Main Edition
US
FR
June 22, 2023 - 7:00am
On Wednesday, Elon Musk made another off-the-cuff policy announcement on Twitter. The billionaire tech titan tweeted that the words “cis” and “cisgender” were slurs on his platform, and that targeted and repeated use of the “slurs” would result in a suspension. Musk was responding to a tweet by gender-critical activist James Esses, who posted to say that he had “received a slew of messages from trans activists” calling him “cis”.
It’s fair to say most normal people will have never heard of this innocuous-sounding three letter word. Activists will authoritatively tell you that “it’s just an inclusive way to describe people who aren’t trans.” Or if they’re feeling particularly smug, they might point out that it’s “Latin for on the same side as”, as if using a dead language makes it a bona fide real thing. But in normal circles, having a specific word for the 99.4% of the population who don’t identify as trans is about as logical as inventing a term for people who don’t have webbed toes.
Researcher and writer Genevieve Gluck traced the term “cis” back to a somewhat iffy German sexologist called Volkmar Sigusch. He first used the term as an antonym for transgender in 1991. But the concept of having a term for “non-trans” only really makes sense for those who already believe that we each have what is in effect a gendered soul, which may or may not align with the sex we are. It is far from a neutral descriptor.
Perhaps what is most irksome about the cis label is that even those of us who reject trans ideology in its totality risk being told by some jumped-up gender adjudicator that our consent is not necessary; we simply are cis. This seems more than a little rich from a movement which holds that words can be deadly weapons.
Despite Musk’s takeover, Twitter’s opaque terms and conditions still prohibit so-called “misgendering”. And in this regard, it seems fair that if the beliefs of those who identify as trans are protected then so should the rights of non-believers to not be called “cis”.
But there is something troubling about the ease with which Musk has made what is in effect a policy announcement conversationally on Twitter, as if the platform were his plaything. And while the rebalancing of rights away from the demands of trans activists is overdue, it’s also an alarming reminder that the world’s biggest public forum is in fact privately owned and subject to the whims of one man. Ultimately, just because ideas are freely exchanged, the platform is not a democracy.
US-developed social media platforms have been allowed to become a vector for the spread of gender identity ideology. Musk has used his position to stop this new form of imperialism, and few of the Anglosphere celebs who huffed and puffed in protest have followed through by leaving.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“Twitter’s opaque terms and conditions still prohibit so-called “misgendering”
No Twitter prohibits correct gendering. It is those identify biological males as female, and biological females as males who are guilty of misgendering, and they do that with complete impunity.
“Twitter’s opaque terms and conditions still prohibit so-called “misgendering”
No Twitter prohibits correct gendering. It is those identify biological males as female, and biological females as males who are guilty of misgendering, and they do that with complete impunity.
“Cis” is a truly horrible word that IS used as a derogatory slur and it has no place in civilised discourse. It is used by antihuman bigots (transhumanists) just like the “N” word is used by racists and the “F” word is used by homophobes. I would expect any platform to remove posts that used such aggressive language. Indeed, I was recently successful in getting Amazon to remove a very nasty review using the word “cis” so there is progress. What breaks my heart is when I hear young people using the term because they have been radicalised into thinking it’s “respectful”. I always correct them. Let’s get this revolting slur word OUT of our lexicon. In fact, I would like the attitude of “transhumanists” to receive the same outrage as “racists” and “homophobes” and “antisemites” – they are just as bigoted. That would be progress.
abh Lord Ennword… I’m sure that he was at the next peg on a partridge day at Holkham a few seasons back?
a member of The Terf Club, i’ll be bound… and gagged and S and M….
a member of The Terf Club, i’ll be bound… and gagged and S and M….
I think that you are simply echoing the weaponised ‘victimhood’ tactics of the wokistas by taking this line of argument.
‘Cis’ isn’t a hateful term, whichever way you look at it, just a completely meaningless one.
“Transhumanist bigots”: Mary Harrington has argued that the Pill was the original transhumanist technology. I’d argue that you could say the same of modern medicine. Can you be bigoted against yourself? Simply name calling doesn’t cut it as a response to this movement.
abh Lord Ennword… I’m sure that he was at the next peg on a partridge day at Holkham a few seasons back?
