Sources help - cis

[NoBinturongsHereMate]

I know many here have splendid reference catalogues, so I hope you can hit me with some written sources about not using 'cis'.

Ideally including an explanation of why - although I can do that part myself if needed - but mainly I need to demonstrate that there's a significant level of objection.

So surveys with numbers objecting to the term would be ideal, or docs from multiple groups stating their objection.

No, the legal rulings have been explicitly clear that while you're entitled to hold GC beliefs you're not entitled to limitless expression of them in the workplace.

The legal rulings have also been explicitly clear that while you are entitled to hold Gender Identity Ideology beliefs you are not entitled to limitless expression of them in the workplace. You are not allowed to compel others to believe them or partake in your belief. You are not entitled to harass others who do not hold a belief in Gender Identity Ideology as proven by the recent court case with Rachel Meade.

GI believers have the same right to express their beliefs and those who have GC beliefs - ain't the Law and equality grand.

I had never heard of cis until I had my Stonewall propaganda course, a whole afternoon lost forever, ostensibly in support of a teenager considering a trans future.
Foolishly, I took on the new words at face value, in the same way you might absorb plant names in Latin to better understand plant families.
Years later, I came on FWR trying to figure what is developing in society and got trounced for mentioning it.
I haven't since. It has no use, except for Stonewall trying to look clever and self validate with their list of pointless or deliberately misleading terms.

Not what you were looking for Op, but this is where it starts and this is where we say no.

Mackereth was before Foratater. The legal landscape has changed. Even if it hadn't, that was about how he directly addressed other individuals, whereas I'm dealing with how policy refers to a group (of which I am potentially a member, depending on how the group is described), in a context where neutrality and absolute scientific accuracy are important.

Very different.

The Merriam Webster dictionary referenced earlier defines cisgender as someone whose internal sense of gender corresponds with the sex the person was identified as having at birth.

Thanks for the clarification, I now know for sure that I'm not cis.

I don't have any internal sense of gender. I've no idea what it feels like to have this internal feeling. Good luck to you if you do have one, please don't try to force one on me.

Ah, here's a fine example of mumsnet law in play with a false equivalence. Unfortunately for you, trans people enjoy an additional protection in law as people undergoing gender reassignment have their own protected characteristic. Whereas GC beliefs are just protected under a general heading of "beliefs which are batshit or even offensive but you can't actually be fired for them".

Again, look at David Mackereth. He was counting on Maya's ruling protecting him when he went to court too, he lost and lost his job without compensation.

Prawn, even on an anonymous thread where we're just discussing the concept of CIS, you can't stay within guidelines.

even rewriting your post to stay within them, you can't stay within them!

Women are targetted for it. Aggressively.

No, one legal case doesn't supersede another, the judgements were different because the evidence and circumstances were different, but the Mackereth case absolutely proves you don't have license to air your GC views with impunity in the workplace. Therefore anyone blithely advising OPs they can say what they want at work because Maya are setting people up for a fall.

I suppose though you don't really care if you give people bad advice and they end up in court - if they win, it's good for you, and if they lose, you can just use it as further evidence for your silly conspiracy theories about institutions being "captured" by "TRAs".

people undergoing gender reassignment have their own protected characteristic.

Indeed, but as is so often the case you fail to acknowledge there are NINE protected characteristics and all have equal protection, there is no top trumps.

We are talking about beliefs, not protected characteristics, no-one is entitled to compel another person to believe what they do and to partake in that belief.

No trans person can insist that another person refers to themselves as 'cis'.

GC beliefs are just protected under a general heading of "beliefs which are batshit

Just delurking to say WTF.

Sorry. As you were.

It's no coincidence that the Forstater judge draw a comparison with a belief that gay marriage is sinful. Ie, acknowledged it was an offensive belief and one many people would consider untrue, and one which absolutely would be inappropriate to share in the workplace in some circumstances. Very much a case of "You can believe it but if you're shouting it at your gay colleague expect to be invited for a conversation with HR".

Shouting at a work colleague would normally result in a conversation with HR.

Keep grasping those straws.

Therefore anyone blithely advising OPs they can say what they want at work because Maya are setting people up for a fall.

blimey, I don't think Calamine will be enough. We're going to need industrial hydrocortisone.

By the way many are waiting patiently for you to supply the evidence you have to back up your assertions about JKR on the other thread @PrawnLiberationFront, please don't disappoint.

"In some circumstances."

Um.

Are you a graduate in Stating the Bleeding Obvious by any chance?

The belief is not batshit though, is it Prawn?

Gosh, sorry for not hanging on your every word, didn't realise I was so popular.

Seems rather entitled to be so demanding of a woman's time and attention though. Are you sure you're not secretly a man? Surveys do show men are more likely than women to hold GC beliefs after all. Funny that.

The only person talking about shouting at colleagues is you, Prawn.

I suppose though you don't really care if you give people bad advice and they end up in court

Like Stonewall gave to Garden Court Chambers, and then took zero responsibility for?

The belief that "cis" is somehow offensive or indicative of some belief system rather than just an acknowledgement that some people are not trans and sometimes it's useful to have a word to refer to that is most definitely batshit.

Another thing FWR don't like to talk about - Alison Bailey lost against Stonewall.

The belief that "cis" is somehow offensive or indicative of some belief system rather than just an acknowledgement that some people are not trans and sometimes it's useful to have a word to refer to that is most definitely batshit.

No it isn't. I don't share your belief system, ergo I don't see males as women. So the idea of having "women who are male" and "women who are female" is a complete non starter.

And if I am going to use a word for "non trans woman" and "trans woman" that means I am saying that a "trans woman" is a female person who identifies as a man. I'm not going to use "cis" because it doesn't just mean "non trans", when your harmful ideology, that I absolutely want no part in, is baked in.

Another thing FWR don't like to talk about - Alison Bailey lost against Stonewall.

That wasn't the point. She won against Garden Court Chambers, who were advised by Stonewall. It was always going to be difficult to win against stonewall. Stonewall were more than happy to chuck GCC under the bus though, lovely, ethical professional organisation that they are.

Just delurking to say WTF.

There isn't much more to say, really! Opposite world.

What is the word for someone who is not Icelandic? What is the word for someone who is not a collector of stamps? What is the word for someone who is not in ownership of yellow curtains? What is the word for someone who is not a plumber? What is a word for someone who is not a believer in fairies?

That's how I think about needing a word for someone who is not trans. Totally irrelevant and useless. In-groups with controlling ideological goals do like to name all those outside the group, so I'm not in favor of banning the use of 'cis' in law or anything as it's the equivalent to words like infidel, gentile, heathen, or pagan. It is a word needed only to signal to insiders that you believe.

The rest of us can reject it. Which I do.

Good post @Delphinium20