How many women (or men) identify as cisgender?

No and I find the term "cis", when used in the context of talking about sex, insulting.

XDownwiththissortofthingX What line of work are you in?

And if you are regularly using ‘Cis’ at work, I think you are not comprehending why it is so offensive to imply that an oppressed group identifies with the reasons used to justify oppression.

If anyone had the gall to identify me as a ‘CIS’ female then they’d get the sharp end of my tongue. I’m happy to use the pronoun that someone else chooses (if they’re trans for example) but I will not have my own identity eradicated by someone else who has no right to do so.

There's not much to add to this!
I'm a woman. There's only one type. If you call me "cis" I'll call you out on it. Do it a second time and I'll ignore you, and I won't care who you are or where I am when I do so.
If you persist despite being ignored the chances are that I'll tell you to fuck off (and then carry on ignoring you).

I encounter them constantly at work. It's one of the biggest issues when you spend a lot of time discussing other groups that you are not part of yourself, or have little commonality with.

Could you give an example?

If you think ‘Cis’ is equivalent with ‘natal’, I am concerned that you don’t understand what the terms mean.

As much as I dislike labels for a myriad of reasons, I do find that they are often necessary and do fulfil a purpose when it comes to clear communication.

As a lesbian woman, I feel about the same way in being labelled 'cis' for other people's use as I do about being labelled 'dyke'. Just words. Clear meaning. Just a derogatory and oppressive one.

Please don't apply words to people without their consent. If everyone respects that equally, there's no problem.

Cis is a fringe thing. It’s a signal that you are going along with trans ideology.

Most of the population isn’t really paying any attention. If the results of this become frightening, degrading or intrusive enough, then you will see kick back.

No because I don’t identify into my oppression. I can’t change my biological destiny but I don’t have to identify into a lifetime of plucking, waxing, spending fortunes on pointless accoutrements and crippling myself in unsuitable shoes just to appease some men who fetishise that.

There is no right or service that a ‘Cis’ women would cease to need if they no longer identified as ‘Cis’.

See, that’s why many women object to the term cis. It implies a subset of Woman. That’s also why many transwomen use it. Because they believe they are women

I have no objection to other women finding the term offensive, as I complete understand their objection to it. It's just not an objection I share because I've not personally encountered the use of the term 'cis' in any scenario where it wasn't being used to make it emphatically clear that the user was referring specifically to biological women and not including transwomen.

I suspect this is probably due to my line of work, where it's pretty much an accepted term because we have to quite often refer to groups using exclusionary language. I don't really have any thoughts on the 'transwomen are women' question so can't really answer that for you, all I can do is try to explain why I don't, personally, find it offensive even though I do understand why other do, pretty much for the reasons you've already outlined.

There’s a word that’s recognisable worldwide for biological males. It’s men

As above, if I was to refer to 'men' in my workplace, people would assume I'm including transmen in that, regardless of my own thoughts on whether or not TWAT/TMAM etc. This is exactly why 'cis' has no offensive connotations for me.

I can’t think of any situation where the context wouldn’t make it clear that the word ‘woman’ refers to sex

I encounter them constantly at work. It's one of the biggest issues when you spend a lot of time discussing other groups that you are not part of yourself, or have little commonality with. How to describe them, how to advocate for them, and unfortunately, how to 'label' them. As much as I dislike labels for a myriad of reasons, I do find that they are often necessary and do fulfil a purpose when it comes to clear communication.

It's the intent that's important

Yes. Very much so.

I have absolutely no issue with any woman labelling herself in any way she so wishes. Your choice, I'll respect it. I also won't use words and labels for you that you have not chosen, do not agree with or identify with.

Please extend me the same respect.

That's it. That's all.

I don’t object to being in a subset. I’m in lots of subsets. The problem is that I need the full ‘set’ definition to be available to protect my rights and the services I need.

I don’t need rights and services because of gender, I need them because of sex. A definition that refers to gender is useless.

I can’t remember the last time I used a single sex space. I still need equality law and sex specific medical services.

The last few months have shown how easy it is to lose those things, not because the male dominated government hates women, but because they forget they exist.

Forcing a name on an individual or a group of people has in the past been used by oppressors to subjugate others. Brave New World ain't it.

Sex based - woman is YY chromosomes

It’s as scientific and definitive as it gets

I view 'woman' as insufficiently clear, and 'cis' as interchangeable with 'biological', 'natal', etc. It's the intent that's important, and if it communicates meaning succinctly then I have no issue with it.

I couldn’t be more at odds with this if I tried.

Woman is sex based.

I view 'woman' as insufficiently clear, and 'cis' as interchangeable with 'biological', 'natal', etc. It's the intent that's important, and if it communicates meaning succinctly then I have no issue with it.

‘natal’ includes trans men and trans women so is very much not interchangeable with ‘Cis’.

I can’t think of any situation where the context wouldn’t make it clear that the word ‘woman’ refers to sex.

I don’t understand why it is a good idea to suggest that talking about sex is offensive. It’s just a medical classification like blood type, but with far more important consequences.

On the other hand, it seems easy to understand why ‘Cis’ which specifically refers to restrictive social expectations is offensive, particularly in the context of women.

FWIW, I view 'Cis man' exactly the same way, i.e. a perfectly appropriate way to ensure you are talking very specifically about biological males and not including transmen

Natal and biological are objective terms that have nothing to do with identity or ideology. It’s just language used to determine sex

Which is more or less how I view 'Cis', and why I don't find it in any way offensive.

As I said before the context is vital. It's commonly used to donate 'a woman who is not a transwoman', which applies to me, describes me, and does nothing to offend me. I accept the argument that just 'woman' also does that perfectly well, but again, I don't find it in any way offensive for someone to make it clear when they are referring to biological women and not transwomen, and I'm not particularly fussy about which term they use to do that.

When it's in a specific scenario whereby the intended audience might believe they are also including transwomen in their use of 'woman', then I view 'woman' as insufficiently clear, and 'cis' as interchangeable with 'biological', 'natal', etc. It's the intent that's important, and if it communicates meaning succinctly then I have no issue with it.

I also do not identify as cis and find it massively offensive. I am a women.

Unpack the logic.

Person A: I reject these labels and words, they do not match my internal sense of self, and I relate to these words I choose. Please use those words for me which value my sense of self and respect my feelings.

Person B: Ok

Person A: I however label you with this word. You must call yourself that at all times too.

Person B: But I don't relate to that word? I relate to other words and beliefs and my choice of language is this, not the word you're sticking on me. Actually that word makes me really uncomfortable and jars with my own beliefs.

Person A: That does not matter.

Person B: You just asked me to not label you and use only the words you choose because of valuing your sense of self and your feelings, and I said yes fine, so - you get to choose and I don't? Your sense of self and your feelings matter but mine don't? And you expect me to provide you with the service of your chosen words but you're not extending any of the same basic respect back to me in return?

Person A: Name calling, shaming, rage unless you comply.

I've only ever seen it used when the discussion is in relation to Trans issues, and in that context I don't view it as much different to being described as 'natal' or 'biological'.

It is very different.

Natal and biological are objective terms that have nothing to do with identity or ideology. It’s just language used to determine sex.

‘Trans’ is a vague word that includes a man in a dress (cross dressing) but not a woman wearing men’s jeans (practical).

It includes a gender conforming person who identifies as non binary if they believe that other people have binary genders. It does not include a gender non conforming person who doesn’t believe in gender.

Cis is grossly offensive. I'm a woman (adult human female) and I'm also a lesbian (adult human female sexually attracted to other adult human females).