#CisIsNotASlur trending on Twitter

Using the prefix 'cis' also involves adopting the belief system that says we have innate gender identities, because it denotes that your gender ID is the same as your 'sex assigned at birth'. I don't believe in innate gender identity, I don't believe that sex is 'assigned' at birth, and I don't believe that what I call 'women' are actually a subset of the category 'women', which subscribers to gender ideology believe includes natal men (transwomen) and natal women ('ciswomen').

So 'woman' describes very nicely both what I am and what my belief system is about gender. 'Cis' is imposing someone else's belief system on me, the same as if you told me I had to start referring to my inner feelings as my 'soul' or describing my hopes as 'prayers'.

Yes. The waffle and nonsense that adults prattle along with on threads like this would be just fine to be left to stand on its own as an example of the illogical position, if it wasn’t being used as justification for the medicalisation of children leaving them with irrevocable harm from hormonal treatments.

The same people like @Millicispud failing to explain gender are also saying that children whose gender is different should be medically affirmed. I stand by my claim that this is the medical scandal of our time.

I don’t understand how enthusiastic genderists are incapable of seeing how the more they explain it on their terms, the less important it looks.

And the more narcissistic and selfish.

Something that always strikes me with this sort of discussion is that when someone tries to define contemporary use of the word gender ie. it’s not sex, it’s not stereotypes, it’s how you choose to express yourself- it becomes apparent to me that gender is superficial, trivial, and in no way justifies making sweeping changes to language, law or medicine. If being trans doesn’t require dysphoria or for the individual to take a medical pathway in order to be trans, then not only does that make gender as unimportant as what hobbies you have or what music you like, it also suggests that only those carefully screened for genuine, crippling dysphoria should receive any medical treatment for it, and the the treatment should also include coming to terms with their sex in order to help them cope with day to day life. It certainly doesn’t put forwards a case for forcing single sex spaces to become mixed or for self ID.
I don’t understand how enthusiastic genderists are incapable of seeing how the more they explain it on their terms, the less important it looks.

Womanly essence sounds to me like a kind of bath oil.
I have no idea what it is and I`m pretty sure it doesnt exist. Its impossible to think rationally and embrace genderism.

What this thread tells me is that I'm beginning to think we're going to win.

YY. It's all such nonsensical special pleading, and if genderists don't come up with some coherent arguments then society is eventually going to come out the other side. With damage done, and probably zero lessons learned.

it is a deep-seated and overwhelming psychological desire to have access to something that others have. Which goes some way towards explaining the rage and frustration when this is thwarted. "Woman" gender identity isn’t “I am”, it’s “I want what she’s having”.

Absolutely. And many women find it rather offensive when one aspect of what is coveted is our oppression.

Trans women are women because thats simply what they are mentally, personally and culturally.

In what sense? What's the difference between an MTF trans person and a man?

I'd understand gender a lot more if it was, generally, masculinity and femininity. But it has been insisted that that's nothing to do with it.

Yes, absolutely @MonsignorMirth. ‘Gender’ was originally a linguistics term, wasn’t it? And in that context, there are usually three options: masculine, feminine and neutral.

I can understand gender being used for humans in that framework. That would make sense because a man could have a feminine gender; ie a male person who behaves/dresses in a ‘feminine’ way. And there would be nothing wrong with that at all. Plenty of men are ‘feminine’, plenty of women are ‘masculine’. Obviously those words are derived from ‘male’ and ‘female’ but since they refer to behaviours/modes of dress/interests, they do not need to be married to sex.

But as you say, the gender cultists tell us that’s not what gender is. But just won’t tell us what it actually is.

The word “woman” has been used as a biological sex label ever since its earliest form appeared in Old English (wifman, ‘wif’ = female + ‘man’ = human being).

Gender ideologists are now trying to co-opt the word to label a social and cultural role, instead of than one half of the sex binary.

My understanding from the posts of Millicispud and others who believe in gender identity is that when “woman” is used as a gender label, what is really meant is:
Woman = anyone who is “allowed” to do things that a biological female is socially and culturally permitted or expected to do.

This often involves “opting in”, e.g. performing femininity, entering single-sex female spaces,. However it can also involve “opting out”, e.g. being exempt from fulfilling masculine stereotypes or social roles, being excluded from association with negative male behaviours such as male violence.

I suspect that when Millicispud and Co. have difficulty articulating exactly what a gender identity is, it’s because they are struggling to explain (or perhaps don’t want to say out loud) that it is a deep-seated and overwhelming psychological desire to have access to something that others have. Which goes some way towards explaining the rage and frustration when this is thwarted. "Woman" gender identity isn’t “I am”, it’s “I want what she’s having”.

