Men’s Rights Redditors agree: Trans, intersex and genderqueer folks are silly and annoying and hinder true equality

I don’t see how it would matter at all to share a bathroom with the gender you are attracted to. I mean, especially for public washrooms where I imagine most people aren’t trying to pick up any dates . . . they’re just doing their business and getting out and will likely never see any of those strangers again.

We need gender neutral bathrooms in addition to women’s rooms. Personally, I’d like to see them also be family rooms so that dads have a place to deal with diapers, sticky little hands and whatnot.

The solution to all these obvious problems, and some less obvious ones, is pretty good where I live. We have men’s, women’s and “disabled” toilets. However, what’s happened over the last couple of decades is that people have realised that disabled toilets take up a lot of space – which matters a lot when you’re talking about commercial premises.

The solution? They’ve made them even bigger. There are no separate disabled cubicles for men or for women in the (wo)men’s toilets. There are no separate facilities for changing babies. The change tables are in the much larger space of a disabled toilet. Works a charm when you have one parent with an infant needing to be changed and a couple of toddlers who may or may not need to use the toilet. The whole family plus pram or shopping trolley (in a shopping centre) can use the toilets without mum or dad needing to find someone trustworthy to watch the kid/s or being crammed up together in an ordinary stall.

Less obvious? Costs. Once again these are commercial facilities. If you provide unisex facilities for a large group, you will have to provide additional containers for disposal of tampons, pads, nappies. At the moment, owners only have to provide enough for the stalls in the women’s and the disabled toilets. Adding in all the men’s facilities as well, with no increase in the number of clients or customers or employees or whoever, means that they will have to pay extra for disposal. (Here the containers are delivered and taken away by contractors. That might not matter in places where the costs have been gradually incurred/ increased. Arguing for it here would be an additional cost all in one hit that doesn’t provide anything more or better than what we already have.)

If the issue is “they might want to see naked women” then you’ll have to ban lesbians, bi women, pan women, et cetera.

Hey, queer woman here, and me looking at women is nothing like the male gaze or the predatory creeping that men are far more likely than women to engage in. This is a hair’s breadth from that “all genders do it equally” MRA bullshit.

I was in a co-ed dorm in college, where my hall shared a bathroom; toilet and shower. Somehow we survived this horrendously awkward situation.

OK, but aren’t you a guy? How did the women feel about the situation? Because as a woman I would feel incredibly vulnerable having to be naked with men around unless I knew those men really, really well.

You aren’t afraid of someone calling you transphobic slurs and attacking or killing you because of that. You aren’t afraid of losing your job and or housing because someone finds out you’re not entirely comfortable with gender.

And this is where I get confused about applying the idea of cis privelege to cis women. Because all these things happen to cis women, too. The fact that our gender tends to match what we were assigned doesn’t insulate us from discrimination, systemic oppression, and violence based on that gender. I don’t think gender maps neatly onto a privilege-oppression scale, but where it does, it seems more likely to me that it’s cis men everyone else. But IDK I could be completely off base here?

@ BabbyFem – obviously, I can’t speak for trans folk, but basically Patriarchy “rewards” men and women who conform to their designated genders and perform their genders sufficiently… there’s a certain kind of person (who is really invested in there being a distinct binary), who gets really uncomfortable with the idea of someone not conforming to being a masculine man, or a feminine woman… and may react violently (the “Gay Panic” defense, which is no longer admissible in more and more courts these days).

Basically, Trans folk are at much, much higher risk of being the victim of a hate crime, or being made homeless than any cis person, because of certain people’s squick factor, and stigma surrounding their identities.

Like, trans folk even have a website devoted to helping them find and recommend houses where the other tenants will be cool about their gender and stuff, because ending up living with vicious transphobes would put them in danger.

TL;DR, whatever discrimination and misogyny cis-women face, trans folk get it worse, on account of being seen as “abnormal” or especially “icky” by people who reserve a special kind of intolerance for gender non-conformity, which is, like, almost everyone, unfortunately.

Oh ‘cis’ is just a shorthand way of saying that someone ‘where their internally identified gender is the same as their birth gender’ as a way of distinguishing from those ‘who don’t identify with their birth gender’ (ie mostly ‘trans’).

I must admit I tend not to use it talking to ‘normal’ people, because it confuses them, but I do it when talking to other trans (etc) people, as a shorthand expression.

