That was just critical to making him better. 

 

It stands to reason, though.  Even Sewer urchin is awesome on his native turf. 

 

(edited because I failed to reference the greatest aquatic hero of all time.   "wallet angler!") 

[Hermit]

9 hours ago, Dr.Device said:

 

 

If I ever have cause to refer to your gender identity, personally, as distinct from trans men, I will use that term. In the general case, though, I will continue to use cis, or cisgender, for a couple of reasons.

1. It's generally considered disrespectful to refer to someone by what they are not, when there is a reasonable not negating term to use. (e.g., now that the term person of color is available, it's rude to refer to the grouping of people who aren't white as non-white people, rather than as people of color.) 

2. Nontrans isn't specific enough. Some agender people, and some intersex people consider themselves neither trans nor cis.

 

I have a similar question for you as I have for Duke above. Why is nontrans any better than cis? What is is about the term cis that you don't like? Assuming that you're white,  how is this different from being called white, if issues of race come up? If you're straight, would you prefer to be called non-gay when issues of orientation arise? These aren't rhetorical questions. I'm truly curious what it is about this term that offends you. I respect you, and do not wish to offend.

First, you have one of the Duke's quotes under my Handle? Not sure if you realize that. 

 

And...

It'll probably require more brain power than I can muster at this time to go into why and I think it'll quickly end in a 'agree to disagree' . But...and this will be a sloppy response and in no particular order

 

I didn't vote for it.;)  IMO The word isn't an evolution, it's a construct. A construct that serves a valuable purpose within the Trans community, I am sure, but non-trans weren't given much say over its use. In short, while trying to promote their own agency over their own identity, some in the transcommunity  (I'm going to assume with no malice) denied the same to others. 

 

In the short few years since the term has spread out beyond it's academic confines, it has been used rather hatefully. One could argue this is the nature of the internet, but it seems at least half the time, it is used in a derogatory and yes, dehumanizing fashion. I've given my opinion on how the term White Privilege has been used not to encourage multiple views on open discourse, but rather to shut it down.  I don't expect everyone to agree, but there it is. And in my opinion, increasingly 'cis' is used in  similar fashion. In fact, those who oppose it, I've noticed, are often lumped in with transphobics even if they try to call other people by their preferred terms. Again, this is mostly the internet, and the internet is pretty much a Jerkwad magnification device that leaves perfectly nice majorities of any group ignored, but I'm afraid those hateful few do ruin the term for me. Perception is not reality, but it sure has its impact.

 

I also just like the sound of 'non-trans' better. No seriously, Cis sounds like a reptile hiss of a snake cultist about to sacrifice some hapless victim in a Conan comic book.  

 

 

 

 

As for the White  label? Ah, not my favorite. if I had my druthers I'd be Peachy! As in Peachy keen. Larry Bird is Clear!  but White has history and honestly, white people pretty much embraced in mass. They chose it largely for themselves (though I recognize an argument could be made that they did it to claim a false sense of superiority over the 'others' more than anything else.) over time. But hey, white is a term that's been around for the  last few centuries. Cis? Cis doesn't have the weight of history behind it as white or even straight does (Yes, we can now go into how brief time really is, humanity itself a blip in Earth's timeline etc but the fact is, relative between the terms, Cis doesn't have the same level of agency granted by the named nor the history)

 

 

Now, understand, I'm the same guy who said even Nazis have the right to free speech in the Political thread (Though if we go into THAT again I'll need to take this over to the political thread). so while I may not like the term Cis being applied to me I will fight for your right to use it. I try to use terms others prefer for themselves more or less, and hope others do the same for me.  But if folks use labels on me I feel don't apply or even don't like after I've told them, they shouldn't be surprised when I don't answer to it and give their statement attached to it less weight if I think about it at all. Because then clearly they're not talking to me, they're talking about me, and expect me to nod along. 

 

All IMO, YMMV

 

 

 

[Pattern Ghost]

I think the cis- prefix certainly has a place in an academic discussion, especially as relates to gender studies. It's good to be precise in certain contexts. The main problem I have with the term's insertion into everyday vernacular is that it's not necessary in almost every case that it's used. Most of the time I've seen it used in conversation or debate, it comes off as an attempt on the part of the user to elevate themselves above the unenlightened. Kind of like when a fresh college grad runs around asking everyone in their family "did you know?" (or one in my family that still does it ten or more years post-grad) when the answer is inevitably, "Yes, I've known that since I was in grade* school."

 

I haven't seen the episode, and I don't intend to, since the show looks bad in many other aspects. But, being human, and this being the internet, I'm going to voice an opinion: Dr. Device gave a pretty good rationalization for the use of the word possibly being in context. However, having seen several interviews with show runners and the actresses, I'm fairly certain that the use was simply a case of ham-fisted attempt at virtue signaling. I say this because the interviews indicated that this was a show that would be broadcast from atop a soapbox. Which is OK. It's just not a style I prefer. 

