ISO Gay Belay

It deserves pointing out that:

If heterosexual single men sought to climb with heterosexual single women whether through a forum, exchanging numbers at the crag, the gym, a meetup group, etc. they would not get the same level of unwanted analysis as this woman is receiving. 

Lauren D. Hollingsworth wrote:

It deserves pointing out that:

If heterosexual single men sought to climb with heterosexual single women whether through a forum, exchanging numbers at the crag, the gym, a meetup group, etc. they would not get the same level of unwanted analysis as this woman is receiving. 

Your right, people would just think he's a dick and move on.

Lauren D. Hollingsworth wrote:

It deserves pointing out that:

If heterosexual single men sought to climb with heterosexual single women whether through a forum, exchanging numbers at the crag, the gym, a meetup group, etc. they would not get the same level of unwanted analysis as this woman is receiving. 

But if he posted "Straight white male looking for straight white male climbing partners, no LGBQT or women" the reception would likely be a little frosty.

Do you think the implied romantic interest in the OPs post makes the difference? 

My feeling is that the unwanted analysis arises from a sense that someone from a group that has rightfully demanded inclusion in the broader climbing community is now themselves, specifically excluding others from the climbing community.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

But if he posted "Straight white male looking for straight white male climbing partners, no LGBQT or women" the reception would likely be a little frosty.

Do you think the implied romantic interest in the OPs post makes the difference? 

My feeling is that the unwanted analysis arises from a sense that someone from a group that has rightfully demanded inclusion in the broader climbing community is now themselves, specifically excluding others from the climbing community.

The reality is though that a straight cis white male wouldn't have to say that. Since this group of folks are the dominant culture and the majority of climbers and forum posters, if a dude says he's looking for a climbing partner he will likely find another white male whether he wants to or not. Posting that he is looking for that is somewhat redundant. He can probably filter the results he gets back as well. If a woman or person of color or lgbtq individual posts that they are looking for someone more closely identified with them, they are simply stating that they would prefer, at this moment, to have a more specific climbing partner. Dudes are a dime a dozen, and most of them are cool and accepting people who are super fun to climb with. If someone wants to climb with a dude, they can. if someone wants to climb with a woman, person of color, lgbtq person or any other minority, it is not as easy. Especially if you are looking for a minority who climbs a specific grade, or a specific style. Forums become very useful for this because it exposes you to a wider swath of people. I have found many a partners across the country on forums. Most of them white men. If I'm in an area for a longer period of time and put out a post specifying women, I am sometimes able to find a woman, but it is never guarenteed. And that is just women, not gay women.

Climbers are often exclusive on forums and nobody gives them much slack for it. If someone wants to climb trad, not many people say why don't you just sport climb. If someone wants to go to a specific boulder with v10 and up on it, not many will tell them to not climb as hard and stay on warmups all day. 

You are right though, if a white man says he only wants to climb with white men, it could be construed as racist. If he says no gays, it could be taken as homophobic. Likewise, if a white queer specifically says they only want to climb with other white queers, that could be thought to be a bit racist. If a queer says they are looking for other queers, you can say its straight-phobic or whatever, but chances are they are just looking for someone more like themselves to climb with since much of their other time climbing is spend with straight white males.

"If heterosexual single men sought to climb with heterosexual single women whether through a forum, exchanging numbers at the crag, the gym, a meetup group, etc. they would not get the same level of unwanted analysis as this woman is receiving."

Not sure I agree.  If anything, it's more frowned upon to be a straight dude trying to pick up chicks, especially through a climbing situation.  Posting to a forum of this intention would be laughable.

Sara, I doubt we disagree on any of this.

I think people should climb with whoever they like. I'm just glad there are so many great people with low enough standards to be willing to climb with me!

But it seems like you are trying to argue me out of my feelings on the matter. I can consider your arguments and recognize that my feelings are irrational. 

But that doesn't justify dismissing them out of hand.

What does cis mean? i.e. straight cis white male

Russ Keane wrote:

"If heterosexual single men sought to climb with heterosexual single women whether through a forum, exchanging numbers at the crag, the gym, a meetup group, etc. they would not get the same level of unwanted analysis as this woman is receiving."

Not sure I agree.  If anything, it's more frowned upon to be a straight dude trying to pick up chicks, especially through a climbing situation.  Posting to a forum of this intention would be laughable.

 What? Remember that guy in Yosemite that was looking for a girlfriend that climbed. That went on forever. Stich posted a girl he knew was looking for a date. Can’t find the link though.

And that guy found what he was looking for! I hope OP does too.

 This thread is unreal. It’s good to see the thumbs up function though.

