Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To despise being called ‘cis’?

999 replies

Ostryga · 07/11/2021 19:50

I’m not ‘cis’. I’m not ‘cisgendered’. I’m literally a woman. I’ve just read a guardian article that calls women seeking IVF cisgendered.

Why????

OP posts:
Whatiswrongwithmyknee · 07/11/2021 23:54

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@ScrollingLeaves yes, I think that’s what they are referring to. But by using the word ‘cisgendered’ they are presumably trying to avoid any confusion from people who may not believe the word ‘heterosexual’ to refer to opposite sex attracted people (instead believing it can refer to opposite gender attracted people).

@TheKeatingFive

Why do you have a problem with that? You’re taking it weirdly personally. Trans men aren’t rejecting females, they are embracing males. Why does it matter at all to you what they do? You might not understand it (I must confess I don’t myself) but you don’t need to get involved.

You don’t believe that men can give birth because you only determine male and female in terms of sex (presumably a mix of genitalia, hormones and chromosomes). Ok, that’s your belief system. Is anyone really trying to force you to believe otherwise? I mean, ignoring the gutter snakes on twitter and the like.

I don’t know how to define gender. I know I am more than just the sum of my body parts, and I know that my identity and beliefs and the way I exist in the world is a combination of my nature and nurture. I don’t know if I believe in innate differences between the sexes because I don’t know how to extricate the millennia of social conditioning from my loved experience. Do I believe a person who has had a lifetime of living as a woman will see the world in the same way as someone who has just started living that way? Probably not. But then, how do I see a middle aged woman or a teenage girl? Is one less of a woman than the other? Or are they both on a spectrum? And if the latter, then can’t we make room on the spectrum for trans women?

FWIW I think the way certain people have been treated with regard their beliefs about it being impossible to change sex is horrific. But I just can’t bring myself to get upset about a term like cis.

Cis woman and woman are not mutually exclusive. Would I call myself cis? No, I can’t imagine a scenario where I would ever need to. But I wouldn’t be offended if someone felt it was a helpful clarification to describe me thus.[/quote]
The only reliable commonality between a teenager female and a middle aged female in your example is biology. Hence the stupidity of trying to argue it is otherwise. Beyond biology I have nothing in common with most women. I therefore can't have more in common with a man who identifies as a woman than a woman who identifies as a man. As ever you we'd to provide definitions of what woman or man mean in your view in order for this conversation to get off the starting block.

foxgoosefinch · 07/11/2021 23:56

You don’t believe that men can give birth because you only determine male and female in terms of sex (presumably a mix of genitalia, hormones and chromosomes). Ok, that’s your belief system. Is anyone really trying to force you to believe otherwise? I mean, ignoring the gutter snakes on twitter and the like.

Like Kathleen Stock, I would almost certainly be harassed and bullied out of my job if I was to express this view. Lots of women in a fair few sectors of work have been and would be. Isn’t that being forced on me?

If I said “I don’t believe in Jesus” I doubt an employer would allow other employees or random members of the public to harass and bully me, picket my office and hold a protest outside my workplace as well as slander me all over the internet and send death threats. However, if I said “I don’t believe men can become women”, I’d run the very real risk of it being made impossible for me to remain in my job.

You can’t acknowledge in the same post that some women have been treated very badly but also claim that no-one’s enforcing this.

Lovelyricepudding · 07/11/2021 23:57

You don’t believe that men can give birth because you only determine male and female in terms of sex

Assuming them you don't belief male and female relate to sex, what words would you use to refer to sex? How would you identify people of each sex without reducing them to the collection of body parts that you say you are more than?

scarpa · 07/11/2021 23:59

@Lovelyricepudding

the BBC this week literally used a rapist as a source for their article about trans people

As a source of the phrase 'cotter ceiling' but yeah keep ignoring the fact that the article was about lesbians being raped and sexually coerced.

I... literally did not ignore that?

I just pointed out that it's not just trans allies throwing around death threats on the internet and it's disingenuous to suggest that it is in a week where someone called for the extermination of trans people having been platformed by the BBC.