I think that you are simply echoing the weaponised ‘victimhood’ tactics of the wokistas by taking this line of argument.
‘Cis’ isn’t a hateful term, whichever way you look at it, just a completely meaningless one.
“Transhumanist bigots”: Mary Harrington has argued that the Pill was the original transhumanist technology. I’d argue that you could say the same of modern medicine. Can you be bigoted against yourself? Simply name calling doesn’t cut it as a response to this movement.
“Cis” is a truly horrible word that IS used as a derogatory slur and it has no place in civilised discourse. It is used by antihuman bigots (transhumanists) just like the “N” word is used by racists and the “F” word is used by homophobes. I would expect any platform to remove posts that used such aggressive language. Indeed, I was recently successful in getting Amazon to remove a very nasty review using the word “cis” so there is progress. What breaks my heart is when I hear young people using the term because they have been radicalised into thinking it’s “respectful”. I always correct them. Let’s get this revolting slur word OUT of our lexicon. In fact, I would like the attitude of “transhumanists” to receive the same outrage as “racists” and “homophobes” and “antisemites” – they are just as bigoted. That would be progress.
Cis is often used as a slur nowadays by transactivisits. Along with TERF.
The difference is many “TERFs” are proud to describe themselves in that way. No one (unless radicalised – see my post above) calls themselves “cis”
Yes, anyone who uses the term ‘cis’ seriously is certainly not someone to be taken seriously.
Yes, anyone who uses the term ‘cis’ seriously is certainly not someone to be taken seriously.
I believe you are referring to”the mentally ill community.” We must try for precision in language.
The difference is many “TERFs” are proud to describe themselves in that way. No one (unless radicalised – see my post above) calls themselves “cis”
I believe you are referring to”the mentally ill community.” We must try for precision in language.
Cis is often used as a slur nowadays by transactivisits. Along with TERF.
Excellent point, very well made.
My only concern about this is not giving the stupid bvggre$ any ideas. Non-flippered people, anyone?
Phalangists, obviously.
True, and we need to frame this in such a way that the majority appears to be the exception. Webbed feet are rarely caused by bone fusion and the phalanges remain in tact (as they are in many pinnipeds) I therefore propose non-syndactylists as an inclusive term for people without webbed feet. Wear it with pride!
Edit: was reply to H Parker.
Normal, is unquestionably the most obvious. Likely a practically universal, intuitive response around the world.
Well played!
True, and we need to frame this in such a way that the majority appears to be the exception. Webbed feet are rarely caused by bone fusion and the phalanges remain in tact (as they are in many pinnipeds) I therefore propose non-syndactylists as an inclusive term for people without webbed feet. Wear it with pride!
Edit: was reply to H Parker.
Normal, is unquestionably the most obvious. Likely a practically universal, intuitive response around the world.
Well played!
Phalangists, obviously.
Except there are a few people who actually, indisputably, categorically do have webbed toes. It’s more like inventing a term for people who don’t think they are the reincarnation of Napoleon Bonaparte.
My only concern about this is not giving the stupid bvggre$ any ideas. Non-flippered people, anyone?
Except there are a few people who actually, indisputably, categorically do have webbed toes. It’s more like inventing a term for people who don’t think they are the reincarnation of Napoleon Bonaparte.
Excellent point, very well made.
“as if the platform were his plaything.”
The platform is his plaything. He bought it. It’s his. He can make any policies he likes.
Damn, you beat me to that one. Quite right.
Damn, you beat me to that one. Quite right.
“as if the platform were his plaything.”
The platform is his plaything. He bought it. It’s his. He can make any policies he likes.
I totally agreed with you until your penultimate 2 paras Jo.
I’m not troubled at all by Musk’s edict (and Twitter is his plaything – he paid handsomely for it).
We need a few more edicts to counter gender ideology . For example, why is the Dept for Education consulting, reviewing, analysing, reporting on schools’ affirmation policies and bringing in dodgy fetishists to teach kink to 12 year olds? Schools don’t need reams of havering guidance with endless get out clauses decided ‘on an individual basis’ – they just need to be told to stop it. Why is the NHS continuing to put trans identifying men on female wards? Why can’t our government just say ‘No’ on behalf of the majority who democratically put them in power?
