Objections to cis

[cheeseismydownfall]

Really good blog post here by Helen Saxby

notthenewsinbriefs.wordpress.com/2020/07/16/objections-to-cis/

Very clear explanation of why we need to actively reject the cis label. I’ve sent the link to teen DD who uses the term despite the many discussions we’ve had over it.

There is no definition of ‘ciswomen’ in law. ‘Ciswomen’ is not a protected characteristic. Choosing to use the definition ‘cis’ turns ‘woman’ into a two-sex category for which the law cannot deliver single-sex protection. Arguably, that’s the whole point of it. The protected category of sex becomes unworkable, and with it women’s basic rights. Distinct rights for women become impossible if ‘women’ includes ‘men’. If the use of the word ‘cis’ becomes normalised, then as females we will always be yolked to males.

This is a great article but it is gutting to realise the absolute consequences of what has been happening by stealth, in our names.

I am not, nor ever will be cis. I did not fight for women's rights to see them trampled on even more aggressively than in the past. This is a real assault on me and I take that personally

Yes.

Females are not a subset of 'woman'.

I’m a feminist for many reasons but a core reason is because I reject the gender role imposed on me due to my sex. I will never agree to be called cis. Anyone referring to me as cis is imposing an incorrect gender identity on me and I will not let it pass.

Who has decided that if you haven’t gone non-binary or identified as trans that equals identifying with sex aligned gender roles? It’s incredibly othering, assumptive and high handed.

I’m so bloody sick and tired of this. Woman have had to fight to be recognised as people because we are female. Now we have a new bunch telling us what women are when we are still fighting the original lot.

Why is the meaning of woman and what we are allowed to do/be/have/own being dictated to us? AGAIN.

“Nothing about us without us.”It’s more like “nothing about us without everyone but us”.

BaseDrops

👍

Because I don't need to be defined as 'not Trans'. Which is what 'cis' comes from.
Its only use is to mean 'on the opposite side' geographically as in Trans-Penine Railway, cis would mean 'on the other side of the Penines'.
When trans is used as in transform, translate, there is no 'cis-late' or 'cis-form', it's the original form, untransformed, untranslated.
Trans of humans is the new status of someone who was previously untransitioned. It doesn't need a word, it's the default.
So yeah, it's not Trans is the default and 'not Trans' / cis is the other, it's people and Trans people. Cis is total nonsense.

Females are not a subset of 'woman'.

It also makes female a subset of male, as there is not allowed to be any aspect of womanhood that is inaccessible to males. If we try to argue that only ’cis’’ women x, y or z, we will be shut down and accused of transphobia.

This has been my concern, and anger, about the current situation, and I keep saying so:

There is a faction of society trying to fundamentally re-define what it is to be a woman, to be female.

And they want to do it without consulting actual women.

This is erasure.

As WPUK say "Nothing about us, without us."

I object to cis because it implies that I agree with the "social role" of woman, or that if I dont agree with it, that I must not be a woman.

I first understood I didn't really have any concept of gender when someone told me that I would be upset if I were to be misgendered, or if I woke up in a male body. If the first were to happen, I wouldn't care, and if the second did, I'd just roll with it.

Absolutely. Types of women include women and trans men.

That language is obviously designed to confuse, but apparently that's how some women like to be described.

Trans women are a subset of men.

More on the same topic: culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2014/06/20/cisgender-cui-bono/

@Mumoblue

I object to cis because it implies that I agree with the "social role" of woman, or that if I dont agree with it, that I must not be a woman.

I first understood I didn't really have any concept of gender when someone told me that I would be upset if I were to be misgendered, or if I woke up in a male body. If the first were to happen, I wouldn't care, and if the second did, I'd just roll with it.

That second paragraph - YES.

Don’t care about being misgendered.

I do care about my experiences of having my appearance, behaviours and pastimes viewed and found to be wrong because they didn’t fit in the female gender role that I was supposed to comply with. I never signed up for female gender role. That was assigned to me because of my sex.

Thankfully as a 70s baby with a Dad who encouraged me to do “boy stuff” it never ever made me think I’m not a girl. It made me think being a girl is harder than being a boy, you can’t stop me and you are wrong.