The vast majority are ‘cis’ of course. A percentage are trans (of one degree or another) and a percentage are ‘gender fluid’. ‘Cis’ can be a bit of a problematic term with intersexed people.

Gender fluid people can be that way all their lives, or it can be a stage of self exploration after which they settle into a particular gender. Probably a larger than normally understood percentage go through a stage of gender fluidity, particularly during childhood, before working out what they are comfortable with.

Note that I am keeping sexuality out of this, because all the various types can have any sexuality whatsoever.

Personally I see the rise of acceptance of gender fluidity as a positive thing, if for no other reason than it provides a ‘safe place’ for people to self explore and work themselves out.

This can all get a bit confusing to an outsider, especially when some people in the various sub-groups ‘go a bit over the top’ as to the relative superiority of one or the other.

Naturally there is a lot of pressure and ‘policing’ by parents, schools, peers,overall society etc to push people into a particular gender role. This one of the very few areas where males mostly get it worse than females. Not all by any means, but many females are allowed a bit more freedom in their gender expression, eg the tolerance for ‘tomboys’ and that sort of thing. Males (usually) are allowed very little tolerance in gender expression variance.

It is a sad thing to note that many parents (teachers, many ‘experts’, etc) would be far more tolerant of the son being a bit of a thug and a bully than if they wanted to play with girls and dolls……..

This is where ‘toxic masculinity’ starts, a tolerance of ‘bad behaviour’ because it is an acceptable form of male behaviour and preferable to any expression of ‘femininity’. People with this mindset train their sons right from the beginning into a very narrow set of allowable traits. A boy that wants to play with girls (for example) is very quickly corrected into conforming with the virtual ‘apartheid’, where interactions with girls is only allowed to be negative (eg bullying). But there will be greater tolerance of ‘bad behaviour’ that is within the accepted range of male expressions, ‘boys will be boys’ after all.

At the extreme end ‘rape culture’ and violence toward women are tolerated, even tacitly encouraged, male behaviours. With extreme ‘policing’ (up to and including violence and murder) of males who deviate from this model also being acceptable.

This can be (albeit to a lesser extent now) be bolstered by ‘experts’, if the parents become concerned enough. Note that parental concern will usually (but not always of course) be much more for males acting ‘female’ than females acting ‘male’ (but not too much though).

For example from: Cisgenderism in psychology: pathologising and misgendering children from 1999 to 2008. Y. Gavriel Ansara and Peter Hegarty
“One example of Zucker and Bradley’s (1995) method involved restricting the gender expression of a five-year-old self-designated girl:
Bradley would no longer be allowed to spend time with girls. She would no longer be allowed to play with girlish toys or pretend that she was a female character [. . .] As her pile of toys dwindled, [Bradley’s mother] realized Bradley was hoarding. She would find female action figures stashed between couch pillows. Rainbow unicorns were hidden in the back of Bradley’s closet. Bradley seemed at a loss, she said. They gave her male toys, but she chose not to play at all [. . .] Bradley would populate her pictures with the toys and interests she no longer had access to — princesses with long flowing hair, fairies in elaborate dresses, rainbows of pink and purple and pale yellow. So, under Zucker’s direction, [Bradley’s mother] and her husband sought to change this as well. (Spiegel, 2008; misgendering pronouns corrected)”

The question that has to be asked is: would Zucker be so concerned and prescribe such a major effort at behaviour modification for a boy that was a nasty bully towards girls…… I suspect not.

So in our society men do get a ‘free pass’ or at least tolerance, for bad behaviour, but only if it is within that allowable range. In the very truest sense, our society gets the male behaviour it wants.

I think people use cis when they really mean ‘not trans’, but they want to avoid making trans seeming like something abnormal.

While this is laudable, I think the ideas have become confused. You don’t need to pretend that ‘not collecting stamps’ is just as much of a hobby as collecting is to be cool with people regardless of their stamp collection.

But to some extent binaries are just how we use language, though; when we talk about what’s in a category, we also need to talk about what’s not in the category, and we need a term for it. There are many examples of this: Jew/Gentile, theist/atheist, even “person of color.”

Anyway, surely you can settle the whole issue if you just allow for “genderqueer” and other identifiers for people who don’t fit neatly into a binary. Then cis and trans can be strictly defined terms and one is not defined as “anyone who isn’t the other.”

