To think that this is out of order, and there's no shame in being cis

[JellyKnockers]

NC as potentially outing.

DD is 17 and gay. She's very active in local LGBT societies and organisations and has campaigned against homophobic bullying in her school. Today she received this email from one of the organisations she's involved with, publicising an event for trans writers.

What's wrong with being cis ffs?! DD has herself been on the receiving end of abuse in the past for being 'transphobic', simply because she's challenged the anti cis opinion which she encounters regularly. This despite the fact that she campaigns for equality and has done since she came out aged 14. She's seriously considering giving up the work she does with various groups because of this attitude, which is all too common. She's even received death threats on Twitter because she's 'evil' enough to think that equality should be just that, and everyone should simply respect everyone else.

I'm livid, she's livid, are we BU?

ego transsexuals and men.

theycallme

This is where you are the polar opposite to me. Man is a biological man. Gender is important in our society, as a way of suppressing women, gay people, men, everyone, IMO. It makes us conform to what society says we should be and that is harmful. This: it is irrelevant what social gender a man has. is my POV. I have a bisexual male friend who mostly conforms to gender norms in terms of dress but secretly loves dresses and pretty things. He feels he cannot wear such things because society will mock him. I accept that he just like that sort of clothing, whereas I, a woman, do not. That is harmful IMO. He should be able to wear a pretty dress as easily as I can wear trousers IMO.

But I must say it is refreshing to be able to have a civilised conversation about these things, as opposed to the hysteria you find on other forums

I don't think the issue is any group having a safe space. It's about whether there is a need to mock any other group.

To answer the OP, no, there's nothing wrong in being cis just like there's nothing wrong with being trans or neither.

Having been away from MN for some months now, I'm curious as to whether MNetters are driving all the sudden trans threads or whether there's some outside influence coming to bear.

Men and transwomen Ego.

So, let me get this right. cis means being born female and straight? Am I right?

I was born a woman.
I'm Straight.
I like being a woman and I like being straight.
Guess what - I don't feel in the least bit ashamed either!

I expect calling people by some crappy, made-up word makes some people feel special.
I think it's laughable really.

Oh I didn't see the image before, now the thread makes sense! I agree that using 'cis' as an insult is a bit immature and unkind. FWIW I'm very comfortable with describing myself as cis, and have no problem referring to transwomen as women, and transmen as men. Doesn't bother me how people refer to themselves in the slightest and I will happily adopt whatever language they like.

blisstory it's been in the news. I think it was Tara Hudson and Caitlin Jenner which started most of the threads off.

Right your mam doesn't have to accept any particular gender norm. Gender norms change over time. But the fact that she considers herself a mam and presumably prefers the pronoun she suggest she identifies as a woman.

Yes she identifies as a (biological) woman according to her sex. No she doesn't have to identify with gender norms, but she does due to those gender norms having been so ingrained in her. I identify as a biological woman, and reject those norms, because I see them as harmful. I don't think any less of her because she drinks halts not pints, I get why she does, but I will not be constrained to those norms and will drink halfs, pints, shorts or whatever as I see fit and be damned what anyone thinks of it. Because why should I drink halfs due to society telling me that it is not lady like to do differently?

It doesn't mean that though violets. Cis means born woman and identifies as a woman as well. You could be a gay cis woman if you accept the use of cis.

I read that 80% of trans women retain a penis through choice.

Still not sure if I'm missing something on the men v transwomen/transsexuals thing.

is there a need for a word (like gay / straight, NT) to describe someone who is not trans

No

"Cis women" (or cis men) is just a way of specifying "women who are not trans", while acknowledging that women who are trans still fall into the category of "women"

What a load of ridiculous tosh.

A woman is a woman

Who thinks up all these stupid labels anyway.

Hmm I definitely agree that people should be able to "transgress" traditional gender norms (my dh cross dresses on occasion so I'm right behind you on that point) and generally pick their own identity. I also agree that gender has been used as a tool to oppress women. But I don't know if rejecting gender is the answer - how could that even be possible? I think even people like your friend and my DH aren't rejecting gender, they're playing with it maybe? And personally there are lots of aspects of femininity that have nothing to do with my biological womanhood but which I quite like. Idk, it's a tough issue. But I do feel that trans people are definitely not in danger of oppressing the rest of us anytime soon.

So, let me get this right. cis means being born female and straight? Am I right?