Whatiswrongwithmyknee · 08/11/2021 00:01

At the end of the day it's very simple : when you call someone cis without knowing if they are happy with that, you are defining their identity for them. This seems to be a point of contention for trans people when it's done to them. When it's done to millions of women though, it's supposedly OK. If anyone can't see the problem with that them shame on them.

thatonehasalittlecar · 08/11/2021 00:04

@Lovelyricepudding

Your comprehension is terrible. I was discussing the other poster’s belief that male & female only involve sex. The rest of your post is pointless because you made an incorrect assumption.

pheonixrebirth · 08/11/2021 00:04

@Ostryga

I find being called cis incredibly offensive, It enrages me and I’m not 100% sure why yet.

It’s just so unnecessary. The only word needed for my sex is woman. I’m happy to call anyone whatever they want or need. But why am I suddenly gaining a new term for my sex without my consent 😳

Because as women we are being sidelined to appease the politically correct. Ciswomen- know your place🤦‍♀️ I don't know who decides this crap, and I struggle to accuse the trans community because I know some people in the LGBTQ community and they are of the opinion that women are women and trans women are trans women.
There seems to be a middle man here somewhere that is really fucking this up! WOMEN and TRANS WOMEN need to come together to sort through this mess!
Enough4me · 08/11/2021 00:11

For the wider public who may not know what all the fuss is about, I expect this exchange probably takes place...
Q. Are you a cis or a trans woman?
A. Oh no, I haven't had any operations.

It's what I'll say if asked, and will ask if adult human female is still known as woman.

ScrollingLeaves · 08/11/2021 00:11

“Scarpa
where someone called for the extermination of trans people having been platformed by the BBC“

Please would you post a quote from the article saying that? I read it and did not see that part.

thatonehasalittlecar · 08/11/2021 00:12

@TheKeatingFive

So how do you define gender? If you know the answer, why not educate us imbeciles?

And why is it sinister that a trans man may want to have a family? I’ve not watched the seahorse film, so I have no idea why the guy wanted to give birth, but I presume he had a really fucking good reason and it was a massively difficult thing for him to go through. You’re seeing this as a massive attack on your own existence and I just don’t.

@foxgoosefinch

Are the people hounding others out of jobs because of their views on sex utterly reprehensible? Yes. They are complete fuckers. No one should be treated like this and I think the university should have protected her and upheld her right to her beliefs. But there is a subtle difference - these idiots are not trying to change her belief, they are trying to make those beliefs socially unacceptable. I don’t agree with what they are doing and I think they are harmful and hateful, but I don’t think they are trying to win minds.

TheKeatingFive · 08/11/2021 00:20

So how do you define gender? If you know the answer, why not educate us imbeciles?

I don't think there is such a thing as innate gender. What we understand as gender is an array of societal stereotypes that shift and change with time. There are any number of different ways to be male and female.

And why is it sinister that a trans man may want to have a family?

That's not what I said at all. Your own reading comprehension isn't so hot, so perhaps hold off criticising other posters. What's sinister is the move to decouple the functions of women's bodies from being biologically women

Katypyee · 08/11/2021 00:22

You can still be CIS and a woman. Using CIS is no big deal to who you are.

Cis-gender literally relates to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender corresponds with their birth sex. So you are female at birth and your personal identity is female. So for you, both align. The very definition of cis.

I honestly do not understand why so many MN'ers get their knickers in a twist over this.

skintasabint · 08/11/2021 00:22

I'm a woman. I'm not CIS.
I do not care if that offends anyone, I'm not on this planet to tiptoe around other peoples feelings.

I refuse point blank to allow others to define who I am.

Enough4me · 08/11/2021 00:23

Biology matters.
Children's best interests come first before parents 'feelings' and none should be told they came into being through an immaculate conception or similar story.

foxgoosefinch · 08/11/2021 00:24

I think if a group of people seek to make it impossible to articulate a particular belief or make it socially unacceptable, then they are trying to force that belief on everyone else, no? Otherwise it’s just sophistry and quibbling - a bit like saying that Kim Jong Un doesn’t actually force you to believe in the regime’s views — just as long as you never articulate your beliefs, or speak then aloud to anyone, and you make sure to act in every possible way like you believe in the regime’s opinion…

skintasabint · 08/11/2021 00:24

@Katypyee it's no big deal to you. Please don't tell others how to feel. We all have our own opinions, that just happens to be yours.

