GC protected belief and use of cis

[OffYouGoNow]

Now that gender critical beliefs are classed as a protected belief, can we argue that the use of ‘cis’ ‘cis women’ etc. - particularly in the workplace - constitute as harassment?

My final point and this is more personal.

Is that I have a congenital defect which impairs me physically. Thankfully I can do daily stuff ok. However my whole life I've never been able to take part in any sports, gym classes, ride a bike, or move fast if I need to.

I have spent long stints in hospital during secondary school with plenty of pain and recovery etc.

The (now less popular) born in the wrong body idea. And the 'comfortable in your own skin' comment just now I think can land quite heavily to people with disabilities.

I was never comfy with it. How could I be? It set me apart, I couldn't join in, even stuff like catching a bus people I would be with would run off and I'd be left behind.

Then the OPs of course.

Coming to terms with this for me was a very very long process and it did affect me very badly from about 9 to 30 maybe. I took massive risks. I felt I was on limited time.

In my head I can run and jump. And dance normally. I wonder what it's like. I would love to know that.

Loads of people in that sort of position.

And also just thought.

Comfortable in your own skin

People who have been subject to racism, up to and including the most horrific oppression. Because of their skin.

My friend who is black has been growing her hair and she says she has to fight to do it because she has a deeply embedded idea that for black women longer hair which is not straightened etc is somehow wrong, a bad thing.

I have no doubt that there are people who have hated their skin colour due to what it meant in their lives, and the lives of their loved ones.

Any thoughts on that?

guidance at work that specified "cis and trans women", it would not be harassment.

It might not be intentional harassment, but it would be imposition of a belief system.

If a natal female can self identify as ‘trans femme’, then ‘Cis’ just implies acceptance of gender ideology/queer theory.

I personally don't think it's harrassment and I think you'd be hard pushed to argue it with your employer.

Even if you support this language. They are not including those who do not identify as trans or cis so surely that's a problem.

The issues with the new 'inclusive' approach is that it's so full of holes and so complicated. That it becomes incredibly difficult, impossible even at times, to say the thing you want to say.

NiceGerbil,

I take your point.

However, if we take racism (or catcalling that somebody else brought up): it is the system of oppression that needs to change (in your case, having the bus wait for you will not solve everything, but it would be an improvement, wouldn't it?).

@NiceGerbil

'Are you uncomfortable in your own skin?'

Well, I was very uncomfortable with what my skin, my body, my looks meant around how I was treated.

I felt terribly confused and angry about this. I didn't understand why other people did that, I felt at odds with it all, I just couldn't understand what I was missing.

And yes. Untold numbers of women and girls feel uncomfortable in their own skin. High rates of eating disorders, the people who resort to dangerous products that they think will change their body or their skin colour, for example.

Untold numbers of women and girls feel uncomfortable in their own skin. High rates of eating disorders, the people who resort to dangerous products that they think will change their body or their skin colour, for example.

why yes. It's the patriarchy/capitalism. That needs to change....

@CatherinaJTV

NiceGerbil,

I take your point.

However, if we take racism (or catcalling that somebody else brought up): it is the system of oppression that needs to change (in your case, having the bus wait for you will not solve everything, but it would be an improvement, wouldn't it?).

Well it would be pretty minor in the scheme of things.

I'd far rather have a body that functioned normally.

Thank you for taking the point though. I do find statements like that jarring and I know I'm not the only one.

'why yes. It's the patriarchy/capitalism. That needs to change....'

Well yes plenty of women have been working on the first one for an awfully long time.

How do you suggest those who are interested in changing things that flow from patriarchy, in terms of what words to use for juvenile and adult people who are female?

what does it mean now, you think?

I think trans now has a very wide meaning, and includes those who are comfortable with their bodies but have an internal feeling that they are male/female which is different to their female/male bodies.

now you are just being facetious.

No I don't see how a chemistry term is relevant to human sex.

It isn't

Also some non binary people don't like it as it reinforces the binary.

I feel comfortable in my female body

Ah, so being ‘cis’ is about not wanting to change your body and being ‘trans’ is about wanting to change it?

Where does that leave female penises?

Jess Bradley for example who vocally declared themselves to be a woman and enjoyed getting their penis out at work?

Was it right that they got to shape NUS policy on women’s rights (the removal of) because they are trans?

Whatever happened to Jess? Wasn’t these some investigation happening into the photos?

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

I feel comfortable in my female body

Ah, so being ‘cis’ is about not wanting to change your body and being ‘trans’ is about wanting to change it?

Where does that leave female penises?

Plenty of transwomen are entirely comfortable with their male bodies. Just changing their expression. Hence 'gender euphoria'.