No. You can be gay/bi/hetero and be labelled cis. It means you are born a sex and identify with the gender norms being that sex entails. Which is why I reject the term because I do not identify with those gender norms but still see myself as a woman.

Okay.
On the first page someone mentioned it means born female and heterosexual.
So that's not right.

Ok, that's clarified.

But, I'm a still a woman and refuse to be called some stupid made-up term, just to make other groups of 'women' feel better about themselves.

Hmm I definitely agree that people should be able to "transgress" traditional gender norms (my dh cross dresses on occasion so I'm right behind you on that point) and generally pick their own identity. I also agree that gender has been used as a tool to oppress women. But I don't know if rejecting gender is the answer - how could that even be possible? I think even people like your friend and my DH aren't rejecting gender, they're playing with it maybe? And personally there are lots of aspects of femininity that have nothing to do with my biological womanhood but which I quite like.

I think that's where we differ. I don't see that labelling thing feminine (such as dresses/dolls/pink, for example) or masculine (such as trousers/football/blue) should be something we do. A genuine question, what do you consider feminine that is not linked to your biological sex? (I don't want this to come across as defensive/aggressive, I really am interested) as this is the crux of the question. When people who consider themselves trans*, I can accept they feel that way due feeling different to what society says they should feel, but I'm interested in what they mean by that.

As I said, it is refreshing to see a different POV discussed in a rational way

But it doesn't make seeeense!!

Trans people feel they were born in the wrong body, they are deeply unhappy with having to live as the wrong gender, they might even say they suffer from examples of rampant cissexism such as being made to feel uncomfortable in nail bars. So being trans, according to trans people, is innate, something they are born with, not a choice.

So, 'be there or be cis' doesn't work as an insult - that conflates being 'cis' with being 'square'. A choice.

Life remains too short.

Jello, I don't think that rejecting gender means rejecting gender norms. It means rejecting the concept that gender is an internal quality that is innate and immutable and present in people at birth. Some trans orthodoxy holds that people have a sex and a gender, or sometimes just a gender, and that it is simply chance whether your gender matches your sex. Gender critical/rejecting gender thought states that gende exists but it is a social construct, and that a person's gender identity only exists in as much as their biological sex interplays with social norms to create an artificial sense of gender.

Lots of trans people, like Ego above, have a more sex based understanding of being trans, without fetishising the socially constructed gender norms and focusing more on the sex dysphoria they experience. That makes far, far more sense than gender based understanding.

What trans people seem utterly unable to accept is that very very few people have a sense of internal 'gender'. Therefore 'cis' is just plain wrong. We are women because we have female biology. There is no need to prefix us with anything

Men who dont hate their penises and feel the need to take hormones are just men. Men who do hate their penises and take hormones are also men; but like to call themselves women, because they believe womanhood is not defined by biology but by 'a feeling of gender'. They are clearly not actually women and so prefix with trans-

I haven't seen any transphobia here on Mumsnet either. No one in any of the numerous threads I have read has said anything that is inciting hatred, bullying or violence.

The thing is, this stuff does have an effect on women's rights. It has an effect on safe spaces, bathrooms, even their rights to breastfeed without predjudice in one breath taking case I read about in America.

The one that got to me was the case about Lila Perry. You know what, I don't much care what she does with her body, I don't much care that she wants to be a woman or dress in mini skirts or be called a woman's name. She should be able to do those things without fear.

But what got to me was that this one persons right was somehow more important than the 200 girls who didn't want a seventeen year old male bodied person in their changing rooms. They weren't listened to, nor were their views taken into account at all. Some of those girls were fourteen, can you imagine being fourteen and being confronted with a naked male? I wouldn't want my fourteen year old seeing a naked male, however they perceived themselves to be. Shouldn't they have had a choice?

Sorry I meant to say - I reject the concept of gender as an entity outside of social constructs, but that doesn't mean I don't want to have long hair or wear dresses with flowers on. I like some aspects of feminine gender norms, but hate others (high heels, fake nails for example)
It's fine to acknowledge the bits of gender that you like and enjoy, whilst also knowing that it says precisely zero about who you are as a human being.

I don't think that rejecting gender means rejecting gender norms. It means rejecting the concept that gender is an internal quality that is innate and immutable and present in people at birth

Thank you, Obsidian, I've been grasping to say this and failing