I wholly reject the term cis woman

[UglyCathKidstonBag]

I wholly reject the term cis woman (or anything approximating it, be that ciswoman, cis-woman, cisgender etc.).

I do not need a qualifier or prefix to my womanhood.

Using that prefix to describe me is an insulating act of misogyny.

I do not identify with gender. I believe gender exists as a hierarchical social construct to force us into not only stereotypes but submission.

Anyone who uses the term “cis” to describe me is discriminating against my biology.

I will push back against the use of it until the day I die. I will write to newspapers, TV channels and other outlets telling them exactly why it is offensive each and every time I see it used. I will report its use as hate speech and discrimination each time I see it used.

I wholly reject the term cis woman. I am a woman.

Isn't it one of the banned words on here?

This is about fighting back against general use. Talking about rejecting something is not the same as applying it to someone as an insult or in spite.

This is a term now being used in media to talk about women who have in no way agreed to it being applied to them.
Women as a group deserve to discuss rejecting it and indeed how to fight back against the fast slide toward it being applied to all women in the media and public spaces.

YY OP. I reject it too.

I also reject the label that is forced on me.

Do not call me cis.

Hear, hear!

Isn't it one of the banned words on here?

No, it's no more banned than the words 'he' or 'she'. It can be discussed, and if anyone chooses to apply it to themselves that's their right. What isn't allowed is applying it to others who reject it. Which includes me. I'm a woman, a female - no qualifier necessary.

Totally agree!

It started as a slur and is completely pointless. I will never ever accept cis as anything but

No I agree with you OP and I'm very happy it can't be used on here to describe woman.

I don't come across it IRL but challenge it if I read it. Fastest way to get a load of abuse bizarrely, usually from dudes.

Agree. I am not an isomer.

I cannot describe how furious this cis-crap bollocks makes me. I utterly refuse to be described as a sub-set of the group "women". There is no sub-set (well, yes there are. Thin women, tall women et cetera) BUT THERE ARE NO MEN IN IT so they can fuck off and take it with them. GRRRRRR!

Me too. Publicly. Don't care if this outs me.....

twitter.com/Yambabe64/status/1018986158800371712

I don't come across it IRL

I’ve started coming across it more and more IRL. During term time we have a lot of students (mostly 19-25) working with us and they have used it several times. They have had a dressing down from their training team but they keep pushing back against it even when it is explained that using unnecessary qualifiers is dangerous in our working environment.

There is only one kind of woman, and that is an adult human female.
I do not have a gender identity. I have always actively rejected the notion of gender, even when I was too young to know it existed as a concept or what it meant. There is nothing about me that aligns or misaligns with my biology. I have a body that dictates what people think of me, what I should do and how I should behave. That isn’t my problem, it’s theirs. The only time my brain makes me aware of my femaleness is when my body is doing something that only females do, or when I’m being treated like shit because I’m a woman, or when my opportunities are limited because women can’t do that, or when I perceive a situation to be dangerous because my female body makes me vulnerable. If having a gender that matches my biology means I should embrace all that externally imposed bullshit then it can fuck right off.
Gender can fuck off, and so can cis.

I dont know how I'll react yet when I hear it. It's seriously offensive but I'm guessing that's the whole point to put woman 'back in their place as lesser beings'?

The whole thing boggles my head tbh.

So given that WE reject it - and I believe most other people - what do we do to change this? Actually change it.... Yes speaking up is enough but it needs more than that? Or does it?

And reflecting further.... I have been trying to work out the difference between my being unhappy with cis and quite happy to currently use "straight" in relationship to gay.....

I suspect it is as simple that the only time I define (or am defined) as straight it is directly relevant, as in about my sexuality or theirs ... but wonder what others think

So given that WE reject it - and I believe most other people - what do we do to change this? Actually change it.... Yes speaking up is enough but it needs more than that? Or does it?

I think we need to reject it en masse. We need threads like this with members of MN standing up saying they reject it too. It need to be a collective.

We need to all contact newspapers, magazines, TV stations, radio stations, websites etc., when we see it used and tell them it is wrong.

We need someone clever to come up a baseline statement, that covers how offensive and discriminatory it is in a succinct paragraph which we can individually adapt per situation.

The media didn’t pick this up over night, they picked it up because they were harangued and lobbied. We need to use the same tactics.

I WHOLLY REJECT THE TERM “CIS WOMAN”

Reflecting on cis and how different it is to "straight" which I am happy to use where appropriate in relation to gay/lesbian....

is it because it is just about sexuality and not used more widely, i.e. only relevant in specific quite-limited scenarios.... or?

UglyCathKidstonBag
I think the vast majority of women agree.

Most women I've spoken to weren't aware of it and then rejected it.
The strongest reaction to the imposition of this descriptor though came from the men I spoke to!

recent thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3290927-AIBU-to-say-that-I-am-a-woman-not-a-non-man-non-trans-woman-or-cis-women

Me too - I wholly reject it, because I need no qualifier to my status as a woman.

From my understanding the use of the word "cis" describes what you're not. As in not trans. But heterosexual and homosexual describe who you are attracted to so its what you are.

Amen.

Lesbian/gay/straight are only used when it’s relevant to make a distinction, like black/white/Asian. It would be considered incredibly rude, and possibly racist, to refer to that black woman when there is no need to identify that person as being black, or homophobic when refer to that lesbian when there is no need for them to be identified as such. Of course all these qualifiers are things that actually, provably exist. A black woman is black because well, you can probably see it, and it’s present in her genetic make up. Homosexuality has been observed throughout the animal kingdom so that obviously exists as well. Where has it been proved that human beings have an innate sense of gender?
Also qualifiers tend to be added to denote what people are, not what they aren’t, and they tend not to be applied to a majority who aren’t. It’s a basic thing about tolerance and acceptance, labels should have a positive and demonstrably necessary use and meaning, and labels shouldn’t be applied if the group of people you’re applying them to object. I mean who would dream of addressing a group of black people as coloureds?
The more I think about it the more it irks me. I used to just shrug it off as being annoying but harmless, thinking about it in this context it doesn’t seem all that harmless.