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

Trans and cis are just prefixes.

Nope. The only way "cis" would work for that is if "cis woman" meant a biological female person who didn't identify as transgender, and "trans woman" meant a biological female person who did.

But that's not how it is used. It presupposes adherence to what I consider a false belief in gender identity ideology.

Yes Grumpyosaurus. The mayor was enlightening in his ignorance.

But we have a poster who stated they researched their gender identity so should have be able to tell us how and what sources (outside the WHO which doesn’t quite match what that poster is saying) they used.

After all, they are the one calling non-believers a cult.

As I said, Catherina has attempted to educate us in the past.

Still waiting for our gender experts to tell us reliably what genderfuck is
Nolan asked that of the non-binary, er person that he interviewed, but [pronoun] didn't have any sort of coherent answer. IIRC, [pronoun] said it wasn't up to [pronoun] to say what one of them was because er um waffle. Or something.

You could feel Nolan's brain quietly frying inside his skull while all this was going on.

I'd just like to say that I fucking resent having to school my language around an ideology that I think is utter bullshit. It's compelled speech, not something I ever expected in a liberal democracy, but here we are.

Exactly, weebisom. It's worth looking at the questions that they consistently refuse to answer. Not just yesterday but over the years since I've been here.
What is gender?
What is a woman? (Non- circular definition)
How can I find out what my gender is, (when I and society around me have used "woman", "he/she" etc to refer to biological sex our whole lives)?
How can a sex match a gender? What are the supposed "matched" pairs?
Is same-sex orientation perfectly valid or is it bigoted prejudice and/or does it need to be "checked" in case it's bigoted because society?
Should women/ any person with different political or religious beliefs be believed about their sexual experiences and gender identity?
Can "gender" broadly be described as essentially masculinity and femininity? (Which are entirely separate from sex). This last one is, to me, a slightly odd one to not answer. I'd understand gender a lot more if it was, generally, masculinity and femininity. But it has been insisted that that's nothing to do with it.

That's before we get into practicalities like the Staniland question.

Interestingly, there are trans women (not all) who have posted here who agree with what I thought transgender used to be - wanting other people to think you are the opposite sex. They will talk more about femininity/ masculinity, body dysmorphia and the importance of appearances, rather more than basing everything on an indefinable feeling-essence.

Still waiting for our gender experts to tell us reliably what genderfuck is.

And exactly what gender means, since they have done all this research, that isn’t even hinting at stereotypes and a person’s perception of how a gender ‘feels’ deeply held or not.

Link us to the exact research that convince you. The WHO is not convincing at all.

And millicispud talks about ‘wards’, I hope that they very much understand safeguarding for females and what that means. Because no female should be acceptable collateral damage for a male’s ‘needs’.

Cis is a useful prefix for describing spacial relationships, eg chemistry and geography. But it’s impossible to make a spacial relationship between unrelated concepts that are material and objective vs ethereal and subjective. Therefore the cis-trans distinction in social sciences is bollocks.

I’m also using words that are long established, although I permit that their use describing gender is relatively recent. I also concede that rigid isn’t a perfect antonym of amorphous, but that’s perfectly fine, since there should be no diametric opposites in terms of gender.
I also accept that only a minority of people are currently using these words in the manner I am ascribing them, but language is always changing, so that has no bearing on their validity.

Ridiculous as my proposal may seem initially, I think it probably has a lot more internal cohesion than the current definition.

In fact, in my gender world, the default gender is now amorphous, and anyone who strongly perceived themselves as having a set gender are now to be referred to as rigids.

If I were to believe in gender, I would believe that every single person the world was non-binary. Why are some people allowed to call me cis, when I’m sure they would not agree to me imposing my belief that they were non-binary on them?

Interestingly cis is quite a regular prefix in modern French (Cisjordanie, cisalpin). It is used to refer to the other side of something of roughly comparable size / status, not pairs with clear majority/minority relationships.

I'm neither cis nor trans and don't appreciate people telling me how to describe myself.

I’m not cis, I’m not trans. I’m a woman and feminist who doesn’t believe in gender identity which is based on artificial, limiting and oppressive stereotypes. I did my bloody dissertation at university 25 years ago on characters in literature transcending stereotypes and prescribed societal roles within patriarchal society. Could now write the same thing about gender identity!

Cis is reductive and assumptive and also used pejoratively.

This is all so fucking boring but also stupid and damaging.

GREAT!

I was an English language teacher for years, thanks, and have a degree in linguistics.
Still not cis. Still not trans