Jake Jones wrote:

"The prefix cis- is Latin meaning “on this side of,” whereas trans- means “on the other side of.” While trans-atlantic means “on the opposite side of the Atlantic Ocean,” an American could describe New York or Virginia or the Rocky Mountains as cis-atlantic. In general, there aren’t too many places outside of a dictionary or chemistry lab where one would likely see the prefix being used, but cisgender is seeing an uptick in use."

It means you identify as a straight white male- like 95% of the population of white males in this country.

My understanding is that cisgender means you gender identify with the sex you were born with, male or female, and has absolutely nothing to do with race or gay/straight (ie; straight white male). 

ErikaNW wrote:

My understanding is that cisgender means you gender identify with the sex you were born with, male or female, and has absolutely nothing to do with race or gay/straight (ie; straight white male). 

Why is the cis necessary? It seems like we're just adding another label to me. 

Sara, you are the rgold of this thread.

mediocre wrote:

Why is the cis necessary? It seems like we're just adding another label to me. 

The "cis" prefix seems unnecessary because it is assumed to be the normal, usual, and default gender identity. Only "other" gender identities need to go out of their way to identify themselves. Similar to when women first began practicing medicine, they were often (and still are by some, I'm sure) called "lady doctor" while their male counterparts were simply "doctors", no label necessary. I'm sure there are many other examples including racial and sexual orientation related ones. 

This is part of the privilege of being cis-gender. It's easy to overlook, because one of the huge privileges of being in the majority on anything is the invisibility of it - the privilege of not having to think much about it at all, and the privilege of the world's assumptions matching who you are without any effort on your part. 

In discussions of privilege, it is important to recognize ways we all have (possibly unexamined) privilege - using the cis-prefix is a way to acknowledge and remind ourselves and others of that privilege. And of acknowledging that there's more than one way to gender-identify, that cis-gender is not a given. 

Em Cos wrote:

The "cis" prefix seems unnecessary because it is assumed to be the normal, usual, and default gender identity. Only "other" gender identities need to go out of their way to identify themselves. Similar to when women first began practicing medicine, they were often (and still are by some, I'm sure) called "lady doctor" while their male counterparts were simply "doctors", no label necessary. I'm sure there are many other examples including racial and sexual orientation related ones. 

This is part of the privilege of being cis-gender. It's easy to overlook, because one of the huge privileges of being in the majority on anything is the invisibility of it - the privilege of not having to think much about it at all, and the privilege of the world's assumptions matching who you are without any effort on your part. 

In discussions of privilege, it is important to recognize ways we all have (possibly unexamined) privilege - using the cis-prefix is a way to acknowledge and remind ourselves and others of that privilege. And of acknowledging that there's more than one way to gender-identify, that cis-gender is not a given. 

My point being that by saying straight white male/trans black female/gay asian doctor seems to already cover it. If someone says straight white male, I take that to already include the cis prefix. Is that incorrect? 

mediocre wrote:

My point being that by saying straight white male/trans black female/gay asian doctor seems to already cover it. If someone says straight white male, I take that to already include the cis prefix. Is that incorrect? 

No it is not correct. I could be born female, identify as male, and also be straight. Again, my whiteness has nothing to do with being cis. 

ErikaNW wrote:

No it is not correct. I could be born female, identify as male, and also be straight. Again, my whiteness has nothing to do with being cis. 

Now I got it. Thanks for the clarification.

"born female, identify as male, and also be straight"

Wondering, honestly it's confusing.  Is straight defined from your self-identified gender?  So in this case, born female but male identifying, and is straight, means this person is attracted to females?

mediocre wrote:

Now I got it. Thanks for the clarification.

Yep, sexual orientation and gender identity are two different things. You can be heterosexual and trans, cis and homosexual, any of a huge number of combinations. Cis basically means that the gender you identify with matches the biological sex you were born with. So I'm a straight, white, cis-gendered female - meaning I was born biologically female and my appearance presents as female and I identify as female. I could be all those things without being straight, that's a separate thing. 

Russ Keane wrote:

"born female, identify as male, and also be straight"

Wondering, honestly it's confusing.  Is straight defined from your self-identified gender?  So in this case, born female but male identifying, and is straight, means this person is attracted to females?

I agree it can be confusing! In this example the person would be transgender (born female, identifies as male) and could be heterosexual, prefers men as sexual partners. People who know more, please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretation!

I’m by no means expert in any of this - been trying to educate myself and learn more recently for a number of reasons. From my standpoint as an educator and clinical researcher, gender identity is important. I do not want to mis-gender anyone by using the wrong pronoun or disenfranchise anyone by using ‘gender’ when I really mean ‘biological sex at birth’ - this is a big deal in my research where I frequently test for male/female differences in my variables (I study biomechanics and low back pain).  

Edit to add: now that this thread has been completely derailed, hope you find some climbing partners Amanda!!

Oh, for God's sake.