Stop fighting over Israel and or Palestine

 I am not arguing anyone should be held accountable for something linked to their race or sexuality, I am arguing the opposite. 

Awesome, I agree then.  I believe the same.

ll words are made up. It divides just as much as the word heterosexual. Cis and trans are concepts you already learn in chemistry class about isomerism, with cis meaning on the same side and trans meaning on the opposite side. Cisalbino is nonsense since albinos don’t have anything to do with being on the same or opposite side like gender where you are cisgender

You are very sly and cunning in your wording.  Yes, all words are “made up” but typically out of  need and not agenda. Equating wording hundreds or thousands of years old to something forcefully injected into the lexicon for a specific purpose is not at all the same thing and it is assumptive techniques like that which convince me you are an activist.

“CIS” is a Latin word from CHEMISTRY.  CHEMSITRY.  Let me say it again.  CHEMISTRY.  It’s was invoked with gender/sex by a German “sexologist” in the 90’s.  No one seemed to pay attention to it a whole lot then but in the last few years it’s now the default description for most of the population which is nonsense.  The minority gets the descriptor to describe the differences from the majority.  This is how language works.

So cisgender is a good word?  Even though people find it offensive, but that does not seem to matter in this case.

Ultimately it’s just a way to divide and nothing else.  That’s the entire point of it.  And it’s BS as you cannot change your sex.  Live how you want to but the reality is you cannot change it no matter how hard you try and no one has the “freedom” to force others to accept anything you do, treat you a certain way nor call you what you wish to be called.  That is simply 100% a power play and the governments of the world would absolutely love you to give them the power to compel speech and action.

Wrong, Cis is not a word from chemistry, but a prefix meaning ”on this side” which is used in chemistry for example

Clearly it’s not FROM chemistry.  That’s where it is used as you just said.

It’s also in many different contexts as a prefix, opposing to the other prefix, trans. Similarly to how the words hetero and homo are used in different contexts, like homogenic or homophone etc

Does not matter.  It’s not used for sexual matters until Mr. Sexologist in the 90’s did.

Cisgender became a thing only in the 90’s because the concept of transgenders also is a very recent thing, but it’s been considered an offensive boogeyman term only in recent years because of the culture war.

It’s a fallacy from the get go.  Transgender was traditionally used to mean someone who had surgery until the last several years and it was exceedingly rare as was gender dysphoria (which still is).  And what once required a surgery to be described as has been changed into a feeling.  So now it’s essentially raining trans people because all it takes is for someone to say “I am trans”.

But you are right Cisgender did come about from the culture war.  It’s a division word just like person of color or latinx. It’s means almost nothing.

 Heterosexual and homosexual were coined in the 1860’s even if the prefixes has been around for god knows how many thousand years, but I don’t see people complaining about those words being offensive and divisive 

Because they are not used that way.  A hammer is a thing that drives nails.  It is a tool.  Until you bash someone in the head with it then it is a weapon.

 but wanting to cancel the word because you find it offensive is some snowflake behavior.

Nope, never said I wanted to cancel it or disallow someone form saying it.  I said it was a BS word used for division. And it is.

And I bet I could rattle off a number of words that you would raise your eyebrows at and say they are offensive and should not be said.  But if someone else states something is offensive and you disagree with that then it’s OK to say.  Pick one, you don’t get both.  Either offensive is subjective or it isn’t.

You are prostrating yourself to the idea that offense is something that should be stopped.  Hate speech should not be allowed.  If you allow society and government to control what you get to say you are abdicating your freedom to say what you want. AND THAT is what all this nonsense is about. Do you think if the governments are allowed to compel speech and action based on whatever sexual nonsense is dreamed up it will stop there?  No.  This is just a foot in the door to the rest and you are not only willing to put on the “compassion shackles” you demand it.

This does come back to Israel/Palestine  (and I do appreciate you trying to keep us on point, thank you) because we all see bad things in the world.  And almost everyone agrees they are bad.  But most folks listen to the propaganda put out by the people who cause the bad things deflecting the blame to something else.  And that’s Israel/Palestine.

We have no business interfering there.  And I mean that in the current sense and in the sense we should not have meddled there since the formation of Israel.  Many of Israel’s problems have been caused by the interference of the west.

@comicsgate

Yes, I did.  It’s like all radical leftist stuff.  They bake a huge lie around a seed of truth and tell you the whole thing is true as they point at the seed.

Should we give cash to Israel? Possibly, they are an official ally at least. My overall take is the Middle East is not our beeswax.  And in fact making it our beeswax in the past has caused many issues in that region.  I am OK with supporting Israel directly if that was the ONLY thing we were doing.  But that is not even close to the truth.  All the dictators I can think of in the middle east in the last few decades we said we needed to rescue people from were at one time on our payroll.

Funny how they did not mention the massive amounts given to Ukraine.  And that’s the same story.  We are sending a river of money to a place we screwed around in and caused problems with.

Politicians will poke a bear until it swats someone, then they will take your money to defend you from the bear.  And by defend I mean slather you down with honey and lock you in a cage with the bear.  Then they will trade you enslavement to be let out the cage.

After terms like Cisgender, are we going to hear something even more cringe like “nibling?”

“The now common use of “cisgender” is not at all the place where the words went awry. The word play has been going on since at least the 80’s.  It cranked up in the 90’s and in the last 10 years has gone insane.  I hear people argue against a radical gender idea by using terms that defuse their whole argument.  These words have baked in assumptions when you say that.  All of these should be challenged at the point of use and not accepted.

When someone is explaining how they disagree with much of the trans insanity but they call a he a she, you are just submitting to the idea while you argue against it.  Another example is biological female.  If you think men cannot become women then using that term just gives a nod to the assertion there is more than 1 type of woman.  There isn’t, so naturally all females are biological and the additional descriptor is not needed.

It’s like asking someone publicly “when did you stop beating your wife”.  The phrase/question is just a disguise for the assumption.

The Canadian politician Pierre Poilievre does this in the video below.  A reporter asks “questions” but it’s just assumptive language he tries to use to tie Pierre Poilievre to Trump in a negative way.  Mr. Poilievre dismantles the assumptions and not only nullifies the attack but makes it obvious as to what the reporters motivations are.

• This reply was modified 9 months ago by Vknid.