What's wrong with 'Cisgender'

[ASugar]

As someone who identifies as a cisgender woman and works in sexual health, I am honestly confused as to why so many females (sex term) who identify with being women (gender term) dislike the term Cisgender?

Now I'm not here to tell you what to say, I am genuinely curious.

However, here is my opinion for those who may be interested.

Cisgender just means you are not transgender. That your sex links you your gender and you assign any gender terms (ie. Pronouns, Gender identity, sometimes gender expression but not always, etc). I personally don't like to think that just because I was born with a vagina means I am a woman because I know many men with vaginas and women with penises. Additionally those who don't have a gender identity, then that would mean you wouldn't use women and men as they're gender terms (according to medical professionals). It would make you non binary or agender.

I understand that the term 'Cis' has been used to insult others which for that I am sorry.
My view is that if you can't allow trans women to be accepted in society and identified as women (without the need for 'trans' infront of it constantly) then we should be using cisgender. It is a medical term that professionals such as the NHS recognize. But I understand that is just my opinion.

I probably won't be commenting as I can imagine this will be filled with comments and I don't want to disrespect anyone's views. Just a cisgender woman who wants to understand more...

And as always I would appreciate if you respect my view as I'm going to be respecting all of yours.

How come we've all managed so far without doing it? Is the idea that transwomen will be called transwomen and women will be called ciswomen? How are transwomen better off? The difference is just as obvious, isn't it? I'm a vegan. Should I demand the 95% of the population who aren't to refer to themselves as non-vegan and start playing up if they don't want that label? Does it change anything for me if the non-vegans simply don't label themselves? Do I feel disrespected? How do you think that'd go down if everyone had to identity as non-vegan. I "feel" more vegan than "womanly". I just AM a woman, being vegan is actually a bigger part of my identity that my clothes, underwear, lipstick, head-tilting, tampon-wearing or whatever it is being a woman is supposed to feel like... because it représents a choice I've made, my moral code... and I have to think about it three times a day. I demand you ALL call yourselves non-vegans. And make sure it's clear on your email signatures. And I want tick boxes on all official forms. And it should be made clear on your passports. Why is it such a problem? It's just the opposite of vegan. And it makes sense. It makes vegans feel more included. I can't tell by looking at someone who's vegan and who's not. Why are we talking about women all the time on here when we should be outing non-vegans? We could call them cis-omnivores.

Because I don’t see why I should change the way I’ve been described my whole adult life to suit people who can’t cope with the fact that I am a woman’s and they are not.

I object to cis because it is part of the drive to redefine the well-established word "woman" to mean something other than adult human female in law.

Law in the UK has evolved over hundreds of years using the word woman, which at the time of debating and drafting everyone understood to mean adult human female, a sexed term.

Some people are now trying to reuse the existing word woman to mean a loosely defined group of people that includes some males and most but not all females.

Then they try to enforce all the existing laws, policies and regulations mentioning women as if the revised definition applies, despite that not being the original intent of the laws and regulations referencing women.

This ends up with situations like male rapists being put in women's prisons and male athletes winning medals in women's sporting classifications.

All this could be avoided by sticking with woman always meaning sex, while introducing as many words as you like for genders like transwoman, transman, non-binary, two-spirit, etc. Then we could set about writing deliberately tailored laws for situations where gender matters without unintended consequences for laws where sex matters.

So, if I used the term ciswoman today I would be implicitly agreeing to this push for reclassification. I do not agree. No.

I strongly object to cis when it is:
(a) applied to support redefinition of the commonly understood sexed words man and woman,
(b) used by someone attempting to assign a gender identity to me due to their belief that everyone can and should have a gender designation.

I am highly offended if the default gender assumed for me is cis, due to the implication that I identify with my oppression. If, for your own world view, you feel the need to assume a default gender to people who don't/won't choose one for themselves I suggest you'd be safest to think of them as non-binary not cis.

Since OP has reported back on her experiment I expect the deletions will get worse and worse.

Copying in Pink News as well as reporting back to Twitter? Impressive.

Once this thread gets to 1000 posts, and as such is ended....I'd suggest people no longer engage.

I think I’m just going to post sunflowers from now on.

Sunflowers love sunlight. And spring is on its way.

🌻🌻🌻

🌻 🌻 🌻

@TheRealMcKenna

I take it MN is absolutely fine with all this...

@MNHQ well what do you have to say about this? You nuked a whole bunch of posts for saying the OP was only coming here for Twitter screenshots. You reassured everybody that OP was just being sarcastic and didn't mean it when they declared their intentions. Come on, let's hear what you think of them actually doing the thing that you promised us all they weren't doing? And will you retract the many strikes given out for saying that this would happen now it actually has?

I will also report my own post here to draw your attention to it as I rarely get a response from tagging you in.

I spent my whole life trying to show many people that I was not who they expected me to be on the basis of thier gender assumptions. I do not identify as a woman and I have nothing in common with all women other than my sex . the restrictions of gender have harmed me and made my life hard

Now you want me to accept them if I am to be allowed to say that I am a woman , which I need to acknowledge if I am to get the correct medical treatment ?

Or am I supposed to call myself a transwoman because although I am a woman I do not match the gender identity that others see as a key part of being a woman ? Or should I call myself a transman ? Although I don't think I am a
Man because of my biology .

Please help

I am not cis. I am a woman in my 60s. An adult human female. No man is going to tell me to call myself 'cis' . Humans cannot change sex. I don't believe in coerced speech or beliefs. NO.

@Ninkanink

I think I’m just going to post sunflowers from now on.

Sunflowers love sunlight. And spring is on its way.

🌻🌻🌻

And it's always darkest before the light ✨ 🌻

I dont 'identify' as a woman. I am a woman. A mother. And a grandmother.

DOZENS OF WOMEN POLITELY
DECLINE TO BE CALLED 'CIS
'TWITTER RAGES ON

Stop trying to make "cis" happen. It ain't gonna happen.

I wonder if this was all an attempt to piss people off on Mumsnet and see if they'd come over to twitter for the fight.

Oh god yes. The OP actually invited people to engage with her on twitter. I suppose the hope was that people would fall for it, go there and engage and all the twatters would pile on and threaten the usual rape/murder/erasure shite. And obviously because it's not MN, none of it would be deleted.

She's not getting a lot of love from her followers though. I'm guessing that's why she's tagged in the usual rentagobs.

Cisgender is unnecessary. Woman is quite sufficient. Transwomen are who they are but they are not women and I am not going to dance round that fact. If they are upset by reality then they need to address that problem themselves.

Oh no dolphins are violent

as I rarely get a response from tagging you in.

I don't think MNHQ is a user name and therefore you can't tag it. You'd have to tag a specific person.

@midgedude

Oh no dolphins are violent

Don’t you mean dolphins are tuna?

Tuna are haddock.

Ah thanks @SoupDragon, I see people using it all the time but I did wonder as it never seems to summon anybody. I've reported it anyway, see if they respond.

@SheldonesqueIsUnwell

Tuna are haddock.

Haddick?

Just reading Abigail Shrier's book Irreversible Damage - which looks at the explosion in girls and young women seeking to transition. Well worth a read.

Another good read is Crazy Like Us - The Globalisation of the Western Mind Looking at the way in which psychological maladies are exported to countries which have never really suffered from them before.

Also Unpacking Queer Politics by Sheila Jeffreys