As the whole sex / gender discussion has had so much more public discussion lately, not least because of male athletes in women's sport, and because of JKR, I've found myself having conversations in real life which I've been wanting but have felt unable to have for years now. And in doing so, I've had to articulate my position on what I find objectionable about genderism, why I won't describe myself as 'cis' etc.
I just want to share the explanation that I have found to be most effective in helping people who are new to this discussion to grasp why it's so problematic to feminists.
I think we've adopted too much of the ideology's language, and we talk in terms of the difference between sex and 'gender identitiy'. People assume that gender identity means something true and proven and profound. I find it more helpful to talk in terms of bodies and personalities:
So, I have a body, and I have a personality (all my thoughts and feelings, likes and dislikes, sense of humour and intelligence and aptitudes and weaknesses and attractions and aversions).
My body is female. My personality isn't male or female... It's just a human personality and it's unique to me. Sure, it's been shaped by my experiences and some of those experiences have been related to having a female body. But my personality itself isn't female, because 'female' isn't a type of personality. It's a reproductive sex class; a type of body. When people talk about 'gender identity', they're talking about having a male personality or a female personality, and whether the sex of their personality matches the sex of their body. And if they describe me as 'cis', they're saying I have a female personality to match my female body. I reject that description of myself.
I think back to all of the work and the struggles of feminists before me and I can't accept that we're sliding back into an acceptance that our personalities are either male or female, and we're supposed call that progress. That's the same assumption that was used to justify women not having positions of leadership or even the vote, and men not having caring responsibilities or being allowed to show emotion other than anger. Or that gay men and lesbians weren't 'proper' men and women respectively. It's so sexist and undermining of so much progress to assert that there are male personalities or personality traits and female ones. Calling it 'gender identity' instead of 'personality' doesn't change how regressive and sexist that is.
People who consider themselves non binary are saying that their personalities are neither male nor female, and that that's a condition specific to 'NB' people. But that just puts all the rest of us more firmly in the 'male personality' and 'female personality' boxes that feminist has been trying for hundreds of years to free us all from.
I fully accept and empathise with the fact that other people have different beliefs about their own bodies and personalities and they can describe themselves how they like. But the movement to enshrine in law and in education and in society, this idea that our personalities are male or female, is not something I can support or participate in.
This is the kind of framing that has helped the penny drop for a few people in my life. I would love to know what has worked for others.