#CisIsNotASlur trending on Twitter

[Slythermum]

I'm assuming through the garbled wordfuckery I'm seeing on twitter that this is people who don't understand language who are using that this is in response to:

a) The BBC article about Lesbians
b) Women objecting to the word "cis"
c) Shut up women
d) Dinosaurs
e) Shut up Lesbians
f) fannies

Meanwhile, my daughter has said girls in her class are saying "down with the cis bus" "cis people are evil", "cis should die" etc

@nauticant it's in the bag.
So diluted now as to be meaningless.

I have waded through Milli's posts and I still have NO idea what gender is beyond a set of stereotypes. Some of those stereotypes fit me. Some of them don't, at all. So they are, IMHO, irrelevant to defining whether I am a woman or not.

Maybe it's a set of feelz, but I don't subscribe to the belief that a set of feelz is what makes you a woman or a man. You are made a woman or a man by your biology. So, since I cannot understand what gender is, I am a gender atheist, and I reject the term cis.

Unfortunately pigeontown that all falls down because there's 18 month old babies who are mentally, culturally, personally the opposite sex.

Apparently.

@EishetChayil

I don't need a descriptor to state I'm not trans.

Just like I don't need one to state I'm not a pelican.

Best comment of the thread so far 😁

Gender is what you are, not what you do or where.

I am gender?

How am I gender.

@Millicispud thanks for the answer, I do appreciate you engaging with me in good faith.

I hope its OK to question you a bit further because IMO we're getting somewhere

You said Essentially, gender is what you are personally, mentally and culturally.
Sex is what you are medically and biologically

That confused me at first because if you asked me 'Who are you culturally?' my answer would include English, British, White, Europhile, and if we discussed further I'd next head to Indie music, mildly rebellious, interested in politics, interested in drug culture. Not really into films or theatre, slightly embarrassed about that, occasionally watch MiC and ditto embarrassed.

That is how I'd describe my cultural self.

Mentally I'd say I'm luckily in good mental health though I do have bursts of various less than ideal behaviours.

Personally I'd talk about how I'm loyal with a strong sense of fairness, I'm a geek, I feel alive around other people.

None of this is anything to do with my gender.

Medically and Biologically I'm female, mother of two, slightly dodgy thyroid, short sighted. The list goes on.

Having read your reply and put it in context I'm pretty sure that what you actually mean is that your gender is how you fit yourself culturally, mentally, personally with respect to men's and women's roles in the society you live in.

You don't mean do you feel more British or more European. I think you mean do you feel more at home culturally among a group of women or a group of men?

And that is very hard indeed to define.

But if I'm honest I think you were either mistaken or disingenuous when you gave a definition of gender which did not once make reference to sex or gender roles.

And I don't see how this alignment cannot make reference to gender stereotypes.

A male who feels more comfortable wearing a dress and heels and putting on a slightly high voice when they are chatting to strangers is getting some kind of fulfillment out of acting out female stereotypes.

A male person wearing baggy jeans with a hairy bumcrack showing, talking about bricks with a group of other men in a low gruff voice would never be thought to be a transwomen.

It is about how comfortable or not a person is acting / being around gender stereotypes.

And we should throw all gender stereotypes in the bin, they're garbage. I am as much a woman in my unsexy denim cut offs with hairy legs, gnarled toenails, talking about maths as I am when I wear make up, heels, and sashay along for cocktails and gossip with my bestest girlfriends.

I'm way more feminine in the second of these, I adhere to female stereotypes and enjoy them in that moment. But I enjoy the freedom to be my true authentic self in the first scenario too. They're both me.

I'm waffling! But you haven't convinced me, and I'd still love to understand what I'm missing here. I'm labour / guardian through and through. Yet tories and the times are the ones being honest about this, which makes my head hurt.

@Wildfart oh bollox I give up!

It was a good post pigeontown.

I'm sad for those babies. I'm sad for the baby that Jazz Jennings (which is a psuedonym) was and the life this mentally, culturally, personally gender pathway has locked that baby into.

And pigeon I think your definition is really good actually. If people were more honest and less hellbent on winning the argument then I'm sure people on both sides would agree you're broadly right on this

However concluding you don't want to live the stereotypes you've absorbed for your sex isn't as compelling an argument for why a transwomen must be treated exactly as a natal woman in every single situation... In fact concluding you don't want to live those stereotypes an ONLY reasonably be answered with 'OK, cool' which is a bit of a damp squib of an answer. Hence the need for attention seeking middle aged men to evolve this to require a different and special response

@flashpaper

If we just "are" cis, whether we agree with it or not, and you're going to call those who you believe to be cis that whether they like it or not, why can't we call trans women what they are, which is men, whether they like it or not?

Completely agree.

@Agrona

Didn't a transwoman claim to be 'cis'?

If the above is true then 'cis' is a meaningless term.

Yes, India Willoughby.

Me too @Wildfart
'Your parents f*ck you up' n all that. But its at least possible to reverse usually. You can't sew back on a pair of nads or bring back some brain development or fertility.
Adults (of right mind) do what you want to yourself. But don't harm others or yourself.

I'm loving this thread (kind of). I now have a better explanation for why I'm not Cis (woke work etc). Cheers! I haven't heard it used much recently though so think its slowly dying out. I give it all another 3 years tops!

Can we not get through a thread without mentioning Willoughby?

@WanderingSoutherner

Millicispud Do enough research and you'll find that pretty much every anti trans argument is just a rehashed homophobic and sexist arguments.

