He will weep.

Oh I didnt realise Jordan Peterson had come out as trans! 🏳️‍⚧️

uwu
Hmm he still uses he/him so it's beyond me but maybe he's just on another level of transatude that we haven't unlocked yet
- He's a non-binary boymoder. Lots of "traditionalist" friends and family, you see, so he's taking his time to test the waters and hasn't even changed pronouns yet. Please be patient with him 🙏
- Perhaps he's a man in a woman's body in a man's body.
- maybe he’s just on another level of transatude
  The many layers of TRANSCEPTION!
  🏳️‍⚧️ 🏳️‍⚧️ 🏳️‍⚧️
Who the fuck knows. His story arc still has some life in it.

People who think Jordan Peterson is very badass.
Bold of you to assume that he or his fans are grown.

Listen, everyone. It's so simple. We just need a neutral word to describe people who are not trans. Okay, the prefix "trans" is Latin for across, so the Latin word for not across is… you're not going to believe this.

ok ok maybe that's not familiar enough as a prefix so it gets a reaction. we could find a familiar prefix to note that your gender is the same as what you were assigned at birth...
from now on the opposite of transgender is... homogender!
- Yay, I'm a homo!
- Same goes for cisfats opposed to transfats
So It's hard to get into the headspace where I could get offended by being called cis but I'll try. Here is a metaphor that hopefully won't be too offensive.
Imagine if vegetarians started identifying non-vegetarians en masse with the label "Omnivores". The first critique would likely be, "But it's normal for humans to be omnivores; It's the neutral state!". That's how most people, including many allies, feel about being cis. It's the neutral state to them and doesn't/shouldn't require a label.
Obviously context matters but I can see how inflection could make it sound like a slight if someone is already loaded with insecurities.
- well the whole point is to make all of it "normal". it's normal for humans to be cis, yes, and so is to be trans. so instead of calling people "trans" and "normal", you call them "trans" and "cis".
  and make no mistake, that's why people oppose the term "cis". they want to other trans people, and normalizing the term threatens the system of oppression.
- I'll gladly call non-vegans, who vehemently defend eating meat and oppose anything remotely vegan, carnies to piss them off
- Honestly the word just has a gross sound to me. Reminds me of cysts.
Trans-ex?
obviously the people that object to the word object to needing a word for "non-trans", not that they have some particular objection to the word "cis" itself.
it's important to understand your opponents' point of view if you want to be able to destroy it effectively

I don’t understand why some people get so bent out of shape over the term cisgender. Latin prefixes are even more common in English than abbreviations like AMAB.

It's just transphobia. If you don't have cis (wo)men and trans (wo)men, then you just have (wo)men and trans (wo)men, which implies that trans (wo)men are not (wo)men.
- Got it. I didn’t understand because they make it seem like it’s an insult to be called cisgender. They’re actually just upset that it removes an avenue of bigotry.
  Fucking gross.
The reasoning is simple: it's just straight up transphobia. The term "cis" is just a neutral descriptor to pair with "trans" with no implication of being right or wrong. They're mad at the existence of a term for the majority that doesn't imply an insult to the minority.
- Thanks. Another commenter pointed that out. They’re not really taking offense to the term so much as objecting to the concept of genders differing from biological sex. It’s awful.
  There’s no reason to challenge the term otherwise. Cis is Latin for “on this side of” and trans is “across, beyond, or on the other side.” There’s really nothing objectionable about either prefix.
As someone who used to think it was an offensive term, it's likely ignorance and because it's often used in a deragatory and dehumanizing way on the internet.
At first I didn't know what cisgendered or cis meant, but I definitely saw it used to describe a group of people non-cis folks didn't like very much. Of course I eventually learned, but still had a bit of a distaste due to the initial impression.
Also, I always saw "cishet" as a cheeky way of saying "cis shit" because it was also often used negatively in the places I originally came across the term. Once someone explained it in a comment section I finally understood it wasn't hateful terminology but instead descriptive.
You can't stop someone from being negative but at least knowing what the words are meant to mean can help identify a bad person rather than bad word.
- Interesting. I didn’t have that experience myself, but I’ve definitely seen those types of comments. I absolutely understand how that could leave a bad impression. I’ll be more mindful of educational opportunities when having discussions about it in the future. Exposure and understanding are the enemies of bigotry.
  Thanks for the insight!
- Bigots often have a problem with being accurately described because gaslighting is part of the strategy. Useful ignorants provide cover.
- At first I didn’t know what cisgendered or cis meant, but I definitely saw it used to describe a group of people non-cis folks didn’t like very much. Of course I eventually learned, but still had a bit of a distaste due to the initial impression.
  How long was this "eventually"? I feel like it should be a couple minutes to search and land on the Wikipedia page.
- Where were you seeing this online? (How much can I blame cursed social media algorithms feeding you bullshit?)

