Pulled up at work for ‘trans views’

Oops sorry I quoted the wrong person due to friday night tired. My apologies.

Not sure why you are quoting me? I totally agree using cis is deeply and utterly fucking offensive. I’m explaining why using it is a gymnastic exercise semantically. I will not allow it to be used in reference to myself as I am not ‘cis’.

I don’t need the lecture as I have not missed the point at all. Thanks

You are completely missing the point. Forcing anyone who hasn't actively chosen to self-describe themselves as such as "cis" is more like saying to someone at a workshop on understanding catholicism "please tell us about your experience of life as a heretic" or expecting atheists to be categorised as "followers of another religion" because the concept of not having a religion isn't accepted. It is absolutely offensive.

If a woman believes in the magic insubstantial concept of gender as a thing that is an intrinsic aspect of herr inner self, which happens to align with cultural concepts of womanhood, she might well choose to call herself "cis" - that's her choice.

If a woman recognises gender as solely as cultural expressions of sexism, and the means by which the patriarchy continues to oppress all women, as well as the means by which those who don't conform to such expectations are punished, then she will not lay claim to any gender, any more than a prisoner would want their chains to be considered a part of their "true self". She is not on the same axis as people who are cis or trans, she has rejected it. Calling her Cis is an insult, and a misgendering.

This is an entire other discussion but briefly not everyone is be comfortable with this use of language around skin colour / race both in terms of the way it's categorised and reducing one to the other. I am personally offended by being expected to identify as either mixed race or white. I would decline to answer the question...

And its not appropriate to expect employees to disclose their ethnicity or other personal information in front of others, whatsoever, especially in the questioners' language. It's important that people aren't expected to disclose sensitive information in the workplace and if they do it's in language that's under their control.

Employment of Cis vs Trans gender is categorising everyone with a gender identity. If you search for a definition you will find “The word cisgender describes a person whose gender identity corresponds to their sex assigned at birth”. Can you genuinely not see that someone who views gender as a social construct that oppresses them does not want to be put in a box of a person whose gender identity corresponds to their sex?

I think you’re missing the point that OP’s employer shouldn’t have been putting someone with a protected characteristic (biological woman) on the spot in a training session and pressing her to describe her experience of having that protected characteristic.

Its unlawful harassment under the EA and is wrong on so many levels, even if they hadn’t described OP as ‘cis’.

Trans essentially means ‘other’ (‘other side’/beyond); why should anyone have to use a descriptor to express that they are the normative counterpart to trans, ie state you are ‘Not Other’? It is fully expressed by NOT using the word ‘trans’.

You could argue that infidel means “not Christian” or “not Muslim” but it’s not a term most atheists would accept.

You could argue that you were using 'cis' to simply mean 'not transgender' if you were talking about 'cis people' vs 'trans people', or 'women who are trans (ie transmen) vs 'women who are cis'.
But activists don't usually use it in that sense. They use it to compare 'cis women' to 'transwomen (ie a subclass of men)'. It only makes sense if you believe TWAW, which the OP doesn't, so she can't be expected to use that vocabulary.

There’s a difference between facts and beliefs surely? Your skin colour is a fact, I’m white so I haven’t experienced racism in the same way as my black colleagues. To say otherwise would be to diminish their experience.

Trans is an ideaology. It’s more akin for asking me my views on heaven. I’m an atheist so it’s not something I believe in and I would push back on religious/ ideological terminology being used as factual during a staff training session.

No. In order to be agender or non-binary you need to believe that gender identity is a thing and that you either swing between them or don't feel any of them fit you.

I, and as far as I'm aware, the op, do not have a gender identity so therefore cannot be agender or non-binary.

This has been covered (multiple times). She doesn't ascribe to gender beliefs and as such does not self identify as having any kind of gender.

Remember, gender is all about self identifying. No one can identify for her.

This!! All day long

With skin colour though, there are many.

There is only one type of woman so cis is superfluous. Just woman is enough.

By adding 'cis' you're implying that there are different types of woman, there aren't. Transwomen are men. @Micaela64

So the op is agender or non binary?

The very concept of cisgender meaning non-trans is BS anyway.

Being cisgender implies two things:

1. that one has a gender,
2. that this gender aligns with their sex.

Well, what about agender people? They don't have a gender.
What about non-binary people? They have a gender that doesn't align on either sex.

So yeah, I would go with: "You don't know that I'm cis." In a perfect world, that would make them realise they've stepped into a minefield.

I'm not going to reiterate the explanations from earlier, but I bet even you don't believe that that is the meaning of cis. And even if "non-trans" was all it meant, it is still the language of GII. To which the OP does not subscribe.

No it doesn't. Cis means you have a gender identity that aligns with your sex. The op does not have a gender identity.

i wouldn’t have thought so because humans objectively have different skin colour saying my skin is brown is just an objective fact. It does not require a subscription to an ideology.

Having to qualify yourself as a woman is predicated on gender ideology. If you don’t subscribe to gender ideology then saying you’re a woman is the only objective statement you can make. Cis is the language of gender ideology, woman is the language of science.

It's a fact that the OP isn't transgender too, which is what the word Cis means. It's not an identity, just a fact of life.

Skin colour, like sex, is an objective fact. The OP is asserting that she is a woman, not denying she is a woman.
She denies having a c*sgender identity and she has told them in effect that she doesn't believe in GII.

What point did you think you were making?

Do you honestly think it would be acceptable to put a black person on the spot in an anti-racism training and pressure them to describe what it’s like to be black so their white colleagues can understand black people better?

In anti racism training do you deny you have a skin colour when they ask for your experiences too and say "I'm only a woman not a white/black/mixed race woman"?

'Thats a rather loaded question. What makes you think I identify with the term cis? I have no interest in getting involved with a gender ideology debate thanks. In future I'd advise you don't raise this issue wity me. It's not appropriate for the workplace'.

Cisoleth acts as a marker of gender ideology and capture.