#CisIsNotASlur trending on Twitter

People say, "most people are cis" and it's simply not true. I'd argue most people don't have a gender identity that neatly fits with their sex. Particularly when the performance of that gender is so arbitrary. Foot binding, neck stretching, FGM? All the execution of gender. Dresses, pink and fancy shoes? Have at times been male.

Some youngster at work said I was cis, and looked stunned when I said, "no, I perform femininity because it's easier and proscribed, I'm not cis". She couldn't believe a big-standard middle aged woman would be anything other than cis . Which means Stonewall thinks I'm trans.

@WeeBisom

If you do not have any gender, you are idenfy best as agender, by definition a transgender identity.

This is a very simple black and white matter.

The very reason there are so many labels is because humans are a funny bunch who don't like to be pinned down nearly into one checkbox, but at the same time we do rather like talking , so we need descriptors.

Hence most labels are a "best fit" sorta fare.

It's important to note that gender does not equal gender roles/stereotypes/expression.

Those last three vary from culture and time, and gender roles/stereotypes are generally sexist nonsense nobody really follows.

I was talking about the way language is changed in 1984 so the meaning of certain words is changed or certain words forgotten, which limits what can be discussed and by who.

They simply are, biologically everybody is different, socially as well.
But we're all women.

Well I don't know who the 'we' are you're referring to. But no, TW are not women in terms of societal expectation and self entitlement. And I am referring to biological sex differences as well you know, so again no, TW are not the same as natal women.

@titchy

They simply are, biologically everybody is different, socially as well.
But we're all women.

I presume by 1984 you're referring to the way BB set about making the proles hate each other and dismantle their own freedoms by removing any sense of individuality and identity, creating an "us and them" as he details with his "orthodoxy and unorthodoxy" lines.

You know, like the GCs are doing.

Splitting feminism, weakening it from the inside, allowing BB, or in this case anti-feminist and the patriarchy to win.

Cis means 'not trans', so we need to know what 'trans' means in order to know if we're cis. Let's take Stonewall's definition. Trans describes people whose gender is not the same as or does not sit comfortably, with the sex they were assigned at birth. I reject the idea that I have a gender, and the theory that gender (whatever it is) ought to 'sit comfortably' with my sex. I don't perceive that I have a gender that is 'the same' as my sex. In fact, I don't even know what that means. So I am not cis.

To be without a gender identity is to be "agender", the overwhelming majority of humanity is cis.

That puts most GC women firmly under Stonewall's trans umbrella then

I never even heard the word cis as applied to human beings until about ten years ago. Presumably no-one had a gender identity before that - why assume we all have one now?

[quote Millicispud]@MonsignorMirth

Nah, cis just means we're not trans.

To be without a gender identity is to be "agender", the overwhelming majority of humanity is cis.

The debate only came about because people use trans as an insult, to see trans people as somehow worse or beneath or "different" to cis people.
So naturally they see the label "cis" the same way as they use trans in such a way.[/quote]
People don't use trans as an insult at all. It's not the same. You're gaslighting.

"To be without a gender identity is to be "agender", the overwhelming majority of humanity is cis." - ok then, what does cis mean?

Oh, cross posted there. If the definition of cis means a person who actually has a gender identity matching their sex, I don't think I know any of those either.

Apart from a few young people who seem to be very confused.

@MonsignorMirth

Nah, cis just means we're not trans.

To be without a gender identity is to be "agender", the overwhelming majority of humanity is cis.

The debate only came about because people use trans as an insult, to see trans people as somehow worse or beneath or "different" to cis people.
So naturally they see the label "cis" the same way as they use trans in such a way.

[quote Millicispud]@titchy

No, you said.
Explained implies that you're correct, which you are not.

You baselessly likened a well known term that's been used in various sciences and in gender for over a century to a racist insults.[/quote]
It's been used in science yes - I said that. It's not been used in gender for long at all. It's used by TRAs to try and imply TW are just as much women as natal women. Which they're not of course - they're biologically and societally the opposite. It's a way of gaslighting, to eradicate language so oppression can not be named. All very 1984.

I don't think I know anyone who is cis. If, that is, cis means conforming to the historical stereotypes associated with the sex given on their birth certificates.

If cis means something else, I would love a definition. And the definition can't be "not trans" unless at the same time I'm provided with a definition of what trans means these days

Interesting that Blueberry disagrees with the poster who was on here telling us we were all cis, and confirmed the definition I just posted.
They also said there was no disagreement about what it means. So now I don't know which one believe!

I was told on here that being cis, or not-trans, means you actively have a gender identity, which you describe using the same word that you use to describe the biological sex of your body.

So most of us are not cis.

If there is some debate about what precisely cis means then perhaps it is not really on to label others with it.

@titchy

No, you said.
Explained implies that you're correct, which you are not.

You baselessly likened a well known term that's been used in various sciences and in gender for over a century to a racist insults.

And cis is a chemical term btw. Not one that's been adopted into common parlance the way trans as meaning across has.

If people want to identify as cis then that's their choice but it does assume you claim a gender identity.
Not everyone agrees with the concept of having a gender 'identity', therefore cis is redundant.
I'm not cis, I don't have a gendered aspect to my identity.

Well no, if you don't like the idea of any prefix, it's just women.

Trans and cis are just prefixes.