With Apologies to Sena Bryer

[usagilove]

Sena is spouting toxic things about about cisgendered woman and wanting actors to be fired or step down from roles that she feels "don't" belong or fit certain roles. But it's ok for a voice actor representing a company to spout toxic things but apparently it's not ok to dislike her for being a toxic human towards others. Seems it's ok for her to be toxic and hateful and treat other horribly but the same things can't be dished back to her otherwise they get called transphobes and other names.

No need to say "cis", you can just say women. Women already implies that, since transwomen are trans (it's kinda in the name).

I refuse to say "cis" for anything, it's just man or woman, or I just call it normal.

[Nebelheim]

No need to say "cis", you can just say women. Women already implies that, since transwomen are trans (it's kinda in the name).

I refuse to say "cis" for anything, it's just man or woman, or I just call it normal.

I usually go by just calling people man or woman also but I was mostly referencing Sena's tweets by her using the "cis" label when going on rants.

[usagilove]

I usually go by just calling people man or woman also but I was mostly referencing Sena's tweets by her calling people by "cis" when going on her rants.

Ah that makes sense. I really don't understand why some people really need to use the term "cis" for just normal men and women. For trans I can understand since they are outside the norm, but there is no need for normal genders.

[Nebelheim]

Ah that makes sense. I really don't understand why some people really need to use the term "cis" for just normal men and women. For trans I can understand since they are outside the norm, but there is no need for normal genders.

I don't understand having to use cis for a term either but it seems to be a thing for some reason.

[Raven2014]

I don't understand having to use cis for a term either but it seems to be a thing for some reason.

The reason if fairly obvious once you look at their usage. Across the board regardless of the subject matter, 9 out of 10 times specific labels are always used to create segregation and as a meant of derogatory insult. The 1 out of 10 times it's not the case is when the group refer to themselves. And the more specific - singular the term, the better it serves the purpose. Before I came to the US, the only term I know was "baby boomer" because it had an attached historical significance to it. After coming to the US, I always wonder why do they have all of this millennia, gen z, gen x? What's wrong with saying "old people, young people, middle age" .etc. Then as I get older, I start noticing these term mostly show up in political context, and like I said once I notice the pattern of usage, their purpose became fairly obvious.


- On the surface, the claim is to give people unique identity to help self-esteem and foster a sense of belonging.

- The reality is ... it's just a way to create tension and set up conflict with the "us vs them" mentality.