I totally agreed with you until your penultimate 2 paras Jo.
I’m not troubled at all by Musk’s edict (and Twitter is his plaything – he paid handsomely for it).
We need a few more edicts to counter gender ideology . For example, why is the Dept for Education consulting, reviewing, analysing, reporting on schools’ affirmation policies and bringing in dodgy fetishists to teach kink to 12 year olds? Schools don’t need reams of havering guidance with endless get out clauses decided ‘on an individual basis’ – they just need to be told to stop it. Why is the NHS continuing to put trans identifying men on female wards? Why can’t our government just say ‘No’ on behalf of the majority who democratically put them in power?
Let’s also object to forced labeling of ourselves as cis or heterosexual on the grounds that they entail a heinous invasion of our privacy. My inner life, my most essential self-concepts, my sexuality, my sexual behavior, my deeply-held opinions, are 100% MY business and my business alone. Forced self-disclosure is a form of mind-rape.
Let’s also object to forced labeling of ourselves as cis or heterosexual on the grounds that they entail a heinous invasion of our privacy. My inner life, my most essential self-concepts, my sexuality, my sexual behavior, my deeply-held opinions, are 100% MY business and my business alone. Forced self-disclosure is a form of mind-rape.
The term ‘cis’ has no legitimate meaning, just as the term ‘trans’ has no legitimate meaning. They do not reference something that objectively exists in the real world.
On the other hand, the term ‘eunuch’ has meaning, as it refers to a man who has had his balls removed.
There’s an argument that believers in gender identity ideology should be permitted to use words such as ‘cis’ within the language of their faith. It is essentially no different from allowing Catholics to refer to ‘transubstantiation’ or scientologists to talk about ‘engrams’. Non-believers might think it’s a load of old rubbish, but, in a liberal society, they have a right to their own faith.
But this cuts both ways. Those who don’t believe in gender identity ideology have rights too, and they should not be compelled to use ideological language such as ‘cis’. They must be free to use another word that better reflects their position. I would suggest ‘actual’, or ‘real’.
Excellent point
Excellent point
There’s an argument that believers in gender identity ideology should be permitted to use words such as ‘cis’ within the language of their faith. It is essentially no different from allowing Catholics to refer to ‘transubstantiation’ or scientologists to talk about ‘engrams’. Non-believers might think it’s a load of old rubbish, but, in a liberal society, they have a right to their own faith.
But this cuts both ways. Those who don’t believe in gender identity ideology have rights too, and they should not be compelled to use ideological language such as ‘cis’. They must be free to use another word that better reflects their position. I would suggest ‘actual’, or ‘real’.
The term ‘cis’ has no legitimate meaning, just as the term ‘trans’ has no legitimate meaning. They do not reference something that objectively exists in the real world.
On the other hand, the term ‘eunuch’ has meaning, as it refers to a man who has had his balls removed.
I hate the term “cis.” It’s very manipulative. It’s not exactly a slur (or, at least, it isn’t always a slur), but its very use implies that “cis women” and transwomen are two different kinds of women. Calling biological women “cis women” is the same thing as saying “transwomen are women,” a statement that many biological women are offended by. Many of the people who use the term “cis women” know this, but don’t care. Nevertheless, I don’t think that people should get kicked off of Twitter for using it. So strong and so elemental is the conflict between what’s best for women and what’s best for transwomen, that the two groups can’t even debate without offending each other. I thought the idea was: “Don’t cancel people just for causing offense.”
I think the difference is when the word is used as a pejorative term to sling anger and make an ad hominem attack, I presume you wouldn’t agree with posts referring to a black person as a “N****” or a gay man as a “F**” as it is such an ugly use of language and so offensive. But you can call people what they are “a black person”, “a gay person”, a “woman” a “transgender woman”. There’s no such thing as a “cis woman”. That’s why it’s so offensive. It’s a made-up term to oppress women. It needs to go!
“It’s a made-up term to oppress women.”