If people want me to call them non-binary etc.. I will, but have the same respect for me and not what I identify as but what and who I am. A woman.

Enough4me · 08/11/2021 00:27

@katypee, then next week we need to add cis human women as we may offend cis dog women as dogs now identify as women ...where do all the possible new labels end in the erasure of women?

We don't need them when women already defines adult human female.

foxgoosefinch · 08/11/2021 00:28

@Katypyee

You can still be CIS and a woman. Using CIS is no big deal to who you are.

Cis-gender literally relates to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender corresponds with their birth sex. So you are female at birth and your personal identity is female. So for you, both align. The very definition of cis.

I honestly do not understand why so many MN'ers get their knickers in a twist over this.

Because it’s made up?

How come using cis is no big deal to who you are, but trans is a matter of literal life and death if not recognised as an identity?

They can’t be both dearly held identities that express an inner truth that must be validated at all costs, and at the same time not be a big deal to who you are. Surely?

TableFlowerss · 08/11/2021 00:28

@foxgoosefinch

I think if a group of people seek to make it impossible to articulate a particular belief or make it socially unacceptable, then they are trying to force that belief on everyone else, no? Otherwise it’s just sophistry and quibbling - a bit like saying that Kim Jong Un doesn’t actually force you to believe in the regime’s views — just as long as you never articulate your beliefs, or speak then aloud to anyone, and you make sure to act in every possible way like you believe in the regime’s opinion…
Can’t disagree with this.
thatonehasalittlecar · 08/11/2021 00:31

@TheKeatingFive

the attempt to decouple what a woman's body does from being a biological woman

In this case the ‘decoupling’ comes from a trans man giving birth, so yes, you are implying that this trans man wanting to have a baby is sinister. I don’t know enough about this case to comment further but I maintain that you are being really nasty in your sneering wink-wink nudge-nudge ‘well if they really want to be a man, why would they want to give birth?’

And as for not believing in innate gender, duh. Isn’t that the point? Trans people identify more strongly with the transient, socially constructed set of stereotypes that doesn’t align with their sex.

God. I thought you were going to wow me with some incredible insight into what gender is, but no. You understand it in the same way everyone else does.

TableFlowerss · 08/11/2021 00:33

@foxgoosefinch

That's interesting with regard to the definition of women - so if they are legally, physically, hormonally, societally (etc) women, I wonder what it is that makes them not really women? Is it just that they were not born so? Or is it the chromosome?

Sex is more than just chromosomes, though that is an essential part of it. The key problem is that none of the treatments actually change real aspects of sex characteristics.

Taking a few oestrogen pills does not make any man hormonally a woman. It merely produces some feminising effects on the body. Women produce a lot more female hormones than oestrogen, and trans women take at most one or very occasionally two of these. A bit of oestrogen doesn’t cancel out a lifetime of male sexual hormones and physical development.

Surgery doesn’t make a man physically a woman. Breast implants and a surgical channel are not actual female organs by any stretch of the imagination. They create largely unconvincing cosmetic facsimiles of female body parts. Shaving off bits of your chin and having electrolysis doesn’t change your muscle mass or male physiology.

Legally documents like the GRC acknowledge that they create a legal fiction, not a fact.

Societally [sic]? Very few trans people “pass”, and everyone around them normally knows it. The pretence of believing so, is usually a kind courtesy. Does it mean a man is societally a woman, if everyone around him pretends he is, but knows perfectly well he is not?

This last point I suspect is the key one for all gender ideology, and points to why it is so authoritarian and totalitarian. It’s often a genderist point to argue that a woman who is someone who is “socially” a woman. But few trans women are socially women in pretty much all respects (some are - I worked with one who did, but she had had full surgery a long time ago). Most trans women now don’t have full surgery and don’t pass as women. So does it really count to be “socially” a woman if everyone is just pretending? Presumably not, so we must all be made to believe.

The rage of gender activists seems to be especially targeted at anyone who shows they don’t really believe, no matter how much they are happy to entertain the pretence (look at Kathleen Stock, for example).

Any old man on Twitter can be in practice as bigoted as he likes, as long as he goes along with the belief mantras. A woman who is happy to be kind and tolerant and supportive of trans people, but who doesn’t pretend to believe in the fiction, is absolutely excoriated. I suspect that this is why - it’s projection of rage at the fiction not really being reality.

