What do people have against the word cisgender?

[m4rble]

I think the word cisgender is a useful and necessary word both in discussions of trans issues and in other discussions(such as when you want to discuss typical anatomical features of cis men or cis women without excluding trans identities). I mean it only makes sense to have a word that means "not trans", otherwise people would either always refer to cis people as "not trans" or use a word like "bio male/female". Not only would this not change anything for the positive, it would lead to confusion about what exactly a "bio male/female" actually is. It wouldn't make sense to equate it genital anatomy or hormones because trans people(and cis people), vary on all those fronts. Of course if you were to make a word that universally means exactly what cis means that wouldn't be a problem, but then it wouldn't be any different than the word, "cis" so people would still take issue with it.

The thing about the word "cis" is that equalizes the descriptive playing field between trans and cis people. If only one group has an adjective describing them, it automatically has an othering effect. Some people who reject the word , "cis" seem to actually want this to be the case because they argue that "cis" people should simply be referred to as "normal" people.(this doesn't even make linguistic sense because "normal" is a vague term, and it would be difficult to decipher the meaning of it without a lot of context, whereas "cis" is a much clearer term, and it better communicates its meaning)

Long story short, I think that the word "cis" is useful, but a certain subset of people on the internet have taken to hating it for what seems like no apparent reason. I've started this to question those people's intentions.

(Another minor thing that annoys me: people making arguments using the word "cis" when they clearly don't know what it means. For example, people argue that someone's contradicting what their sexual orientation is when they say they're cis and gay. It makes me facepalm every time. Seriously, if people want to argue with someone they should first look up the meanings of the words they're using. Cis just means "not trans", it's not that hard. This also bleeds into another pet peeve I have with people mistaking gender identity with sexual orientation, but at least that's more understandable than arguing using words you don't know the meaning of)

[Ruqiah]

Do the people who seem bothered by the term "cis" exhibit words or actions that are against trans, nonbinary, or LGBT folk in general? If so.. then they aren't even worth discussing. I am; however, more interested in this if it turns out that LGBT supporters have expressed discomfort with the term "cis".

In what context have you seen this discomfort? I've not seen behavior like this in my LGBT communities, so I'm genuinely curious.

[butterflydreams]

I use it, but only to blend into spaces that are already using it. In everyday life, I just say there are trans people and then there are normal people. But I've always used "normal" to mean the statistical normal. I guess I don't feel othered by it because I see myself as much, much more than just a trans person. I see myself as a normal person I guess. I'm a normal person who has blue eyes, loves her friends, and is also trans.

[m4rble]

I use it, but only to blend into spaces that are already using it. In everyday life, I just say there are trans people and then there are normal people. But I've always used "normal" to mean the statistical normal. I guess I don't feel othered by it because I see myself as much, much more than just a trans person. I see myself as a normal person I guess. I'm a normal person who has blue eyes, loves her friends, and is also trans.

It's not that people can't use the word "normal" I suppose, but using that to mean "cis", while not having a word for cis seems like it would cause confusion(and I'm talking about people who seem to be against the word "cis" on principle). I generally dislike the word "normal" because of the emotional baggage tied to it(a lot of that is linked to my experience with disabilities, which is also why I don't like the word "retarded" to be used casually), but I generally don't see the point of taking offense to the word normal being used. I don't really have a problem with people using the word to describe sexual people as opposed to asexual people, although it's definitely not the term I would use. I like your outlook on things, it seems pretty positive.

[m4rble]

Do the people who seem bothered by the term "cis" exhibit words or actions that are against trans, nonbinary, or LGBT folk in general? If so.. then they aren't even worth discussing. I am; however, more interested in this if it turns out that LGBT supporters have expressed discomfort with the term "cis".

In what context have you seen this discomfort? I've not seen behavior like this in my LGBT communities, so I'm genuinely curious.

A lot of the people who do take issue with the word seem to be transphobic(saying things like trans people are mentally ill/delusional,ect.), but I'm not sure that everyone who takes issue with it is transphobic.(statistically, I would think there would be a few non-transphobic people who have issues with the word, but I'm not sure if it's a significant number.Some people just seem opposed to having to learn a new word.)

Another thing that baffles me is the existence of homophobia and transphobia, but I guess I don't need to discuss ideas that are based around homophobia or transphobia, although some understanding might be helpful.

[Lost247365]

It is like the word allosexual in the asexual community, it denormalizes cis-gender people and puts them and trans people on equal footing. They don't want to be on equal footing.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/being-called-cis-is-not-oppressive/

[butterflydreams]

I use it, but only to blend into spaces that are already using it. In everyday life, I just say there are trans people and then there are normal people. But I've always used "normal" to mean the statistical normal. I guess I don't feel othered by it because I see myself as much, much more than just a trans person. I see myself as a normal person I guess. I'm a normal person who has blue eyes, loves her friends, and is also trans.

