<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Retiring Mind</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wendygriffinonline.com/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wendygriffinonline.com</link>
	<description>Mindful Musings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:10:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Talking to Strangers by Faith AND Reason… &#124; Chrysalis</title>
		<link>http://wendygriffinonline.com/?p=62#comment-3205</link>
		<dc:creator>Faith AND Reason… &#124; Chrysalis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wendygriffinonline.com/?p=62#comment-3205</guid>
		<description>[...] the Christian Radio host&#8217;s gay-hating ignorance and religious intolerance, rather than of the Methodist minister&#8217;s open minded-ness and interfaith approach; HOWEVER&#8230; there are many good people of faith out there, and many good and genuinely [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the Christian Radio host&#8217;s gay-hating ignorance and religious intolerance, rather than of the Methodist minister&#8217;s open minded-ness and interfaith approach; HOWEVER&#8230; there are many good people of faith out there, and many good and genuinely [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Gender Matters&#8230; by Citizan Journalism</title>
		<link>http://wendygriffinonline.com/?p=43#comment-3195</link>
		<dc:creator>Citizan Journalism</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Mar 2011 01:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wendygriffinonline.com/?p=43#comment-3195</guid>
		<description>[...] began these musings after attending Pantheacon and the controversial discussion that took place there and on the web. Those of us in attendance at the discussion knew the press [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] began these musings after attending Pantheacon and the controversial discussion that took place there and on the web. Those of us in attendance at the discussion knew the press [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Women Born Women Only by Jadelyn</title>
		<link>http://wendygriffinonline.com/?p=29#comment-3097</link>
		<dc:creator>Jadelyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 00:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wendygriffinonline.com/?p=29#comment-3097</guid>
		<description>Full disclosure: I am a cisgender woman, or what you would call &quot;female born woman&quot;.

&lt;i&gt;So I will use the language “female born woman” when it is necessary for some reason to differentiate them from transwomen.&lt;/i&gt;

Or, just a thought here, you could use the commonly-accepted term &quot;cisgender women&quot; or &quot;cis women&quot; for short, instead of insisting on bulky phrases that, even with a nominal concession to sex/gender difference, still manage to convey the sneering sense of &quot;not real women&quot; that the previous &quot;women born women&quot; terminology has traditionally carried.  &quot;Cisgender&quot; is a term mirroring &quot;transgender&quot;, with exactly opposite meaning; where &quot;transgender&quot; means an individual whose assigned sex at birth does not match their gender identity, &quot;cisgender&quot; simply means an individual whose sex assigned at birth and gender identity match.  A quick snippet from what I&#039;ve found to be the &lt;a href=&quot;http://dglenn.dreamwidth.org/1588929.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;best writing&lt;/a&gt; on the subject of marked case, unmarked case, and why we should use trans/cis terminology:

&lt;blockquote&gt;(&#039;cisgendered&#039;, from &#039;cis-&#039;, &quot;on the same side&quot;, + &#039;gender&#039;; in contrast to &#039;trans-&#039;, &quot;crossing over&quot;; both from Latin, and both prefixes used in Chemistry with similar meanings.)

The reason it feels jarring -- &quot;naming&quot;? &quot;marking&quot;? -- to you, and gets your hackles up is quite simply that y&#039;all are accustomed to being the unmarked class, and giving you any concise name is going to feel like an imposed label that, because you&#039;re not used to having to acknowledge a label at all, some of you start to suspect is somehow insulting or denigrating.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Also, if you are trying to be taken seriously as *not* anti-trans (and I am doing my best to assume good faith on your part, despite the fact that the &quot;women born women&quot; segregation you are part of and defend absolutely screams &quot;transphobic bigotry&quot; to me), I *very strongly* recommend you write it out &quot;trans women&quot; not &quot;transwomen&quot;.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://takesupspace.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/put-the-goddamn-space-in-transwoman-transfeminism-transmasculine-etc-language-politics-1/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Here&lt;/a&gt; is an excellent post on the subject, and how writing it &quot;transwomen&quot; is inherently Othering because the counterpart to &quot;transwoman&quot; is almost never &quot;ciswoman&quot;, and thus it positions trans women as not women, but &quot;transwomen&quot;, something other than real women.  (In fact, I used to write it that way myself, until a trans friend of mine called me on it and linked me to that article; I hope you will find it as illuminating as I did.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Full disclosure: I am a cisgender woman, or what you would call &#8220;female born woman&#8221;.</p>
<p><i>So I will use the language “female born woman” when it is necessary for some reason to differentiate them from transwomen.</i></p>
<p>Or, just a thought here, you could use the commonly-accepted term &#8220;cisgender women&#8221; or &#8220;cis women&#8221; for short, instead of insisting on bulky phrases that, even with a nominal concession to sex/gender difference, still manage to convey the sneering sense of &#8220;not real women&#8221; that the previous &#8220;women born women&#8221; terminology has traditionally carried.  &#8220;Cisgender&#8221; is a term mirroring &#8220;transgender&#8221;, with exactly opposite meaning; where &#8220;transgender&#8221; means an individual whose assigned sex at birth does not match their gender identity, &#8220;cisgender&#8221; simply means an individual whose sex assigned at birth and gender identity match.  A quick snippet from what I&#8217;ve found to be the <a href="http://dglenn.dreamwidth.org/1588929.html" rel="nofollow">best writing</a> on the subject of marked case, unmarked case, and why we should use trans/cis terminology:</p>
<blockquote><p>(&#8216;cisgendered&#8217;, from &#8216;cis-&#8217;, &#8220;on the same side&#8221;, + &#8216;gender&#8217;; in contrast to &#8216;trans-&#8217;, &#8220;crossing over&#8221;; both from Latin, and both prefixes used in Chemistry with similar meanings.)</p>
<p>The reason it feels jarring &#8212; &#8220;naming&#8221;? &#8220;marking&#8221;? &#8212; to you, and gets your hackles up is quite simply that y&#8217;all are accustomed to being the unmarked class, and giving you any concise name is going to feel like an imposed label that, because you&#8217;re not used to having to acknowledge a label at all, some of you start to suspect is somehow insulting or denigrating.</p></blockquote>
<p>Also, if you are trying to be taken seriously as *not* anti-trans (and I am doing my best to assume good faith on your part, despite the fact that the &#8220;women born women&#8221; segregation you are part of and defend absolutely screams &#8220;transphobic bigotry&#8221; to me), I *very strongly* recommend you write it out &#8220;trans women&#8221; not &#8220;transwomen&#8221;.  <a href="http://takesupspace.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/put-the-goddamn-space-in-transwoman-transfeminism-transmasculine-etc-language-politics-1/" rel="nofollow">Here</a> is an excellent post on the subject, and how writing it &#8220;transwomen&#8221; is inherently Othering because the counterpart to &#8220;transwoman&#8221; is almost never &#8220;ciswoman&#8221;, and thus it positions trans women as not women, but &#8220;transwomen&#8221;, something other than real women.  (In fact, I used to write it that way myself, until a trans friend of mine called me on it and linked me to that article; I hope you will find it as illuminating as I did.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

