What does CIS mean?

I get it. So you redefine women to include people who are not "reproductively female", get the "reproductively female" women to consider themselves a subset of women, construct a narrative which says that this subset is somehow more privileged than the "non-reproductively female" women and, bingo! You still have access to the services of the "reproductively female" women, but don't have to worry any more about their rights.

That really is very clever.

More seriously, I can see how that would be the effect of the reclassification, but I'm not convinced (yet) that it's the intention.

Yes, someone suggested on another thread that MTF trans people could call themselves "woman in the head people" and they can ally with all the biologically female people who also consider themselves "woman in the head people" and we can have woman in the head spaces and biologically female spaces. The female woman in the head people could use either of course. Would that be a reasonable suggestion?

Reader, it was not. The presence of women who didn't want males there was required.

It has always confused me that trans women dont just label themselves cis. They are the only people I know who subscribe to gender stereotypes of women.

Who benefits if women can’t talk about themselves as a distinct group, can’t see patterns, can’t organise?

It ain’t women, that’s for sure

Yes why do TRAs want to abolish this distinction? Life is navigable because we break up what we see around us into categories and assign words to things.

No one is arguing we shouldn't have words for different races and saying we should all just be "people". Because, yes we are all people but categories matter.

Why is this a problem?

It only works if sex doesn't relate to biological reproductive roles

Which would then mean we need another set of words for sex education and health

What new words can we make up that mean biologically female/male in the baby making sense to replace woman and man if they are to mean gender ?

Bam and spam for baby and sperm makers ?

ok. Thanks.....

is it reasonable to accept that sex can be misdiagnosed with females being incorrectly labelled as males

Cos lady brain

Or something

The argument is about if it is reasonable to suggest that, excluding known DSD, is it reasonable to accept that sex can be misdiagnosed with females being incorrectly labelled as males
I think

Men and women haven't been bred over thousands of years by a group of people, to make ones with different sex characteristics.

OR HAVE WE?

Help me out here.

It seems to me to be perfectly sensible for a bunch of scientists to believe that it's wrong to pass a law which makes someone's civil or sex based rights dependent on a genetic test. I'm also sure that a bunch of scientists would sign such a letter without considering the implications of some of the sociological terms in it.

It also seems fairly clear to me that the way in which the sex of an individual arises is complex, and involves genetic, hormonal, and other factors dependent on the environment. In fact I'm sure I've read that in a book somewhere. However, it still results in one of two sexes. Male, female. There are no others. Developmental disorders do not result in any third kind of sex.

This has degenerated into bickering. What is the argument actually about?

Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling

Then I don't see any basis for considering their identity issues an urgent medical priority.

The term is then clearly a spiteful little insult if you are using it to nip at people who don't conform to your ideology. You're using it to send a message about what you think of the person.

Yes. So much for "neutral description".

Ah, so the word ‘cis’ is a way of punishing non compliant women

I for one am loving all the educating on this thread. More please!

They always disgrace themselves in the end

It feels a bit like playing with your food, but I quite enjoy getting them to that place

Well said @tibtom. 'Cis privilege' does not exist. @hibari will no doubt tell us otherwise while conveniently ignoring the fact that NO trans women have been murdered in the U.K. whereas it took Jess Phillips FOUR minutes to read out the names of women murdered.

Wait, I am confused. I thought trans ideology said that

1. male and female are biological categories relevant in medicine (and in sex change - do you need testosterone or oestrogen, do we remove your breasts or create silicone breasts?)

2. man and woman are to be redefined as social categories that do not necessarily map to a person's biological sex of male or female.

So, under gender ideology it would be fine to say transwomen are males but not transwomen are men

Has that changed recently?

If so what are the new words to indicate whether a trans person is a transwoman or a transman, whether they need to be booked in for a mastectomy or a boob job?

The term is then clearly a spiteful little insult if you are using it to nip at people who don't conform to your ideology. You're using it to send a message about what you think of the person.

It is a nonsense word.

@Shizuku

Many transgender people do not experience their gender as distressing or disabling

The suicide statistics alone (whether or not someone transitions) and the disabling nature of surgery which mutilates healthy men and women is more than enough to prove that this disorder is distressing and/or disabling.

Do you genuinely believe that it’s impossible to tell what sex a mammal is @Shizuku?

Like the conspiracy theory you are peddling?