It's not that people can't use the word "normal" I suppose, but using that to mean "cis", while not having a word for cis seems like it would cause confusion(and I'm talking about people who seem to be against the word "cis" on principle). I generally dislike the word "normal" because of the emotional baggage tied to it(a lot of that is linked to my experience with disabilities, which is also why I don't like the word "retarded" to be used casually), but I generally don't see the point of taking offense to the word normal being used. I don't really have a problem with people using the word to describe sexual people as opposed to asexual people, although it's definitely not the term I would use. I like your outlook on things, it seems pretty positive.

In reality I'm probably anything but normal, but damned if that's gonna stop me from calling myself that. I'm objectively outside of many norms, but I see myself as a regular, normal person...in the spirit of the term I suppose.

If I had to guess about why some people would object to cis being a term, I think it might be because it's describing an absence. An absence of the circumstances that lead to someone being trans. And people who aren't trans aren't really a definable group on the same way trans people are. It'd be like creating a term for every opposite of some condition. Not blind people would be seers, not deaf people would be hearers...I guess you could say "able bodied" but even that doesn't cover everything. Being not trans isn't a distinct condition. Unless a person wants it to be. If that's the case, more power to those people. I'd rather let them decide if that's what they want.

[Snao Cone]

I'm not at all against the cis prefix for similar reasons to you, m4rble. As for using it in every day conversation, I wouldn't insist other people adopt it in their language, but I'm going to use it and I'm going to explain to them what it means if they ask. Using it to specify that a person's gender corresponds to their sex assigned at birth can provide useful context. Also it's one syllable and three letters, so it's twice as efficient as "normal".

[Amedot]

Cisgender is absolutely a necessary word in vocabulary when discussing gender. Intersex people are assigned genders at birth, and many of them are cisgender because they identify with the gender they were assigned at birth (e.g. an intersex person with cryptorchidism being assigned female at birth who grows breasts during puberty).

Cisgender: you identify with the gender assigned at birth

Transgender: you do not identify with the gender assigned at birth

[m4rble]

I use it, but only to blend into spaces that are already using it. In everyday life, I just say there are trans people and then there are normal people. But I've always used "normal" to mean the statistical normal. I guess I don't feel othered by it because I see myself as much, much more than just a trans person. I see myself as a normal person I guess. I'm a normal person who has blue eyes, loves her friends, and is also trans.

It's not that people can't use the word "normal" I suppose, but using that to mean "cis", while not having a word for cis seems like it would cause confusion(and I'm talking about people who seem to be against the word "cis" on principle). I generally dislike the word "normal" because of the emotional baggage tied to it(a lot of that is linked to my experience with disabilities, which is also why I don't like the word "retarded" to be used casually), but I generally don't see the point of taking offense to the word normal being used. I don't really have a problem with people using the word to describe sexual people as opposed to asexual people, although it's definitely not the term I would use. I like your outlook on things, it seems pretty positive.

In reality I'm probably anything but normal, but damned if that's gonna stop me from calling myself that. I'm objectively outside of many norms, but I see myself as a regular, normal person...in the spirit of the term I suppose.

If I had to guess about why some people would object to cis being a term, I think it might be because it's describing an absence. An absence of the circumstances that lead to someone being trans. And people who aren't trans aren't really a definable group on the same way trans people are. It'd be like creating a term for every opposite of some condition. Not blind people would be seers, not deaf people would be hearers...I guess you could say "able bodied" but even that doesn't cover everything. Being not trans isn't a distinct condition. Unless a person wants it to be. If that's the case, more power to those people. I'd rather let them decide if that's what they want.

I've actually heard non-blind people referred to as sighted people, so there are some terms like that(they may be useful when talking specifically about those issues)(if you think about it blindness and deafness are actually the absence of something, not the other way around). I think that being cis is a condition just as distinct as being trans, although it is primarily determined by the absence of something(dysphoria).

[UncommonNonsense]

I'd wonder if those who object to the word 'cisgender' are only objecting because it's a word meant to put them on linguistic par with trans people.

I've observed an odd effect in regards to attempts to bring privileged and non-privileged people toward a more equal level... Even if the more privileged group isn't actually losing any of their privilege, they still get very resentful that the less-privileged people are being given those 'rights'. Even when the more privileged group didn't have to actively do anything to get those rights, just be born a certain gender or race or orientation. The fact that people they look down upon are being given privilege they think of as being exclusively theirs is enough to make them furious.