I was shocked when I found out that gender identity is supposed to be an abstract feeling not at all based on the actual sex of one's body. If it happens to correlate with the latter, then you are cis and very privileged (more than, say, Caitlyn Jenner), and if it does not, then you are trans or nonbinary and very marginalized and oppressed.

I am quite sure my definition of my gender (identity, if you wish) is very firmly based on the fact that I have a female body and that others treat me a certain way because of that body. But though every person is supposed to be allowed to decide on their own gender identities, this does not extend to me or anyone else who defines their gender on the basis of their sex.

When it is 'people' who menstruate, then clearly my gender identity, based on the female body, is invalidated and I am excluded and so on, but because I am seen as 'cis,' and privileged, none of that matters.

Many seem to think that 'cis' just means 'not-trans' and that it is an ok label to accept, but that is an incorrect interpretation. The cis concept forces you to accept a gender identity not based on sex, and if you don't spot that, you will end up skating on weak ice when it comes to later inclusiveness demands.

I also like Saxby's take.

I was accused of transphobia by an old school friend online literally because I asked not to be called a woman, not a cis woman 🙄

Do you think there will be any protests if GRA reform weakens womens rights further?

Excellent blog. Thanks for the link OP.

Thanks OP

Mumoblue exactly, I think this is how a lot of people come to GC points of view because we don’t have a gender identity. If they changed the legal definition of woman to ‘someone with a womanly gender identity’ 3/4 of us would be left wondering how on earth to identify ourselves now as we don’t relate to that at all.

It makes even more sense when they want to change the definition of ‘woman’, for us to be allowed to continue to differentiate ourselves as biological females. A lot of females are not going to relate to that enforced gender identity and need to be able to say ‘well I’m female because I’m female’.

It’s interesting that it goes against everything TRAs say they stand for to force a gender identity onto another person, yet that’s what they want to do to women.

If the use of the word ‘cis’ becomes normalised, then as females we will always be yolked to males.

Yes.
But the word "yoked" has no "l".

Unless it refers to eggs.

Venn diagram incoming:

Nellodee that's exactly how it is

"Cis" is meant as a term of abuse. If trans woman want to hold a meeting, fine. If Cis women want to hold a meeting, they would be vilified. But the real reason why cis is not a thing for me is that feminine is the gender form of woman, and I do not identify as being feminine. I have qualities that are feminine, masculine, and just plain human. What cisgender should actually mean is the gender that is on the near side of woman, i.e., the feminine gender. So the so called feminine traits, which are by and large social constructs. If they meant women and wanted to use cis, they should have used cis sex. Not that I would find that acceptable.

Once ‘cis’ has done its job of mixing up the sexes into a new gender-determined classification, a much bigger problem becomes clear. The two subsets of women (cis and trans) turn out to be not so equal after all. Cis is being used to posit an axis of oppression which subverts the usual order of things and places females as the oppressors of males: if women come in both cis and trans varieties it’s the cis ones who have the privilege. Cis privilege means that cis people oppress trans people, so it naturally follows that males are the most oppressed of all women. Once that’s established, then it’s clear that female women, with all their privilege, can no longer be allowed to organise alone without their male ‘sisters’. Groups like ‘Sisters not Cisters’ have sprung up to make sure we can never have anything just for ourselves ever again.

When we are lambasted for ‘excluding’, there is no recognition that we are losing something we are entitled to, and often something we rely on. ‘Women-only’ has meant a place of safety or of sanctuary or of healing ever since second wave feminists fought for our rights as women, decades ago.

This. So, so much this.

I'm human, over 18yrs of age, and I'm female. When asked, I say I'm a woman, because that's the name of the biological category of mammals who are human adult females. Not because I like some colours and not others, or because of how I dress, or any other personal preferences or characteristics.

The objective, material reality is that I'm an adult human female. The fact that I don't pretend to be something else, is not a "privilege".

I'm also not going to pretend I don't think the very idea is ridiculous.

How did we even get here! Who where & why ever thought it was acceptable to pretend that men are women.
Biology is a fact and you cannot simply choose to be a different sex, whether or not you've had bits removed, taken hormonal drugs or put on feminine clothes.
This has always been the case and always will be. How on earth did groups lobbying for lies to be accepted as truth ever get this far with supposedly sensible lawmakers?
The mind boggles.