to think Mumsnet should delete posts in which women are called cis

[violetsarentblue]

I (and I imagine quite a lot of women on here) are fed up with being referred to as cis. I find the term deeply insulting.
I'm a woman and prefer to be addressed as a 'woman', not a cis woman.

I noticed MN are quick to delete posts where transgender people are called 'he' instead of 'she', because that group of people find the term insulting and MN don't want to offend.

Generally we delete posts in which people persistently refuse to refer to people by the pronoun (he/she; him/her) by which they’ve asked to be referred, out of respect for that individual’s wishes.

Please - could we have the same depth of consideration for our wishes?

Thank you.

I doubt many of you will be doing much reporting though, because as far as I have seen the only people mentioning 'cis' are those against it

hahahah exactly. I have learnt all of this malarkey from the MN posters basically

believe it or not, no one in my entire life has referred to me as being CIS- EVER

I was born in the right body for me (although I could do with losing some weight), I get that they feel they were born/trapped in the wrong one and respect it, can they please do the same for me and all those happy with their gender without branding us.

But the problem most of us have with 'cis' is quite explicitly not that we're 'happy with our gender' and feel that that state of affairs is so normal that it needs no special descriptor - it is rather that we feel gender is nonsense and the idea of being 'born in the right body', or otherwise, is therefore also complete nonsense.

Hi there
Thanks for this thread OP
Sarah MN has talked about this here on our thread in Site Stuff - Transgenderism: the MNHQ position.

Here's what she said:

There has been a question raised about whether or not we would delete the term “cis” when applied to posters on threads, on the grounds that some posters feel that being identified as a “ciswoman” rather than a woman is just as offensive as being addressed by the “wrong” pronoun.

We can see where these posters are coming from, so are of a mind to use the same rule of thumb when it comes to the term “cis” as we do for pronouns - i.e. we won’t necessarily delete every use of it, but if it’s applied pointedly to a poster who doesn’t identify as a ciswoman, we would delete that.

With this in mind, please do report any posts which you feel cross the line.

stopfuckingshoutingatme I don't think cis has gained much traction on MN. Yet.

But it has in lots of other places including pretty well all LGB activism and women's rights activism (and worryingly a great deal of academia). Cis is also all over social media, blogs, etc - that is to say all over popular culture and an influence on young people.

Which may all be a joke to you but it isn't funny to people who think that gender causes harm in human society.

Why are you sneering at women who wish to discuss the word cis and the sexual politics behind it?

Coming to a place near you soon?

smashingturnips, I think people like to go on threads and cause mischief for some reason.
Try and derail it maybe? (through boredom)
Who knows.

I'm with Worra in that I couldn't give a toss. Not least because my brain is frazzled trying to get my head around the sheer amount of terms being used/debated about on a gazillion threads lately. So I've given up. I vote for a separate topic so I can hide it in general. Like the feminist ones.

TheOnlyOliviaMumsnet (MNHQ) Wed 18-Nov-15 16:51:24
Hi there
Thanks for this thread OP
Sarah MN has talked about this here

I can only assume you havn't read this thread as it is about women finding CIS offensive,

Good idea Shakey.
Then those who give a toss can discuss it and those who don't give a toss can stay away from the thread.
or is it more fun to go on a thread and say 'I don't give a toss'

www.advocate.com/transgender/2015/07/31/true-meaning-word-cisgender

time.com/3636430/cisgender-definition/

Basically the same article just expanded on in one of the links. My first thought when I heard the term cis was sissification as that was the only similar word I'd heard before recently. Still don't want to be referred to as a cis woman when woman will do just fine.

But I now understand that it is to help trans women to feel more included and apparently the only way to do that is to create more labels to create more room for inclusion - like the creation of homosexual, heterosexual, pansexual ect to help further label our sexual orientation. It gives us a sense of belonging

Op in answer to your question. I agree I am a woman and not any other stupid term that someone wants to call me.
Idiots.

Synyster,
I have read it. But when it first went up, I only noticed the first bit (the part on transgender).
The second part was only noticed later on, by which time lots of people had already commented on this thread.
If people still want to discuss it on here and you don't.
Then Don't.

Well I done find being referred as a cis woman offensive.

I've never heard the term before.

I'm a woman. That's it. I don't see the need for a further label and will not start identifying myself as a Cis woman because it's fucking stupid.

You (general you) can refer to me as whatever the hell you like though. Call me Cis or Bim or Tra or Dep or any other ridiculous made-up-sounding pre-fix if you like. It doesn't particularly bother me.

My first thought when I heard the term cis was sissification as that was the only similar word I'd heard before recently.

THAT is also very, very offensive. Sissification, I mean.

Wtf
Sissification:-

Sissification is used to describe the practice, especially in female dominance, of switching the gender role of a male submissive. It is usually achieved via cross-dressing, where the male is dressed in female attire, ranging from just wearing female undergarments to being fully dressed in very feminine attire, including make-up, hairdress and nail polish. Some males take on tasks, behaviours and roles that are overtly feminine, and adopt female mannerisms and postures in task such as sitting, walking and acting in a feminine manner. This emasculation may be coupled with punishments such as spanking or caning to gain cooperation and heighten submission of submissive male. Begging and pleading to stop the feminization may be part of the fantasy

It's the first I ever heard of it

Actually, afterreading that, I'm convinced now, more than ever - that there is nothing flattering about the term cis.

I don't consider myself to be a 'normal woman', just a woman. It doesn't mean I don't respect transgender women, if I say I'm a woman... it's just what I am.

I am not a cis woman because that is a made up thing.

Fun? No. You've asked a question, I've responded to the topic in hand. And I'm quite sure I'm not the only poster who has expressed a similar opinion.

Why are you sneering at women who wish to discuss the word cis and the sexual politics behind it?

I did not want to come across as sneering- and OP did post in AIBU.....

I am really frustrated at these threads and some of the nastier posts on them, and just some of the nastier comments made- honestly

but I am just so tired now, so will fuck off- and I do listen to the more reasoned posters, honest!

I still don't understand cis. I'm female and happy about it. Is that it?

But the problem most of us have with 'cis' is quite explicitly not that we're 'happy with our gender' and feel that that state of affairs is so normal that it needs no special descriptor - it is rather that we feel gender is nonsense and the idea of being 'born in the right body', or otherwise, is therefore also complete nonsense.

Yeah, but that's not my issue with it, I don't need a new discriptor because I'm happy with female. You have your reasons and I have mine, both valid reasons for not wanting to 'have' to identify as cis.

Yeah, but that's not my issue with it, I don't need a new discriptor because I'm happy with female. You have your reasons and I have mine, both valid reasons for not wanting to 'have' to identify as cis.

That's fair enough. It's just that your post seemed to be a response to SmashingTurnips' posts, but in your post you seem to use sex and gender almost interchangeably and you aren't actually saying what SmashingTurnips is saying at all.

Well, I had never heard of women having violent male criminals (who are actually in prison for assault) put in amongst them, but they have started doing that in the prison service.

I think we need to start paying attention to trojan horses happening in different echelons than the daily grind.