The fact that the word 'cisgender' exists is a way to make trans people less 'othered', to help them be seen as more 'normal' (which they are, of course... But certain people will never believe that), and that kind of person would likely be infuriated by that.

[DragonflytotheMoon]

I don't have a problem with it. It's not a term I use often, though, as I don't believe many people are aware of it. I just learned of it in the past year or so. And that was after being on a forum for bi women for nine years, much of it as a mod. It's one reason I've taken a break from there. 95% of the women are cis & bi. Some are more on the romantic end, whereas, others are more sexual. I know the spectrum is diverse, but, it wasn't being represented that way there. It's much more so here & I feel I fit in better.

[Anthracite_Impreza]

As others have said, they want to be 'normal', not like 'those trans people'. Even if they aren't outwardly transphobic, there's something in their subconscious that says they are the 'right' way and shouldn't be on the same level as trans.

[deltaX]

As someone who is cisgender, I don't have any problem with cis as a word. I don't use it very often in my everyday life, but I think a word like cis is really useful when discussing trans issues. It's almost like blind vs. sighted to me; I won't go around telling people that I'm sighted, but when I had a conversation with a blind person, it was useful terminology to use when discussing how our experiences differed.

[R_1]

Im a cis person, but I only see problems with people who defines it as feeling-based or action-based because some cis don't really have gender feelinhs and some cis don't give a damn about how they think and feel compared with others. I ain't one of those cis who have gender feelings, and nor I care for comparing myself. Hell, I might "think and feel like a woman", but meh.

[Heart]

Hehe. I can remember the first time I heard the word cisgender. I had a huge aha moment. Before then, I'd been talking about "trans women and other women". Though I'm lucky to be in a tolerant and accepting location, I think cis is much less potentially insulting than "other" :P

[Kappamaki]

Heh heh, I remember the first time I heard this word, back in... 2013, maybe? Kind of late, but there you go.

I asked my friend, who had just used it while talking about queer politics, 'cis' meant. And they said, "It's short for cisgender. It basically means 'not transgender' - someone who identifies with the gender they're assigned at birth."

Which made perfect sense to me! =^.^=

And then they continued, "For instance, you're cis," and I threw up a little into my mouth.

(It'd take me another year or so to figure out why.)

[ChillaKilla]

Cislings gonna cis, from what I've learned

[Snao Cone]

Tee hee, cislings is a cute word.

Of course, many of us cis people don't see that being cis is a thing that we're doing by existing, so it would confuse them if they were told so.

[Finn.]

I have a few different thoughts about this.

Firstly; I think cis people don't want to be labeled with a term they didn't choose themselves or actively identify with. Which is fair enough. But it's really just descriptive and practical to use and it's not a slur or anything so calm down.

Secondly; it might stir feelings of being pathologized, it sounds a bit clinical to be honest. Which, duh, we lgbtq+ people all know the struggle. It's a fair argument, but we all live in an unfair world, if I'm allowed to be openly cynic. Same treatment for all.

Thirdly; it calls them out on their privileges. It gives us trans people words to call them out on their privilege. And we know how (most) privileged people

1. don't see themselves as privileged

2. don't want to be called privileged

3. don't want others to have the same privileges

and we know how they tend to react if one ore more of these things happen.

So it makes a lot sense to me.

My experience is that the more aware people are of lgbtq+ people's struggles and realities and the more supportive they are the less the have an issue with it. It's also applicable to being aware of your white privilege or straight privilege. My best friend refers to herself as cis all the time (we talk about gender a lot). My parents would never deny/be offended by me using this word to explain something.

I think we just need to keep normalizing the use of this word. Heterosexuality wasn't a thing (as a term) before homosexuality as a term was created too. And it's a "normal" word now.

[Nylocke]

Cisgender is actually offense? Wow now that's what you call crying over spilled milk.

[Crystalia]

I can only guess, but I think, along with not getting to feel their privilege, cis folk feel othered (even though it's not an othering) when we call them cisgender, and very few like that feeling.

[dissolved]

It has its practical uses - i.e. to differentiate between trans and not trans - but only in certain circles, as I see why it's offensive to some. It's the same principle as "allosexual" being used by asexuals on AVEN and tumblr and whatnot, which is quite frankly, a gross word.

[Heart]

It has its practical uses - i.e. to differentiate between trans and not trans - but only in certain circles, as I see why it's offensive to some. It's the same principle as "allosexual" being used by asexuals on AVEN and tumblr and whatnot, which is quite frankly, a gross word.

From my understanding though, allosexual has a history to the word that specifically means "other-sexual" in the sense of "other than heterosexual". So using allosexual to mean all sexuals is appropriating a term that already had meaning to a minority group (I think in Quebec, or a French area of the world).