 

 

*note the "e", I did indeed mean "grade" and not "grad."

 

 

[Lucius]

3 hours ago, Dr.Device said:

 

 CIs is not meant to be disrespectful.

 

It is entirely possible for something to not be meant as offensive, and still be experienced that way.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary has  a Y? chromosome and a Y-not? chromosome.

[Starlord]

Zis male - How Batroc the Leaper refers to the guy behind the counter at the DMV who he's about to kick in the face.  

[Bazza]

From a dictionary app on my phone. Posting it for a certain chemistry teacher. 

[Cassandra]

14 hours ago, Bazza said:

 

Judith Light might be more apt name. 

 

I would prefer Mona.

[Cassandra]

6 hours ago, Bazza said:

From a dictionary app on my phone. Posting it for a certain chemistry teacher. 

 

I'm not surprised the Germans were involved in this.

[BoloOfEarth]

14 hours ago, Hermit said:

While I enjoy Aquatic Monarchy I recognize it is, ultimately, an inferior form of government to Shield Slinging Republics

 

On a completely unrelated note, I have to say that I initially read that as "Aquatic Monkey." 

 

On a related note (though it may not seem related at first) I was three when my biological mother died, and my father remarried when I was eight.  So the woman I call Mom is technically my step-mom.  I do occasionally refer to her as my step-mother, mostly when I want to avoid somebody being confused when I mention calling Mom after I've told them that my mother died when I was a kid.  To me, "step-mother" is not meant as a derogatory term -- in fact, the history in my family has many step-relations being as devoted to their step-kids as some biological relations are to their bio-kids.

 

However, when Dad and Mom got divorced when I was 18, and Dad remarried a few years later, the woman he married objected vehemently to being referred to as a step-mother.  To her, it was a completely derogatory term.  Full stop, no exceptions.  However, since she had no hand in raising me I wasn't comfortable calling her "mom" or "my mother".  So I just referred to her by name, occasionally adding "Dad's wife" if needed for clarity (since she had the same name as my aunt).

 

So I can understand using prefixes like "cis-", ""trans-", et. al. for precision sake.  I also notice some people using them when such precision isn't necessarily called for.  And I can understand that some people may be offended by their use, or others offended by their non-use. 

 

We really need to work on Telepathy, folks.  Maybe then we'd stop being such jerks to each other.

[Hermit]

3 minutes ago, BoloOfEarth said:

 

 

We really need to work on Telepathy, folks.  Maybe then we'd stop being such jerks to each other.

 

Perhaps!

 

Downside is, if I ever met Holly Combs in this telepathy filled world I'm going to be busted so badly

[BoloOfEarth]

11 minutes ago, Hermit said:

Downside is, if I ever met Holly Combs in this telepathy filled world I'm going to be busted so badly

 

Who knows?  She might be flattered by the life-size Holly Combs body pillow you have.  Or the cardboard cutout that you sit at the dining table when you eat.  Or your collection of 2,000+ photos where you pasted her face atop the people you're actually in the pictures with.  Or...

 

Nah, never mind.  You'd be busted for sure.

 

(Though the one where you pasted your face onto Cap, and her face onto Black Widow, is actually pretty nicely done.)

[Hermit]

1 minute ago, BoloOfEarth said:

 

Who knows?  She might be flattered by the life-size Holly Combs body pillow you have.  Or the cardboard cutout that you sit at the dining table when you eat.  Or your collection of 2,000+ photos where you pasted her face atop the people you're actually in the pictures with.  Or...

 

Nah, never mind.  You'd be busted for sure.

 

(Though the one where you pasted your face onto Cap, and her face onto Black Widow, is actually pretty nicely done.)

 

Okay, I knew you were reading Fish Guy but how did you get your hands on the fiction on my hard drive????

?

[Pariah]

He made an INT roll?

[Dr.Device]

I don't think I have anything further constructive to add to this conversation, so I'll bow out, having said my piece.

[Hermit]

18 minutes ago, Dr.Device said:

I don't think I have anything further constructive to add to this conversation, so I'll bow out, having said my piece.

More than fair.  I appreciate that everyone has tried to be civil even when we don't always agree.

 

In fact,I'm not even sure we're still on OUR internet...*looks for Goatee on browser indicating mirror universe*

 

 

 

[Bazza]

A long long time ago there was an inside joke about Steve Long & Eliza Dushku. I think Eliza just got replaced with Holly Marie Combs. 

 

Time to go restart that clone machine. 

[Hermit]

6 minutes ago, Bazza said:

A long long time ago there was an inside joke about Steve Long & Eliza Dushku. I think Eliza just got replaced with Holly Marie Combs. 

 

Time to go restart that clone machine. 

 

Actually I think I have a witch problem because I also think Elizabeth Montgomery was the hotness

[Lord Liaden]

Growing up in the Sixties, when it came to magical ladies I appreciated Liz Montgomery, but I was team Barbara Eden all the way. Suburban slacks and skirts can't match silk harem pants.