What you say about “cis” is true. It’s a made-up word to promote transgender ideology. But that ideology is not necessarily about oppressing women–not unless you believe that this is its whole point for all trans women or all trans men. If you do, then you need to explain and support your claim.
Oh no, not at all! There are many genuine transsexual people in the world. They are by far the biggest victims of this distasteful nonsense as I’m sure the majority of them don’t want to be associated with it. This is a kind of cultish agenda that has a life of its own and is pushed by many sinister agents of dubious intent. Another aspect of it is homophobia. They don’t want any homosexual people in the world and seek to “fix” this by making children who sense they are gay change genders so they become “straight”. It’s truly heinous, it’s a cesspit. This “cis” word is just one weapon amongst many.
no such word as homophobia: a meaningless invention that would mean an allergy to the single, were it not yet another bon mot from that little known philosopher Testiclese…
Language evolves and new words are constantly coined! There IS such a thing as homophobia (the fear / hatred of homosexual people) and I’ve been on the receiving end of it eg ” you queer b*****d” then more likely “batty boy”.
I agree with your etymological point, but we refer to “workaholism” which also doesn’t make literal sense. The double negative is considered illogical in English but is commonplace in French.
Language is a living thing, not some fossilised thesaurus.
Language evolves and new words are constantly coined! There IS such a thing as homophobia (the fear / hatred of homosexual people) and I’ve been on the receiving end of it eg ” you queer b*****d” then more likely “batty boy”.
I agree with your etymological point, but we refer to “workaholism” which also doesn’t make literal sense. The double negative is considered illogical in English but is commonplace in French.
Language is a living thing, not some fossilised thesaurus.
no such word as homophobia: a meaningless invention that would mean an allergy to the single, were it not yet another bon mot from that little known philosopher Testiclese…
Oh no, not at all! There are many genuine transsexual people in the world. They are by far the biggest victims of this distasteful nonsense as I’m sure the majority of them don’t want to be associated with it. This is a kind of cultish agenda that has a life of its own and is pushed by many sinister agents of dubious intent. Another aspect of it is homophobia. They don’t want any homosexual people in the world and seek to “fix” this by making children who sense they are gay change genders so they become “straight”. It’s truly heinous, it’s a cesspit. This “cis” word is just one weapon amongst many.
I’m afraid I will never call a man any kind of a woman, and cis is a term that shows support for the mantra “transwomen are women “ hence it is offensive to anyone who knows humans can’t change sex.
My Sandhurst drill S’arnt used to call us ” Big girls blouses”…..
My Sandhurst drill S’arnt used to call us ” Big girls blouses”…..
Offence cannot be given unless it is taken… I do like to take afence out Hunting, though….
“It’s a made-up term to oppress women.”
What you say about “cis” is true. It’s a made-up word to promote transgender ideology. But that ideology is not necessarily about oppressing women–not unless you believe that this is its whole point for all trans women or all trans men. If you do, then you need to explain and support your claim.
I’m afraid I will never call a man any kind of a woman, and cis is a term that shows support for the mantra “transwomen are women “ hence it is offensive to anyone who knows humans can’t change sex.
Offence cannot be given unless it is taken… I do like to take afence out Hunting, though….
I think the difference is when the word is used as a pejorative term to sling anger and make an ad hominem attack, I presume you wouldn’t agree with posts referring to a black person as a “N****” or a gay man as a “F**” as it is such an ugly use of language and so offensive. But you can call people what they are “a black person”, “a gay person”, a “woman” a “transgender woman”. There’s no such thing as a “cis woman”. That’s why it’s so offensive. It’s a made-up term to oppress women. It needs to go!
I hate the term “cis.” It’s very manipulative. It’s not exactly a slur (or, at least, it isn’t always a slur), but its very use implies that “cis women” and transwomen are two different kinds of women. Calling biological women “cis women” is the same thing as saying “transwomen are women,” a statement that many biological women are offended by. Many of the people who use the term “cis women” know this, but don’t care. Nevertheless, I don’t think that people should get kicked off of Twitter for using it. So strong and so elemental is the conflict between what’s best for women and what’s best for transwomen, that the two groups can’t even debate without offending each other. I thought the idea was: “Don’t cancel people just for causing offense.”
