alexseanchai | (no subject)

I have seen and am adopting "cisallohet" as a replacement for "cishet" in the usage of people who don't want to target queer folks when they use a word explicitly to mean only not-queer, because asexual and aromantic are queer dammit and "cishet" is often used to target aces (who happen to be cis and heteroromantic) and aros (who happen to be cis and heterosexual). (I have no idea whether "heterocis" is used similarly, but that's also in my experience a less angrily connoted word than "cishet" even though they denote the same thing.)

How would we fix up "heterocisnormative" to make the same point? "heterocisallonormative"? "cisalloheteronormative"? Someone in #dreamwidth-kvetch is suggesting "heterallocisnormative" or "hetallocisnormative", but I'm not sure those flow? But then I'm not sure my two thoughts flow either...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yeah, I understand why you want the word. Which, I mean, sometimes you throw your hands in the air and live with an ugly kludge because it works and nothing else quite actually does.

I think hetallocisnormative is the easiest physically say of those options put forth, but it makes it harder to parse the meaning in both speech and writing. If we're going to for maximum clarity, I'd say heterocisallonromative manages that the best in part because it uses a partial form that people are at least more likely to have encountered before (ie, heterocisnormative).

*nodnod* :)