Actually, most of us did our research and ended up here in the gender critical position.

Saying there is more to being a woman or man than the physical body is sexism. The concept of gender identity is built on sexism.

This^

Catherina if you believe that TWAW, why do you need the cis descriptor to identify yourself as other due to your masculine presentation?

I give it all another 3 years tops!

Yup.

@NarcissistsEyebrows
Exactly. Because 'its in my head' doesn't sound real or solid. And strays into the mental health arena which is dangerous ground. If you make it all genetics and biology and medical then it has to be an actual thing that can't be reversed so must be accepted without question (and through legislation). It's not gonna work though because the evidence is 'head' only.
(So can't be fought on same grounds).
For most people simply doing something different than the 'sex norm' would be enough.
If out of all of this comes a renewal in the ability to be who you want away from labels that would be at least something. I am an optimist and I think that's what this will fizzle into (and some people will then look a bit silly!)

I reject the use of 'cis'. I am a woman. An adult human female.

It worries me that vulnerable people feel the need to hurry under the trans umbrella for fear of being isolated.
The idea that the AS spectrum belongs there is sinister.

spud I am no more cis than I am a sinner or infidel. You may be a believer but I am not.

Gender identity ideology is the niche belief system of a tiny minority. The 99.5+% of the population who are non believers do not need to declare ourselves 'cis' to differentiate ourselves from trans people.

Trans used to mean homosexual transexuals. Now it means anything and everything. Able bodied straight males can now declare themselves to be disabled lesbians.

They tell us we must call ourselves 'Cis' to create the illusion that there are 2 types of women. Transwomen and 'cis' women that both belong is the same category.
By doing this it allows the males to insert themselves into our sex class. They can then pretend that we are using the very biology that their sex class has been using to oppress ours forever, to oppress them.
Classic DARVO.

Woman generally refers to gender but is often used interchangeably with female

'Woman' isn't a 'gender', it's the word to describe female humans. It isn't a special inate feeling or a outfit, or a performance of femininity.

Still haven't told us what this woman gender us supposed to be. Because the males who claim to have one seem to need the sex role stereotypes in order to reinforce this gender belief and think this behaviour somehow distinguishes them from the rest of their sex class.

As humans cannot change sex, 'gender' is simply personality and presentation, so why do these males need access to female spaces? Why do children need to be put on medical pathways when the adult males can just be trans by saying so?

It's nothing like gay rights.
Same sex attraction is once again being called a 'preference' that can be changed, because straight males want to call themselves lesbians.
How anyone can't see the blatant homophobia in telling lesbians they should overcome their sexual orientation to accommodate penis owners, just because the person the penis is attached to claims to be a woman, is beyond me.

Gay people demanded nothing off anyone else. No language changes or forcing people to alter their beliefs.

TRAs want the rest of us to pretend that our sex is irrelevant and that this unprovable, entirely subjective feeling of gender that only a few people actually claim to have, or give a shit about, should be the basis for all future policy for society, despite that having an extremely detrimental effect on females as a sex class. Only males benefit from this. Transwomen ARE the patriarchy.

Cis isn't a gender and doesn't imply you have a gender, it literally just means you're not trans.
This is just so offensive. I’m a woman. If people want to say the only suitable descriptor for me is ‘not a trans woman’ putting them at the centre of being a woman and all of the rest of us simply as those other kinds of woman people who aren’t trans women , then I reject it. The vote was not won for ‘non trans women’. Education, the right to work and own property was fought for for women, for me and all other females. Men already had them.

I came back on to make the point made above that although Milli says that woman and man generally refer to gender rather than sex, this isn't true. I don't know why a small number of people keep repeating it. It's out just in the hope that if they say it enough times it will magically become true?

Was there a meeting ten years ago where 5 people got together and agreed 'let's start saying that woman and man are genders. We can say it to a bunch of women determined to be kind whatever the cost, and I'm sure we can find a bunch of sexist men who'll enjoy putting clever women in their place. Let's see if it catches on'?

There is a dictionary definition of the word man and it does not mention gender or feelings. The top line entry is Adult Human Male www.google.com/amp/s/dictionary.cambridge.org/amp/english/man

There is also a definition for the word Woman, again the top line is medical and leaves no room for debate dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/woman?q=Woman

Why do you think we don't notice if you change the definition of a word to try and win your argument?

This labelling reminds me of the demands I heard growing up to assign my alliance with a football team in order to avoid or risk sectarian violence depending on who was asking.
It's divisive and dangerous.

"Almost all the women I know who share these beliefs read up on it to disprove the hateful bigots. I wanted to do what you're doing - genuinely, I went away and read up on all the shit the horrible women here were saying, to prove they were wrong. As a good liberal progressive feminist, I knew they had to be! Right?

The problem was that they weren't. All the evidence was on their side."

Ditto. And I have to say it was a stressful process to go through, and it would be easier to be on the other 'side' still, but here we are. I have a lot of sympathy for trans people, it's this whole gender ideology that I can't buy into.

Cis is a label to ‘other’ women (biological, natal females), and allow certain people to describe themselves as a subset of that group.

No, thank you.

I absolutely reject the label “cis”, just as I reject the fallacy of any male being a subset of sex = female.

Just no. How many times do people need to be told that it is not accepted or acceptable? On this forum, at least, we are “allowed” to absolutely reject its use - Don’t Call Me Cis.