To the best of my knowledge, cisgendered has never meant anything other than identifying with the gender you were assigned at birth. Am I correct in that?

If that's the case, then I understand why people take insult at our use of allosexual as a synonym to sexual. Sexual already exists as a term and we don't need a second term, and allosexual is stolen from a culture that was already using it to represent a minority group. Cis, however, has no synonym. Calling cisgendered people "normal" is problematic, and calling them by their gender is inaccurate (a trans woman is just as much a woman as a cis woman, so calling cis women just "women" makes it unclear who you're referring to). So there is no real other word for it.

Anywho. Those are my thoughts as to why I do not use allosexual to describe sexuals, but why I see cisgender as an acceptable (and, in fact, the best) term for those whose identities match their birth assignments.

[Qwerty321]

Cisgender is absolutely a necessary word in vocabulary when discussing gender. Intersex people are assigned genders at birth, and many of them are cisgender because they identify with the gender they were assigned at birth (e.g. an intersex person with cryptorchidism being assigned female at birth who grows breasts during puberty).

Cisgender: you identify with the gender assigned at birth

Transgender: you do not identify with the gender assigned at birth

If I don't identify with any gender, should I be cisgender?

[Heart]

Cisgender is absolutely a necessary word in vocabulary when discussing gender. Intersex people are assigned genders at birth, and many of them are cisgender because they identify with the gender they were assigned at birth (e.g. an intersex person with cryptorchidism being assigned female at birth who grows breasts during puberty).

Cisgender: you identify with the gender assigned at birth

Transgender: you do not identify with the gender assigned at birth

If I don't identify with any gender, should I be cisgender?

You could be if that's what feels most comfortable. Or maybe agender. If you feel like you have no gender, but are functionally cisgender and identify as such for convenience, then you'd fit the definition for cisgenderless.

[Qwerty321]

Cisgender is absolutely a necessary word in vocabulary when discussing gender. Intersex people are assigned genders at birth, and many of them are cisgender because they identify with the gender they were assigned at birth (e.g. an intersex person with cryptorchidism being assigned female at birth who grows breasts during puberty).

Cisgender: you identify with the gender assigned at birth

Transgender: you do not identify with the gender assigned at birth

If I don't identify with any gender, should I be cisgender?

You could be if that's what feels most comfortable. Or maybe agender. If you feel like you have no gender, but are functionally cisgender and identify as such for convenience, then you'd fit the definition for cisgenderless.

First of all, what is "identity" in this context? Is it an inner feeling of connection to some group or just a fact of belonging to some group? For example, if someone is let's say Canadian, but they don't care about it and don't feel any connection to their country, do they still have "Canadian" as their identity by default?

[Heart]

To me, identity is more of the former than the latter; a sense of connection with all the others who have that identity, even if I have never met them before. However, there are also identities that are more for practical reasons, for communication. For example, I have a UK passport and am technically a OK citizen, but I got it through one of my parents and I don't feel any of that connection with others who are UK citizens nor did I grow up there. But I am English in the sense that this is shorthand to say that I have a passport from there and am a citizen.

So I guess there are many different definitions of "identity". In some contexts, it means feeling a connection. In others, it is just belonging to a group. I am asexual because of the former, but English because of the latter. I suspect that most people's sexual and gender identities are the former, but I guess it's possible to be the latter (such as a least some cisgenderless folks).

[Qwerty321]

To me, identity is more of the former than the latter; a sense of connection with all the others who have that identity, even if I have never met them before. However, there are also identities that are more for practical reasons, for communication. For example, I have a UK passport and am technically a OK citizen, but I got it through one of my parents and I don't feel any of that connection with others who are UK citizens nor did I grow up there. But I am English in the sense that this is shorthand to say that I have a passport from there and am a citizen.

So I guess there are many different definitions of "identity". In some contexts, it means feeling a connection. In others, it is just belonging to a group. I am asexual because of the former, but English because of the latter. I suspect that most people's sexual and gender identities are the former, but I guess it's possible to be the latter (such as a least some cisgenderless folks).

I see.

So, the reason why I don't like the concept "everyone who is not transgender is cisgender" is because it makes people to take those cisgender identity by default. I don't mind the word "cisgender" and cisgender identity by itself in the meaning "people who are happy about their genders assigned by birth". But for people who confused or questioned about their gender identity "cisgender" sounds just wrong for me, even if those people feel more comfortable "not being trans".

[Zorc]

Their problem is usually ignorance. They often don't understand that it's giving them equal terminology rather than othering them, which is exactly what using the term 'normal' rather than 'cis' does to trans people.