A Victory for Sororities: Education Department Rules Sororities Are for Women Only

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by naraht

As a note, cis and trans as prefixes viewed as opposites goes back centuries as a concept in Chemistry. (for example) two Carbons linked by a double bond one of which has a Hydrogen and a Chlorine and the other a Hydrogen and a Fluorine exist in two forms. Cis, where the Chlorine and Flourine are on the same side of the carbon bond and trans where they are across from each other.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

It’s basically real science misused to give bullshit a fake ass lab coat.

I would need you to break your post down CG so I can understand it. I’m also not understanding how naraht is proving your point. Because of that, I read naraht’s post 4 times and your post 6 times and what I’m getting out of what you’re trying to say is what I changed your post to. Am I right?

Originally Posted by navane

"Cis" is a Latin prefix or word which means "on the same side". So, in this context, cisgender, cisman, and ciswoman are meant to describe individuals whose gender identity matches their biological sex. So, if you were born a biological female, and you identify as a female, then the term now given is "ciswoman".

You see how confusing that is? It’s bullshit, if you ask me.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

I would need you to break your post down CG so I can understand it. I’m also not understanding how naraht is proving your point.

In chemistry, “cis/trans” means a real, physical flip you can see under a microscope. In gender talk, “cis” is just a social label, no physical flip, no real structure.

So when naraht brings up chemistry, it shows the word only makes sense when it describes a real structure, which gender identity doesn’t have. That’s why it proves my point.

Real science vs. made up marketing.

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

Because of that, I read naraht’s post 4 times and your post 6 times and what I’m getting out of what you’re trying to say is what I changed your post to. Am I right?
.

lol
Yes. They’re real science terms repurposed so ideological fluff pretends to be biological fact. But it’s pretty much rhetorical camouflage.