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.

i don't know what's more pathetic: a) that a grown ass man still makes /c/iamverybadass threats on the internet; or b) that there are grown ass men who actually think he's tough
- 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
- 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
- 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.
  
  Honestly the word just has a gross sound to me. Reminds me of cysts.
  
  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!”
  I don't see the problem. Non-vegatarians/vegans are already called omnivores and it doesn't seem to be a problem. I wouldn't expect them to go out of their way to label themselves as such unless they were saying something like "I'm an omniVore" as a Vore joke. Carnists is the term that's used to be derogatory (although I think some weirdos who like to define themselves in opposition to vegans do call themselves that?). Likewise, "cissies" is a derogatory way to refer to the cis, but "cis" is just the neutral word used describe them. I wouldn't expect people to go out of their way to proclaim their cisness, but getting upset that the term exists and people use it is mostly just a bit.
  
  I'll gladly call non-vegans, who vehemently defend eating meat and oppose anything remotely vegan, carnies to piss them off

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!
  
  Where were you seeing this online? (How much can I blame cursed social media algorithms feeding you bullshit?)
  
  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.

- 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.

Is he/she saying they transitioned?
How wonderful!

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.
- removed this whole thing started because _your side _ couldn't handle him using three letters
  
  The only removed in here is the person trying and failing to defend Jordan Peterson. I just can't believe I actually saw one of his ten fans in the wild. I wouldn't be surprised if this is one of his alts.
  
  What thing?

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.
  
  I have a penis.
- Anything can be an insult in politics.
- 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.

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

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
- We usually call ‘em clankers.
- 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.
- 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

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

did he just come out as trans ?

- He had a severe benzo addiction and rather than going through the normal treatment of tapering off use, he opted for an experimental treatment offered in Russia where he was instead placed in a medically induced coma to avoid the worst of the withdrawals. This had other side effects though and he later described having to relearn basic motor functions after being awoken, so who knows what else that did to him.
  
  Can't wait for the Peterson communist sleeper agent arc.
  
  The chronically depressed benzo addled role model for disaffected young men
  
  His chemistry was messed up and he couldn't do a standard detox, the Russia place (sounded shady as f from his daughter retelling it) was the only place that would do this experimental way. ( Or even attempt it)
- That explains how he's also become an idiot.
  
  I think anyone who puts themselves into a coma because it's easier than fighting addiction has no room to scold me on my life choices, he was always stupid.
  I know addiction is hard to beat and I'm not trying to be insensitive, it's not as easy as "Just stop doing drugs"
  But if you take irresponsibily stupid shortcuts in life... You can stop trying to be my Guru

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’

I am pretty sure I can beat Jordan Pattersons ass.
- 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.
- I could make him cry.
  
  Start saying: Neener neener neener and he will start tearing up.

Is being in touch with your emotions good or not? Is men crying okay? Or should they be mocked?
- Men crying is fine. Jordan Peterson is a troll.
  
  In short, I wish I could cry. When I was younger I did it when I felt I need to. Now that I’m older, I’m suddenly not allowed to. I get so many looks, and comments, and follow up calls that it’s just simpler to stop myself. And then, when I’m alone, I’ll cry.
- crying is completely ok. Jordan is mocked for several reasons, one of them is advocacy for traditional gender roles. also he cries a lot not because he's in touch with his emotions but because he broke his own brain with his benzo addiction and his self induced coma while telling everyone else to get their shit together.
  
  It suck because JRE actually has had a lot of men share some heavy stuff in their lives in a way that would be frowned upon in most other podcasts. He could have been so much more if he leaned left.
  
  If that's a real tweet, he has my compassion. He used to seem kind of sweet, in a bigoted grandfatherly sort of way.
- JP's tweet heavily implied he would react violently or argue with someone to their face if they say "cis" to him. The response implies JP would, in fact, do neither. JP would instead scurry off with maybe a mean glance and then whine for an hour from the safety of his podcast.
  The response to JP is making fun of false bravado, toxicity, and whatever the word is for people that take everything as a personal insult - even a simple fact that JP is a cis man.
  Granted, some people can deliver obvious facts in a tone that can draw blood. And some facts do cut into insecurities really deep.
  But JP, based on his rhetoric should not be hurt or insulted by being cis. He is instead angry about people existing that are trans and threatening violence over a word.
  So no, I don't think this is mocking men having or showing real feelings. It's mocking the talk-tough toxicity that gets pushed to cover genuine emotions.
- It depends on why they're crying. removed and moaning about people not being on board with bigotry is worthy of ridicule. Salty tears over an invented persecution complex deserves harsh mockery. Force them to choose between public shaming and the chance of redemption (for those not so far gone that they're beyond the possibility).
  That's not the same as being genuinely in touch with your emotions and crying from traumatic events or other stressful situations. It's a human response that doesn't give a shit about genitalia or chromosomes or any other factors that I, as a layperson without specific education in such matters, may not be well-suited to articulate.
  I'm an adult man, cisgender and my life experience includes things that many see as traditionally masculine pursuits. Won't say I cry terribly often but just within the first half of this month, I have been brought to tears multiple times in public and private settings. A recent loss in the family has been tough on all of us and while I'm not going around and making a spectacle of myself, I know there are cousins and nieces and nephews who look up to me and I see it as one of my responsibilities to model healthy behaviors and speak openly about how I'm feeling. I love them all and want them to grow into well-adjusted adults who will recognize that this is not a weakness and are willing to ask for help if and when it is needed.
  Probably more info than necessary there but it's a topic that's been on my mind a lot recently. By breezing past the matter of sincerity and cry-bullying, it seems to me that the poster above has missed the mark.
  
