I've already answered that in another post. I do not feel the need to divide further since I don't think there is much of a difference between me and, for example, my aforementioned friend. Or can my friend now identify as cis as well, since her biological sex (visible parts anyway) and gender identity now do line up as desired? Apparently not, because cis implies you had those things at birth. So even though me and my friend are now identical in both gender identity and sexual 'parts' there is still supposed to be a different label for both of us. I object to that.Zachary Amaranth said:It's always completely different.Nimcha said:That's... completely different.
Okay, that doesn't have anything to do with why you would choose a divisive label. Yes, sex and gender identity are different. So what? What has that got to do with the question at hand?First, sexuality is independent of gender. I am first and foremost female.
That also doesn't answer the question of why you would choose a divisive label, only that you are free to choose. Which I don't think anyone's contesting. You argued that the cis label was not productive and that it was divisive. Dividing people on sexuality works on the same level, by any apparent reasoning I can arrive at on your behalf. You've argued they're completely different, but not made a case for why or answered why you would actually choose to counterproductively and divisively label yourself. Now, is it your right? Absolutely. But that doesn't address anything of relevance here.Second, people should be free to choose their own label. If someone identifies as female or male or intersex or whatever, I will respect that.
As for the gay label, that part's not gonna change. There is actually a big difference between me and a heterosexual female. Hence the label.