Cis as a slur

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

I am sick to the back teeth of being called a cis woman or just cis. I don’t need a prefix.

Is there anyway we can campaign for this to become some kind of slur? It is so othering, incredibly demeaning, unnecessary and offensive.

So any regular mn-type woman who says "well I don't believe I have an internal gender identity so I must be agender (and therefore included as trans)" just gets called a terf.

They're going to call me that anyway. I don't have a gender. I'm not cis so I must be agender.

PLEASE STOP co-opting, appropriating (weaponising) PoC and the disabled into your specious arguments. We don’t fucking appreciate it at all.

This, to the moon and back.

"cisgendered" isn't in my dictionary. I've just looked. I like my old dictionary.

cis is defined as "being on the side of" so cis woman would be "being on the side of women" - which is ironic, as anyone who uses 'cis' in my experience, is not on the side of women. And wants to re-categorise "woman" into a subset of women - a group which now includes born males.

Transwomen and women is just fine.

“Being on the side of” makes me feel like a bowl of chips.

Disturbinglyorange you're not everyone's mother though, you're allowed to speak to other adults as an equal. It's fine to be assertive, polite and firm and to say exactly what you mean in a direct manner without pussyfooting around the subject.

Also if we come up with a compromise we are agreeing that gender is innate even if we come up with another word their ideology still floats to the top.
I do not believe in an innate gender identity, gender is not an axis of oppression gender IS the oppression.
I have a sex, a gender which is inflicted upon me and a personality.

I am a woman. The end.

I do not need or want a prefix to define my gender. I am a woman, I have a female reproductive system and XX chromosome. If I had XY chromosome and male reproductive system, I would be a man. Sorry to be so blunt but it really is that simple.

@Yambabe Just started another thread about the definition of woman on wiki now including gender en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman
I know wiki isn’t exactly an authoritative source, but this is winding me up now...

Presumably the wiki could be edited along the lines of adding after the gender definintion something along the lines of 'although this is strongly disputed by certain feminist thinkers' with links to Jermaine Greer, or whoever else is authoritative on this. Any suggestions for good citations?

Interesting. Check out the history of that page:

The wiki entry had that line removed yesterday, with the comment:

"With no citation or definition talks about people of the male sex, who are, according to any objective and biological definition, and also common speech, men, being women. No citation. Furthermore, refers to 'intersex and transgender conditions'. These are not comprable. Intersex people have conditions affecting normal sexual development, trans-identified males are sexually normal men who 'feel they are women'. There is no evidence for gender identity. Keep ideology out of encyclopaedias.)"

6 minutes later it was restored. So the TRAs are all over this.

We are literally watching an Orwellian 1984 unfold in front of our eyes.

Only 5% wiki editors are female.

Isn’t that interesting, do you think it’s because women are less likely to think themselves experts?

How do you edit Wikipedia?

I dunno, I'm not one of the 5%, just looking at it now....

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ/Editing#How_do_I_edit_a_page?

Sorry 9 per cent globally (2011). And yes that's part of the reason. Pesky female socialisation!

hbr.org/2016/06/why-do-so-few-women-edit-wikipedia

So shall we start encouraging women to become wiki editors?

I think so!

I am going to figure out how to edit it, but won't be able to focus on it for a couple of days. If anyone can point me to relevant feminist literature stating clearly why transwomen are not actually women, or can suggest another feminist MN user likely to know, it would be much appreciated. I can't let that stand unchallenged!

Obviously if someone else already knows what they're doing and can do it sooner, please do!

There is a massive issue around sexism, harrasment and sex bias on Wikipedia:

www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/10/how-wikipedia-is-hostile-to-women/411619/

More women editors is a great idea, but you may have to be prepared for tactics as outlined in the above article.

Maybe we should start a thread about women and wiki? It’s a big issue and I think it’s one that needs to be tackled outside the idea of the self ID/trans discussion.

Well, if some women embrace the term they're welcome to use it to describe themselves. Meanwhile, the rest of us are free to reject it.

Having done so, we've requested that it not be used here. Have you seen those requests, crispbutty, and do you intend to start honoring them?

The wiki peeps constantly try to encourage women to join.
You end up arguing constantly with men over everything you add or correct.
Misogynist MRAs colonized Wikipedia years ago and police the Feminist pages, sex and gender pages, relentlessly.
I lasted about three months before I decided I no longer cared about an org that had become so biased it could no longer even be used for the most basic biography info.

Jeez - I am still willing to give it a go. I shall await my status as a feminazi. I've never been one of those before...

some Dutch courage for you flowers!

That's a shocking article about Wiki.