  Yes men can only express their emotions if it not going to bother someone else

Mr big brain resorting to threats of violence.

Sad Kermit noises

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.
- It's literally the Latin counterpart of "trans" nobody in the trans rights community decided on that word. Trans in Latin means "on the other side of" and Cis means "on this side of". Cisgender - Transgender
- 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

Call me siss to my face and see what happens. 😏

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

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

I'm of two minds:
I find the 'cis' label offensive. That's my right.
I find this guy offensive. That's also my right.
(If you want to know who says I don't get rights, look at the downvotes. They disagree with one of those. You pick)
- It literally means "not trans" my dude. Do you get offended when people call you human?
  
  Call me human to my face. See what happens.
  
  I think it's disingenuous to argue that is the only usage of it. Plenty of words have colloquial meanings. There's plenty of assholes out there who use it venemously. Like a racist saying "He's black" when they mean the n word. "Fuck off and die, cishet!"
  There has been a lot of shit on Twitter and Tumblr outright calling for genocide of cis people. Forced sterilization. Saying that if you are a cis white male you inherently are a bad person. A rapist. Etc. Etc.
  It's bullshit lashing out, and doesn't truly amount to anything. That said, it can wear on you to be vilified for what you were born as, for things you can't control.
  Huh, imagine that.
  It strikes me as particularly ridiculous when this is brought up, there usually are a lot of responses along the lines of "Well now you know what we've dealt with!" "Poor majority person is suddenly hurt when they're treated the same way they've been treating the rest of us" etc.
  I don't think many people miss that point. But it's still a shitty thing to do, and it can feel like gaslighting attempts when reasonable people make responses like yours.
  "Negro literally means black, do you get offended when people call you the color of your skin?" ... let's start the countdown to people falling over themselves to say it's not the same. It isn't the same, but the parallels should give you pause. Hopefully cause some thought.
  
  Female literally means egg holding human. Do peeps get offended being called female?
  Oh shit. Is language fucking social? Jesus. Motherfuckers think gender is social but language is concrete apparently.
  FOH
- Reasonable, nobody should have to accept a label they don't ascribe to themselves.
  
  Bruh. We use labels to sort shit. Abstraction is how we deal with complexity. Choose your own labels, but how others see you isn't up to you. You've got no ownership of other peep's heads.
- Do you find all the other labels that can be used to describe yourself offensive, or just this one?
  Like are you offended by being called a human or homo sapien? Are you offended by being described by your skin color or race? Sexual preference? I just find it weird to single out the one label for no apparent reason.
  How would you suggest we describe people that aren't trans or non-binary in a way that wouldn't offend you for whatever reason? As uncomfortable as it may be for you, gender identity is a thing, and the rest of the world is going to use that word to describe people. It would probably be best for you to just get over it.
  
  Why are some women unhappy with being referred to as female? It's biologically accurate, yeah? Obviously can't be offensive.
  You understand why some people find being called cis a problem, you just don't want to accept it ideologically. That's fine. Don't try to drag others to your viewpoint for bullshit reasons.
- I find your finding of the cis label offensive to be offensive. That's my right.

Is this even real?

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

Are we not respecting people's self chosen labels now? I must have missed the memo
- Self chosen label
  Have you chosen to be cis? Have you chosen to be trans?
  Because there isnt any other option. If he isn’t cis, then he is trans.
  
  cisgender /sĭs-jĕn′dər/ adjective 1. Identifying as having a gender that corresponds to the sex one has been assigned at birth; not transgender.
  
  transgender /trăns-jĕn′dər, trănz-/ adjective 1. Identifying as or having undergone medical treatment to become a member of the opposite sex.
  
  (Technically, there's a secret third option: agender. Agender folks are not cis, but not necessarily trans, either. Source: am agender)
  
  You could call somebody a slur then go "why are you getting worked up? It's what you are, look at this definition in the book". A person can say "I don't want to be called that", regardless of who they are. If you don't respect it, you're not being nice.
  Simple as
- What is his chosen label beyond "not cis" because he hates trans people?
  
  Making fun of people for them asking to have their labels respected seems inconsistent.