Good!
Good!
Anyone calling me ‘cis’ gets filed away in the box marked “those people”, along with the rest of the blue-haired they/them tuuats.
Anyone calling me ‘cis’ gets filed away in the box marked “those people”, along with the rest of the blue-haired they/them tuuats.
So before Musk Twitter was the bastion of free, liberal, open speech. What rot. Whoever is in charge of twitter sets the rules and at the moment I’d prefer Musk to the previous regime. As ever time will tell
So before Musk Twitter was the bastion of free, liberal, open speech. What rot. Whoever is in charge of twitter sets the rules and at the moment I’d prefer Musk to the previous regime. As ever time will tell
It is characteristic of juvenile narcissists and other mentally disturbed people to need a form of xenophobia, in this case a verbal description, to justify their psychosis. As if anyone other than them really cares. The real problem is their goal is to utterly destroy the concept of the normal, thus magically erasing their own abnormality. This, of course, will not work in the real world where norms are created perforce. Never mind, say the trans psychopaths, we are interested in the real world anyway. Fine, say the rest of us. Live your fantasies in private, but don’t drag us – or our children – into your virtueless virtual reality. We are the 99%, and proud of it.
It is characteristic of juvenile narcissists and other mentally disturbed people to need a form of xenophobia, in this case a verbal description, to justify their psychosis. As if anyone other than them really cares. The real problem is their goal is to utterly destroy the concept of the normal, thus magically erasing their own abnormality. This, of course, will not work in the real world where norms are created perforce. Never mind, say the trans psychopaths, we are interested in the real world anyway. Fine, say the rest of us. Live your fantasies in private, but don’t drag us – or our children – into your virtueless virtual reality. We are the 99%, and proud of it.
I read this somewhere and thought it was apt:
“Are you a Catholic or a Protestant?”
“I am an atheist.”
“But are you a Catholic atheist, or a Protestant atheist?”
“I am an atheist.”
Ah, The “Glasgow Atheist” question! As actually asked of me in my “non-denominational” high school by one of the local hard boys trying to work out if i had any taint of Fenian blood.
I don’t even get the benefit of the doubt on that question when I visit Glasgow!
I don’t even get the benefit of the doubt on that question when I visit Glasgow!
Ah, The “Glasgow Atheist” question! As actually asked of me in my “non-denominational” high school by one of the local hard boys trying to work out if i had any taint of Fenian blood.
I read this somewhere and thought it was apt:
“Are you a Catholic or a Protestant?”
“I am an atheist.”
“But are you a Catholic atheist, or a Protestant atheist?”
“I am an atheist.”
Isn’t is Musk’s private business so can make the rules just like they’re so blatantly made by other publications with total disregard for a lot of people? Why can’t he make the “what is in effect a policy announcement conversationally”, should he parade downtown or go on CNN?
Isn’t is Musk’s private business so can make the rules just like they’re so blatantly made by other publications with total disregard for a lot of people? Why can’t he make the “what is in effect a policy announcement conversationally”, should he parade downtown or go on CNN?
If a bad thing is happening then I don’t mind if a “despot” stops it from happening. More power to his elbow.
If a bad thing is happening then I don’t mind if a “despot” stops it from happening. More power to his elbow.
Musk owns it and can do anything he likes. If people don’t like it, tough. They can take their argument to Facebook or another of the scores of social media platforms.
Musk owns it and can do anything he likes. If people don’t like it, tough. They can take their argument to Facebook or another of the scores of social media platforms.
In defence of Elon, do we know it was an ‘off the cuff’ policy announcement, a whim? Maybe it was carefully thought out.
In defence of Elon, do we know it was an ‘off the cuff’ policy announcement, a whim? Maybe it was carefully thought out.
1- I do not need to identify as a woman…because I just am one.
2- I do not need to sign my name off with my pronouns, because who really gives a damn.
3- I am not a “cis” woman because see point 1.
4- Those who own the platform make the rules…it’s free speech until they don’t like what you’re saying.
5- I choose not to take offense because I’m a grown up.
