Help me explain to the hard of thinking why the word 'cis' should not be in our public facing document

Cis isn't widely understood. A large subsection of those women who do understand it find it insulting.

I go to a menopause clinic that has a statement on its website to the effect that they use the word women throughout but acknowledge this includes trans men, some non binary people etc

Would that work on your document?

Watching with interest as this is one I came across recently in my workplace - fortunately not directly so didn’t have to deal with it but I suspect it will crop up again.

Nah. I went straight to eye roll.

Try saying cis is a minefield because it makes assumptions, often stereotyped ones, as to how people identify. And unless you can know for sure that all the people classified as cis happily id as cis then the organisation could be misgendering them and that would be literal violence. Or something.

I ordered the categories in that order because I think basically everyone will spend time in each category in that order. We all started off not knowing about it, then (if briefly) thinking ok I'll be kind, then eventually pretty much everyone will reach Category Eyeroll

People fall into three categories:

• they have not heard of gender ideology. They are faintly bewildered and put off by a business using the jargon.

• they have heard of gender ideology and agree with it. They are happy to be called cis (or trans, nb etc).

• they have heard of gender ideology and think it's nonsensical and oppressive to women and girls, and they eye roll about it and avoid businesses who promote it.

Categories 1 and 3 comprise the majority of society. Using cis in a document will put off those categories of people.

Its not a 'fact' that there are cis people. Its an unevidenced idea. Its a belief, like any other belief.

Your company should not be describing people in terms they do not use to describe themselves and which they reject when applied to themselves.

I'd suggest they consider risks to the brand, if it's a commercial organisation.

The word/idea of 'cis' comes from a highly contested and partisan political argument, and any brand with any sense would stay well away from such inflammatory language.

If I was in the group of women in your workplace being called Cis I would be furious. The word puts my back up no matter where I hear or read it. As does the assumption of having a gender identity at all.

Using cis tells me you subscribe to an ideology that prioritises men's feelings over women's and helps erode their rights to safe spaces and unfairly disadvantages them in sports.

And that's a hard no from me.

Most definitely not ‘on the Wrong Side of History’. Truth has a way of doing that!

yeah that's me. As soon as I see 'cis' I lose all interest.

There is a substantial section of society thatd see something like the word cis in a document and immediately think "oh ffs more silly nonsense" and take our business elsewhere.

We may be on the Wrong Side of History (I don't think we are) but we have a lot of spending capacity and we'll take it elsewhere and roll our eyes too.

This is what I'd tell your colleagues

Because ‘cis’ is a made up word, made up by people who are trying to push a fiction - that sex is not real. It’s a language issue. So…

We need to reclaim language.

Every time we use fabricated terms like ‘cisgender’, transgender,’ ‘gender identity,’ or ‘correct pronoun usage,’ we reinforce the notion of people existing outside the boundaries of our species’ biological sex - which is wrong.

“My understanding is that the cis prefix relates to people whose gender identity ‘matches’ their biological sex. But it presupposes a belief in something called gender identity which entirely unfounded in science or fact and is based on reductive and unhelpful stereotypes. It is better practice to keep to what is universally known and factual ie. that there are men and women.”

They won't listen to you if you try and explain why it's wrong in a logical and inclusive sense. Because they're convinced they're on the Right Side of History or whatever.

The only angle they'd listen to is that they'd put off customers/clients. Because many people don't believe in or agree with this ideology and it'll put them off.

All us bigotty types, and we are in large numbers.

Point them towards poll findings and stats etc.

For example like how Bud Lite plunged their share price when they sponsored Dylan Mulvaney.

Because it is utter bollocks nonsense. HTH 😁

Not everyone understands what 'cis' means, my mother would not know what it ment and assume that it did not apply to her.
the Census data has proved that beyond doubt and women who's first language is not English and many others may struggle to understand it.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/05f7ca79-be9f-47ec-9e82-7e6bf41bf863?shareToken=9879f52b6564237d8918ba035cd22c89

Also we have moved to a 'post Cass' era and it's going out of fasion.

Lordy.

I am so sorry for you OP but your user name and the opening post made me laugh.

The irony with this whole thing is that it started with 'I don't want to be a transwoman, call me a woman' . And yet 'I don't want to be a cis woman, call me a woman' is rejected. Double standards?

https://genderapostates.com/cissexism-and-you/
This is written by a transwoman, against the use of the term 'cis'.

"The Orwellian use of ‘cis’ would be astonishing, if it were new, but naming women is an age old trick. Transgenderists are simply following the tricks of their fathers. Following transgenderist logic, Transwomen are women. Female people are “ciswomen.” Therefore, the only “women” who have the right to call themselves women are transwomen. Through these language games transwomen further the othering of women. They define womanhood, just as men have done for centuries before them. It is not the place of transwomen, or men, to define what woman is." (my bolding)

The whole piece is interesting, but that particular paragraph helped me to see why 'ciswomen' made me uncomfortable.

"If someone refers to you as ‘cis,’ if someone insists you label yourself as such, think about what they are asking. Think about how they are trying to define you. You do not have to bear a label, because transwomen are uncomfortable with themselves. You do not have to wear an identity someone else has handed you."

The point of someone else labelling you - I've seen that mentioned many times over the years. Why are transwomen allowed to reject how anyone else labels them, but women are not? Hypocrisy!

Are men ever referred to as cis?

I'd say something like "Cis women means female people who identify as women. Do you mean that, or do you just mean female people in general? Plenty of female people aren't cis, I mean I'm not for a start" and give a big friendly smile