A trans person feels a gender identity that is the opposite of their sex (as much as male and female are opposites, which is another discussion), whereas a cis person (like some of the posters above) may feel no gender identity, or may reject the idea of gender as meaningless.

This strikes me as a bit beside the point. Regardless of whether you think the idea of gender is meaningless or whatever, if you were identified as female at birth and accept the term “female” as an identifier, then you’re cis, because that’s just what it means. You still share the social experience of being cis, just as, say, a white person still shares the social experience of being white even if they reject the concept of race.

^What happens when your uni makes it onto reddit. The UQ Women’s Collective is responding via photo petition. Check it out and signal boost please!

https://www.facebook.com/UQWomensCollective

@Dvärghundspossen

I’ve seen some feminists object to ‘cis’, because ‘cis’ is sometimes defined in a way that makes it sound as if cis people are completely perfectly comfortable with everything gender-related, and feminists make a point of the fact that today’s expectations for the different genders are a shitty deal for women. I think that’s a misunderstanding of what ‘cis’ is supposed to be, but I can see how people object to being labelled ‘cis’ if they had the term explained for them in that way, like “cis people are completely comfortable with being the gender that they were assigned at birth…” or the like.

Also, some people seem to make it a condition for being a cis woman that you really, deeply feel yourself to be a woman, and analogously for being a cis man. But that’s false for a lot of cis people. Not for all, but for a lot. A lot of cis people are what Ozy once labelled “cis by default” – you’re assigned female at birth, you have a vagina, a female name, people use ‘she’ as a pronoun for you and you’re okay with that. Not necessarily embracing it in a “Wow, this is so totally me, I’m so totally a woman, that’s what I really am”-way, but you’re okay with it (and the same for many cis men of course).

@AltoFronto

I take “cis” to mean that I was born with female sex characteristics, feel “womanly” on an intuitive level, was raised within the social framework of being “a girl”, and I present myself as generally feminine, without really giving a second thought to my gender identity.

If I go by AltoFronto’s definition then I’m not cis. I, like a lot of people who grew up gay, struggled what felt like gender failure, but now tend to be called gender nonconforming. I still consider myself a cis woman because I don’t like limiting cis women or men to some sort narrow cast stereotypes who’ve always had a cozy relationship with gender identity. I can be the only woman not in a dress at a formal event and still be a cis woman. I can feel alienated by the portrayal of how women’s gender performance is portrayed in media and still be a cis woman.

I agree with Dvärghundspossen (if I’m reading what she wrote correctly), that it’s too restrictive to have “cis” only applies to people totally comfortable with their gender. It defines cis women and men into a group of cartoonishly conforming people who are, in a sense, proponents of gender conformity. It ironically also defines trans women and men into a group of cartoonishly conforming people who are, in a sense, proponents of gender conformity.

I think women and men, both cis and trans, can be uncomfortable with and fight against the rigid socialization that enforces the binary gender segregation. I feel like a lot of gender experiences are forced on people, so I get people fighting to find an authentic life and feel alienated from the gender binary. I just don’t think throwing every gender stereotype onto people who identify as men and women if fair, helpful or realistic.

BUT…
@Lisa

Probably a larger than normally understood percentage go through a stage of gender fluidity, particularly during childhood, before working out what they are comfortable with.

This was close to my personal experience and I’m well aware that it shapes how I view gender; I do my best to limit projection, but projection often seems to be the main ingredients of gender discussions.

@AltoFronto

I can’t speak for trans folk, but basically Patriarchy “rewards” men and women who conform to their designated genders and perform their genders sufficiently… there’s a certain kind of person (who is really invested in there being a distinct binary), who gets really uncomfortable with the idea of someone not conforming to being a masculine man, or a feminine woman… and may react violently (the “Gay Panic” defense, which is no longer admissible in more and more courts these days).

Some of the worst things I’ve ever heard an adult say about butch lesbians and effeminate gay men, including some really hateful things, were said by gays and lesbians. A lot of the the shit talk involves the oldie but goodie, “if you’re attracted to women/men why are you going out with someone who looks and acts like a man/woman”, and some of it is just complaining how unattractive they are. The fun gay twist is when they complain butch lesbians and effeminate gay men ruin everything for normal gay people.

Great, I’ve got to redo my teal deer thanks to you know who.