I kinda hope he tries so I have an excuse to fight back. So many of these pundit fucks need a solid punch to the jaw
- You think he could do any physical damage? I'm 5'2, 120 lbs and could see myself just laughing at him

The other side of his comment is that he is willing to be pulled into a physical struggle over being labeled a gender.

What a weakass anti-philosopher / anti-therapist.

Patient: "Doctor, I feel like my coworkers are labeling me ... what should I do ?"

Dr Peterson: "Have you considered beating them to death ?"

what a fucking loon

Peterson is a moron, but I also don't like the word cis. If people are allowed to be called what they want to be, then if they want to be called straight, that should be fine
- But that's a different thing than cis. Straight is to whom you're attracted, cis is who you are.

Someone is clearly uncomfortable in their body.

Poor snowflake can't handle three little letters :(

Imagine needing to other someone so badly that you have a tantrum because someone created a name for the "default" category. Peterson views trans people as so subhuman he doesn't even want there to be a word for non-trans people.

Is he/she saying they transitioned?

How wonderful!

Is the term 'cis' an insult now? Or am I not spending enough time reading people whining over politics?

Bigoted reactionaries, like Elon and Jordan, want to make cis a slur so they can ban its usage and prevent inclusive vocabulary. They're not actually offended by it.
- They're not actually offended by it.
  I'm not too sure about that. Some people just want something to be offended over and end up making stuff up so they can be upset.
Transphobes have been trying to turn it into one for a while, so they can play victim about it.
- The biggest thing I can think of is it sounds like sis. As in sissy.
  If you're down voting my observation please do go ahead and explain why. Am I factually wrong in the way the word sounds?
Culture war nonsense. Try not to spend much time at all if you can.
They'll pick anything to get more airtime. I remember them going after Jill Biden for using the prefix Dr but not in the medical sense.
They don't believe the words they're saying and playing this fake intellectual debate to keep attacking the liberals.
Not really, but there are some particularly crazy/militant/extreme people in the left and trans community who use it like it is.
Often not on it's own, usually in phrases like "cishet white male". Usually implying that the simple existence of this particular combination of uncontrollable personal traits is inherently problematic. Sometimes outright stating it. Sometimes literally calling for genocide or eugenics, or saying that it is entirely impossible to be a cishet white male and also be a good person.
It's the type of behavior that young men see that drives them into shit like Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, etc.
I'd imagine the people saying these things think it is fair or payback for the sexists, racists, bigots, etc that call for the same for their group. Payback for the reprehensible behavior they have had to endure. Hearing similar things directed at them may have driven them into the arms of extremist shit stirrers on their side.
Makes for a shitty, shitty cycle of reciprocal attack on people defined as "other".
Personally, I don't think the target makes a difference. It's reprehensible behavior either way. Go find a healthier output for your hurt. There are times where being the bigger person or taking the high road is not effective, but that should never be the assumed default or a situation to look forward to.
All that said, anyone arguing that those extremists are somehow leaders in the wider community is more interested in fanning the flames than anything else.
You see, "cis" implies the existence of "trans" and some people just really don't like the fact that they exist. Despite the it being fact.
Because it can be used as an exclusionary term to minimize cis voices. Stay with me, this isn't going where you think.
When trans folks engage in community discussions, it's very typical for cis people to insert themselves into the conversation so they can tell trans people who they are and aren't, what they should and shouldn't do. This actually happens with a lot of minority groups hoping to have serious discussions in public. Black folks hear about all lives matter or black-on-black violence, atheists here from religious proselytizers, etc.
So when trans folks - very rightly - let cis people know not to talk over them in their own communities, bigots believe -very wrongly- that their rights are being abused. Therefore the conclusion that "cis" is "discriminatory." See also "anti-white racism" "Men's Rights," etc.
All of these grievance perspectives are based on real-world difficulties, but provided without context. There are certain specific situations where it may be disadvantageous to be male, white, and cis. But those specific circumstances are not a part of systemic bias. If you don't care about context, and you don't care about systemic bias (particularly because it tends to benefit you), it's easy to view these isolated situations as a cause for victimhood.
It was meant as an insult, sort of. It was meant to reverse the verbal power dynamic in calling someone trans.
It was meant to make the oppressor feel oppressed and learn from the experience.
But CIS bigots go full on victim mode without the "oh is this what it is like for you ?" empathy moment that some people can experience.
Republicans only can experience empathy for their children, and Republicans can only feel empathy if it happens in the open and their peers talk about it. Then all the sudden the Republican is heartfelt in their sorrow for their personal ratings dip.
- No it wasn't.
- It's very simple. You have a word for somebody whose gender identity is different from what they were assigned at birth; so, you also need a word for the opposite of that (somebody whose gender identity is the same as what they were assigned at birth). And no, you can't just call those people "normal".
  The word wasn't created in order to reverse a power dynamic or make an oppressor feel oppressed. It was created because you needed a word there.
- It never occurred to me that was the intention. It is quite funny when people get together to come up with some clever idea but forget to tell the target audience. I saw it, understood it meant "not trans," and moved on. I also don't get involved in a ton of gender discussions. There seems to be an over abundance of focus on it for reasons unclear to me.
Anything can be an insult in politics.

