But you use cis.
Right there is a freedom women have lost: to be free to define ourselves as a distinct political demographic with common needs due to our biology; to be free to define ourselves the way we see ourselves - not limited by, but proudly respecting the truth of, our own biology. Cis only exists relative to trans, & positions women relative to trans. It forces us into a new category.
This is one hell of a freedom for women to have lost. The empathy extended to trans people’s desire to self-identify implicitly acknowledges this - it’s respected as deep-seated & valid… while denying women the same freedoms of self-perception & language.
But whereas trans people still exist as a distinct demographic, with a vocabulary to draw on to describe themselves & advocate for their needs, women-as-were no longer have this.
And, what’s more, this loss of women-as-we’re’ freedom to define themselves is contributing to tangible mental & physical harm on a grand scale. Males in women’s prisons, sports & shortlists; corrupted data in already-neglected areas; privacy in hospitals; increased vulnerability to injury (sport) & attack (the loss of single sex spaces).
Anyone prepared to use “cis” has made a choice: that a trans person’s freedom to self-define is more important than many biological women’s equivalent freedom.
And anyone who’s put enough thought in (regrettably, I think that’s still proportionately few people!) has made that choice knowing its devastating impact on women’s concrete & legal freedoms, & judging this as less significant than trans people’s (substantial in some cases, yes) emotional discomfort.
Edited to say, I’m genuinely curious how you’d reconcile using “cis” with your views on freedom in the light of the above. Are these new perspectives on this word? Or would you say they’re over-exaggerated? (I’d personally say this is hard to argue, once you start reading about what’s happening). Would you reconsider your usage? And, if not, could you argue for retaining it, with reference to the arguments above? A compromise on one or other group’s freedoms is needed either way: I defend my choice above, and would be interested to hear this countered.