Plenty of transwomen are entirely comfortable with their male bodies. Just changing their expression. Hence 'gender euphoria'.

Yes, and the respectful approach is to accept that people are trans if they say they’re trans, surely? I expect you agree @CatherinaJTV ?

So if for you being ‘cis’ means not wanting to change your body, but there are lots of trans people who don’t want to change their bodies either, do you want to revise your definition?

If I was a trans woman, I'd answer the question of whether I am a woman with "yes", I the question was "do you identify as a woman" and I'd answer "yes", people would think I am trans. Using "cis" is really an easy way to answer either question fully and unambiguously.

Late to this but this from @CatherinaJTV sums it up doesn't it?

In order to be clear women have to accept an additional label, one that men do not, because otherwise parts of the Twittersphere will assume that they are trans.

The default woman is a man.

Transwomen are women; women are something else.

And that is why so many here are refusing the term. It is incorrect scientifically and socially. The logic behind it is intended to make the word 'woman' all encompassing and so to undermine the rights of women and girls.

Be like Zammo: just say no!

Yes what did happen to Jess?.

If I recall they had posted about getting their ladystick out at bus stops as well.

Jess was very comfortable with Jess’s male genitalia

exactly - call all women "women" and when you need to differentiate between cis and trans, use cis and trans. As a biologist, I've never understood the fuss about "cis" tbh. It just makes the discussion easier, where differentiation is needed.

And what do you call all the women who don't consider that they have a gender identity (i.e. most women)? Cis assumes people do have a gender identity. Gender identity ideology is built on regressive stereotypes so this cannot be reasonably forced on women who, by the nature of being natal women, have been marginalised all their lives due to such regressive ideologies. It is mis-gendering which for people who are not women we are told is inappropriate. Why can we not be afforded the same respect that others are demanding?

Cis assumes people do have a gender identity. Gender identity ideology is built on regressive stereotypes so this cannot be reasonably forced on women who, by the nature of being natal women, have been marginalised all their lives due to such regressive ideologies.

Exactly. And not believing in gender identity is now a protected belief.

Calling me cis is giving me a label that forcibly includes me in a belief I don't have.

No thanks.

Calling me cis is giving me a label that forcibly includes me in a belief I don't have.

Colluding with 'go along to get along' language is what got us in this mess. Being coerced into using such language and conceding seemingly inconsequential items that leads to more substantial declarations (even against your own interest) is an acknowledged tactic that is the subject of a lot of social psychology research. You might recognise some of this from the Stonewall and NHS 'sign the pledge' tactic:

An amazing example is the prison-camp program in Korean War where the Chinese used commitment and consistency pressures to gain compliance from prisoners. Although the American servicemen had been trained to give minimal details (name, rank and number), they gave away much more. How? The Chinese first asked prisoners to “make statements so mildly anti-American or pro-Communist as to seem inconsequential” such as “The United States is not perfect.” Then, once they’d complied with these minor requests, they were gradually pushed to make bigger and bigger declarations. Once they’d agreed that the US was not perfect, they would be pushed to expand on ways in which this was the case – not wanting to be inconsistent, they complied. Then, to remain consistent, they would agree to read their statements aloud in a discussion group, then maybe record it as an anti-American radio broadcast. Finding themselves a “collaborator”, without any physical coercion, the men changed their self-image and performed even more extensive acts of collaboration. The majority of prisoners collaborated at some time. Nobody wanted to appear inconsistent.

The critical act here, apparently, was that they wrote it down. They couldn’t deny the previous step, and pushed themselves into further acts of collaboration to prove their consistency (probably to themselves more than anyone else).

scrumandkanban.co.uk/commitment-and-consistency/

Colluding with 'go along to get along' language is what got us in this mess.

Yes.

And what do you call all the women who don't consider that they have a gender identity (i.e. most women)? Cis assumes people do have a gender identity. Gender identity ideology is built on regressive stereotypes so this cannot be reasonably forced on women who, by the nature of being natal women, have been marginalised all their lives due to such regressive ideologies. It is mis-gendering which for people who are not women we are told is inappropriate. Why can we not be afforded the same respect that others are demanding?

There's never an answer to this from trans activists that doesn't boil down to "one rule for you and another for me, I'm more important and my feelings and "identity" trump yours"

All the arguments for 'cis' basically mean using it instead of 'real' or 'actual' from what I can see.

The arguments for using it switch around depending on what's being asked - gender and sex are separate things/it's gender identity not gender as the feminist concept/it's comfort with your sexed body etc. but usage always boils down to 'real' - especially how they impose it on people who are obviously female but are off minding their own business rather than navel-gazing about their identity.