@Dvärghundspossen

I’ve seen some feminists object to ‘cis’, because ‘cis’ is sometimes defined in a way that makes it sound as if cis people are completely perfectly comfortable with everything gender-related, and feminists make a point of the fact that today’s expectations for the different genders are a shitty deal for women. I think that’s a misunderstanding of what ‘cis’ is supposed to be, but I can see how people object to being labelled ‘cis’ if they had the term explained for them in that way, like “cis people are completely comfortable with being the gender that they were assigned at birth…” or the like.

Also, some people seem to make it a condition for being a cis woman that you really, deeply feel yourself to be a woman, and analogously for being a cis man. But that’s false for a lot of cis people. Not for all, but for a lot. A lot of cis people are what Ozy once labelled “cis by default” – you’re assigned female at birth, you have a vagina, a female name, people use ‘she’ as a pronoun for you and you’re okay with that. Not necessarily embracing it in a “Wow, this is so totally me, I’m so totally a woman, that’s what I really am”-way, but you’re okay with it (and the same for many cis men of course).

@AltoFronto

I take “cis” to mean that I was born with female sex characteristics, feel “womanly” on an intuitive level, was raised within the social framework of being “a girl”, and I present myself as generally feminine, without really giving a second thought to my gender identity.

If I go by AltoFronto’s definition then I’m not cis. I, like a lot of people who grew up gay, struggled what felt like gender failure, but now tend to be called gender nonconforming. I still consider myself a cis woman because I don’t like limiting cis women or men to some sort narrow cast stereotypes who’ve always had a cozy relationship with gender identity. I can be the only woman not in a dress at a formal event and still be a cis woman. I can feel alienated by the portrayal of how women’s gender performance is portrayed in media and still be a cis woman.

I agree with Dvärghundspossen (if I’m reading what she wrote correctly), that it’s too restrictive to have “cis” only applies to people totally comfortable with their gender. It defines cis women and men into a group of cartoonishly conforming people who are, in a sense, proponents of gender conformity. It ironically also defines trans women and men into a group of cartoonishly conforming people who are, in a sense, proponents of gender conformity.

I think women and men, both cis and trans, can be uncomfortable with and fight against the rigid socialization that enforces the binary gender segregation. I feel like a lot of gender experiences are forced on people, so I get people fighting to find an authentic life and feel alienated from the gender binary. I just don’t think throwing every gender stereotype onto people who identify as men and women if fair, helpful or realistic.

BUT…
@Lisa

Probably a larger than normally understood percentage go through a stage of gender fluidity, particularly during childhood, before working out what they are comfortable with.

This was close to my personal experience and I’m well aware that it shapes how I view gender; I do my best to limit projection, but projection often seems to be the main ingredients of gender discussions.

@AltoFronto

I can’t speak for trans folk, but basically Patriarchy “rewards” men and women who conform to their designated genders and perform their genders sufficiently… there’s a certain kind of person (who is really invested in there being a distinct binary), who gets really uncomfortable with the idea of someone not conforming to being a masculine man, or a feminine woman… and may react violently (the “Gay Panic” defense, which is no longer admissible in more and more courts these days).

Some of the worst things I’ve ever heard an adult say about butch lesbians and effeminate gay men, including some really hateful things, were said by gays and lesbians. A lot of the the shit talk involves the oldie but goodie, “if you’re attracted to women/men why are you going out with someone who looks and acts like a man/woman”, and some of it is just complaining how unattractive they are. The fun gay twist is when they complain butch lesbians and effeminate gay men ruin everything for normal gay people.

In my opinion, cisgender dose not exist. It’s a Trans & gender queer word used to slut shame and guilt trip people into playing along with the trans and genderqueer politics. It’s why I don’t believe in cisgender or cisprivilege concept. People who fall for the cisgender crap are deluding themselves and kidding themselves.

@Nicky

Bullshit. Just… Bullshit, and gross transphobic bullshit at that. I’m cis. I was assigned female at birth, I feel entirely female, being female is central to who I am, I’m cis. Discovering the word “Cis” was like discovering the word “Gay” – nothing changed, but hey, I have a nice short word to use for it now, awesome! There’s nothing “Political” about it, I haven’t been “GuiIted” into anything (I’m for trans rights not because of any “Guilting” but because I’m not a bigoted piece of shit); as I said before, I just like having a word that isn’t clunky or inherently transphobic to describe how I identify.

Where the fuck is the “Deluding myself” in that?