I have never heard cis being used as a slur.

- Where does this come from?
I actually have. Mind I don't have a problem with the word in particular but I've read it used as a slur on the Internet and in real life.
It's all about intention imo. Many people use it just to clearly communicate but some also use it with hatred.
- Lol sure bud, def not a weird concocted scenario
It's impossible to use it as a slur, as cis people are not oppressed.
- A slur is any word that is used to insult someone based on their immutable characteristics (race, gender, sexuality, religion, ableness, etc.). There is NO requirement of oppression.
- That sounds sensible on first thought...but it's easy to find slurs that are for non-oppressed people's.
  The French, for example.
- Any word said with enough hatred is a slur
  Of course that being said I've never ever heard cis used like that either
Some people are just looking for something to be upset about.
Maybe it's just factually inaccurate and he doesn't want there to be anyone mistaking him as cissexual.
We usually call ‘em clankers.

Oh, so you're trans? Okay, will call you that, then.

Botox in the brain. Not even once.

It wasn't Botox tho, right?
Like the dude who's all about "personal responsibility" couldn't man up and make it thru benzo detox got put in a coma to avoid it in a eastern European hospital because no one else would risk it
Then they couldn't bring him out of the coma and he got brain damage.
But did he really get Botox in the brain to intentionally cause the coma?
Like, that just sounds even more insane...
- A coma to avoid benzo detox?
  I mean, I guess that's one way to skip it.
  I'd personally just let the docs provide me stuff to deal with the symptoms along the way, it's not like it's going to be any quicker

Look a lot of us wish we weren't cis but them's the breaks

did he just come out as trans ?

I am pretty sure I can beat Jordan Pattersons ass.

I could make him cry.
- Start saying: Neener neener neener and he will start tearing up.
Jordan Pattersons
I'm enjoying the thought that some random Patterson is out there summoned to this challenge, answering the call ready to beat the pants off you, with no reason other than "he challenged, I accepted"
- That was a thing once. Don't remember which name it was, but they made a group with many people sharing the name, set a time and place for the fight, then got together there. A kid won.

Okay, is queer better?

JP’s pronouns are twat / cunt, as in ‘that twat JP has been saying bullshit on the internet again’ or ‘I hope that cunt JP has shut his big mouth’

Mr big brain resorting to threats of violence.

Doubtful that Kermit Peterson was giving honest tactical advice to the left here, but he does have a point: “cis” is pretty bad branding when the biggest social group that slows down trans rights is the red-meat alpha-male boomers for whom “sissy” was the ultimate insult of their teenage years.

Petty and eyeroll-worthy? Yeah. Also an unforced error on the part of trans rights? Probably.

The word cis is just the opposite of trans, they're both latin prefixes. I suppose you have a better idea? And honestly, those guys probably wont change their minds anywah, so why shouldnt I go all the way and call them a beta sissy for the catharsis

Oh god it’s JP I didn’t even notice 🤦‍♂️

DIOGENES, holding a chicken he plucked: Here is Peterson's man.

Like cis is just the word for being comfortable with who you were born as. Unlike Jesus.

Is this even real?