memetrender answered to your post “Is “too far into my women and gender studies major to have a gender…”

how about ‘gender burnout’

Yesssssssssss yes yes yes yes yes yes.

Gender burnout 2014.

Is “too far into my women and gender studies major to have a gender anymore” a gender identity?

certains:

stop unfollowing me i have been nothing but gorgeous and hilarious to u all

(via bigender96)

So I decided ~2 months before starting T was a good time to have a gender crisis

ask children before you touch them

squidsqueen:

celibatesprites:

  • ask children before you hug them
  • ask children before you pick them up
  • if moving a child is unavoidable for their safety, at least warn them first and explain afterwards
  • this applies to disabled children
  • this applies to non- or pre-verbal children,…

(via sizzlefruit)

*thinks about gender til i don’t have one anymore*

Proposed new definition of cis:

makingmountainsoutofmountains:

a person whose social gender category and assigned sex match

pros:

  • doesn’t insinuate that gender non-conforming people are cis by virtue of not identifying as trans
  • doesn’t imply women choose to comply to gender roles/norms
  • doesn’t leave out trans people…

You’re definitely right that that sort of trans-ness does complicate my definition a bit. I’m tempted to say that it depends on the person and their identity, but I get that that’s kind of a non-answer because it’s so individualistic. I’m definitely more of an advocate for broadening definitions for the purpose of inclusion than the opposite, as you can see in the vagueness of my language in the first place. My intent was less to draw boundaries of what is trans-ness and what isn’t, and more to rectify some issues that people have with contemporary definitions of cis-ness.

One issue, for example, is the tendency to categorize gender non-conforming people who don’t explicitly call themselves trans (for example, I have a friend who identifies as non-binary to some degree but is still typically grouped with women in social contexts, sometimes by herself but mostly by others). While I think whether someone plays “into cis privilege and related power structures” is sometimes a useful measure for discussing cis-ness and trans-ness, it leaves out people like my friend, whose non-binary gender is often erased and ignored in both trans and cis circles because she blurs the line between cis and trans.

Also, using the phrase “social gender category” was kind of an attempt at making identified and lived gender more concrete, although I can see why you’d find it rather vague. I think the value in making it more concrete is that it is less open to the (primarily cis feminist) criticism that gender identity is really just adherence to gender norms. I probably could have just said “gender,” now that I think about it. But that would hinge upon a shared understanding that gender is the social element or social proliferation of one’s (perceived) sex, which is obvs not what everyone thinks.

blake-onator replied to your post “Proposed new definition of cis:”

As opposed to what other definition? This is the definition I’ve always known and used.

As opposed to:

"Cisgender is a term used to describe people who, for the most part, identify as the gender they were assigned at birth." (x)

In gender studiescisgender and cissexual are a closely related class of gender identities where an individual’s gender identity matches the behavior or role considered appropriate for one’s sex.” (x)

"Cisgender is a neologism that means “someone who is comfortable in the gender they were assigned at birth”, according to Calpernia Addams." (x)

The nuanced differences are what make all the difference, you know? People conflate being cis with being 100% cool with one’s own gender/gender role/gender expression/gendered body, which is just not true.

Many cis feminists insist that the label cis erases the reality of women’s oppression and implies women are comfortable with their own subjugation, so it’s inherently misogynist to say cis women have cis privilege. But that’s based off of shitty, cissexist, inaccurate definitions of what it means to be cis and trans in the first place.

Proposed new definition of cis:

a person whose social gender category and assigned sex match

pros:

  • doesn’t insinuate that gender non-conforming people are cis by virtue of not identifying as trans
  • doesn’t imply women choose to comply to gender roles/norms
  • doesn’t leave out trans people who don’t want to or can’t transition

cons:

  • probably will still piss some people off anyway

I’m going to make a new paradigm called Never Thinking About Gender Ever Again Bc Both Radical Queer Theory and Radical Feminism are 2 Problematic and My Brain Says No

"Sexual orientation is a fundamental aspect of someone’s identity. You can’t ignore the oppression people with non-normative orientations face. How dare."

"Gender isn’t a fundamental aspect of anyone’s identity. Trans oppression/cis privilege isn’t real. Fucking transactivsts."

jaxandkai:

Collage from our first visit (July 2013)

:)
How to tell if a film about trans people was written by a cis person

boredangry:

skysquids:

rambleonamazon:

kaninchenzero:

warriortomaiden:

smashthecis-stem:

How to tell if a film about trans people was written by a cis person:
- binding with bandages
- “but I was born in the wrong body!”
- parents go from against it to…

(via msr-aeshling)