You’ve articulated this so well. I didn’t have energy to reply to this thread, but this sums it up.
Lovelyricepudding · 08/11/2021 00:33

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@Lovelyricepudding

Your comprehension is terrible. I was discussing the other poster’s belief that male & female only involve sex. The rest of your post is pointless because you made an incorrect assumption.[/quote]
My comprehension is fine. So I ask again, what word do you use to describe sex if male and female do not refer only to sex? What would do you use identify mammals that gestation young without having to refer to them as 'mammals that gestation young' if in your view males (men/bulls/rams/toms/boars/bucks) can give birth?

Blibbyblobby · 08/11/2021 00:35

@scarpa

Nobody ever accuses trans men of being trans for nefarious purposes. Nobody spends entire threads implying trans men have a deviant sexual fetish. So I assume by that measure people are largely happy to assume that, whether or not they understand it or even think it's 'right', trans men aren't acting maliciously. Yet almost every thread I see on here descends into assuming all trans women are fetishists, trying to gain access to female spaces for nefarious purposes, etc.

I know you can't entirely extract the social power dynamic from anything and I know the power dynamic between male bodied and female bodied people might be a consideration for some bad faith actors using this as a cover, in a way that isn't possible for trans men because patriarchy.

But I find it wild that the starting assumption about 'motive' is so different.

Why would it be wild? Paraphilias are far more common in male people than female. 99% of sexual assaults are committed by male people. Male people commit (and suffer) violence more often than female people. The proportion of trans women who are are mature adult males is greater than the proportion of trans men who are mature adult females. A trans women in a woman's space knows (even if she doesn't want to know) that she has a physical advantage over the female people in that space. A trans man in a man's space knows that the male people in that space have a physical advantage over him.

And that's before we get into the socialisation that trains female people to smile and accommodate males (of any gender) who demand their attention, space and sometime bodies rather than risk their anger, and the complementing socialisation of males to expect that as their due and feel righteous anger when those expectations are not met.

With that cultural context, I find it wild that anyone would expect trans men not to exhibit different motives and behaviours in male-only spaces to trans women in female-only spaces.

And it is unavoidably true that the replacement of "woman" as a word with gender neutral or strictly biological equivalents in public discourse is more common than the equivalent treatment of the word "man" and failure to do so more often targeted.

To be clear, I don't doubt that many trans women do genuinely believe in their identity as a woman. I do not think every trans woman is a bad actor. But neither do I accept that a male's self-image as a woman gives them the right to redefine womanhood for every woman just to accommodate that self-image. I do not accept males forcing their own definition of womanhood over the voices of the female people who are saying "no, this is not what being a woman is like, there are consequences to our sex, good and bad, that matter, and it's not ok to reduce our lived experience of womanhood to just the subset of factors that can be achieved by a male as well".

So I'd be happy to find a way to accommodate trans women socially, but only in parallel with supporting the rights of female people to define themselves, maintain female-only spaces, opportunities and provisions and speak in their own interests as a valid political group.

Bortles · 08/11/2021 00:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

scarpa · 08/11/2021 00:38

@ScrollingLeaves

“Scarpa where someone called for the extermination of trans people having been platformed by the BBC“

Please would you post a quote from the article saying that? I read it and did not see that part.

Apologies - my wording isn't clear there, I was referring to an article she published on her own blog (which has since been removed, probably because it's got incitement to violence all over it and is - regardless of your views - utterly fucking deranged.)

If you search Lily Cade on Twitter you'll see screenshots of the piece. Really wild stuff. The BBC obviously couldn't have known she was going to publish an Elliot Rodgers style manifesto after their article went live, but they also failed to acknowledge her having previously had to apologise to women she sexually assaulted (which, given the article's topic, was a dramatic editorial oversight/choice). She was already clearly a questionable choice of contributor, and as soon as she gained coverage via the BBC, she fired up her blog again and published a genuinely horrifying piece off the back of the publicity. They didn't quote a single trans woman in the piece - despite a trans woman on twitter saying she'd been interviewed, they didn't use her contribution - but they did publish the contribution of a sexual predator who calls for the lynching of trans women. Surely there are better, more responsible sources.

Swipe left for the next trending thread