6- I comfortable with people not conforming to the stereotypical ideals of what men or woman “should look like”
7-I am very sorry for the genuine trans people who are lumped in with all the noise and nonsense and performative exhibitions from extremists.
8- it’s easy to think the worlds gone bonkers, but mostly it’s just on the internet.
Have a chat and a coffee with a kid who is identifying as something other and you’ll see we all have more in common than you think.
1- I do not need to identify as a woman…because I just am one.
2- I do not need to sign my name off with my pronouns, because who really gives a damn.
3- I am not a “cis” woman because see point 1.
4- Those who own the platform make the rules…it’s free speech until they don’t like what you’re saying.
5- I choose not to take offense because I’m a grown up.
6- I comfortable with people not conforming to the stereotypical ideals of what men or woman “should look like”
7-I am very sorry for the genuine trans people who are lumped in with all the noise and nonsense and performative exhibitions from extremists.
8- it’s easy to think the worlds gone bonkers, but mostly it’s just on the internet.
Have a chat and a coffee with a kid who is identifying as something other and you’ll see we all have more in common than you think.
In current usage, this prefix of a non-word is more of a silly affectation than anything to get deeply worried about. While I can see how it might be used legitimately–to distinguish two or three different John Smiths with divergent at-birth plumbing maybe?–it is indeed pretty pointless: “Have you met Joe Blow? I want to forewarn you that he is not a hemophiliac!” (I know that’s just a variant on the “webbed toes” crack).
When I first heard the term several years ago, in the crumbling halls of American academia, I thought it was a subtle way to insinuate a connection between “performed” masculinity and hidden effeminacy: “cissy”. While I now see that many are indeed painfully serious about this usually pointless prefix, I still think that is part of why it gets thrown at men in particular: “Tough guy are ya? What a cis-white-het-norm-patriarchal cliché!”
Either way, the dumb prefix is both here to say and sure not to become the norm (cis-het or not), except in well-earned ironical derision, like with your mates at the pub or when meeting other dads at school functions. You know, run-of-the-mill aspects of masculinity that some idiots will call toxic.
In current usage, this prefix of a non-word is more of a silly affectation than anything to get deeply worried about. While I can see how it might be used legitimately–to distinguish two or three different John Smiths with divergent at-birth plumbing maybe?–it is indeed pretty pointless: “Have you met Joe Blow? I want to forewarn you that he is not a hemophiliac!” (I know that’s just a variant on the “webbed toes” crack).
When I first heard the term several years ago, in the crumbling halls of American academia, I thought it was a subtle way to insinuate a connection between “performed” masculinity and hidden effeminacy: “cissy”. While I now see that many are indeed painfully serious about this usually pointless prefix, I still think that is part of why it gets thrown at men in particular: “Tough guy are ya? What a cis-white-het-norm-patriarchal cliché!”
Either way, the dumb prefix is both here to say and sure not to become the norm (cis-het or not), except in well-earned ironical derision, like with your mates at the pub or when meeting other dads at school functions. You know, run-of-the-mill aspects of masculinity that some idiots will call toxic.
Reasons why I’d never make it as a politician. In my view:
There is no such thing as mental illnessA good walk / cycle and making a “to do” list sorts out most personal issues. On no account go blabbing to anyone- sort it out yourself, ffs.Trans does not exist – it’s just a form of gay cancellation for gay people who think they’re above being gay. metoo and blm are secular cults, full of strident thickos. They exist in opposition to reason. Voting should be compulsory, and non-voters fined (at source via PAYE / benefits).Absentee Dads should be fined, and half their income diverted to a national child benefit scheme.Birching in place of ASBOs.One year’s compulsory national service – can be in the army, or doing community voluntary work. The point is to put something back in to society. Who’s in lol
Reasons why I’d never make it as a politician. In my view:
There is no such thing as mental illnessA good walk / cycle and making a “to do” list sorts out most personal issues. On no account go blabbing to anyone- sort it out yourself, ffs.Trans does not exist – it’s just a form of gay cancellation for gay people who think they’re above being gay. metoo and blm are secular cults, full of strident thickos. They exist in opposition to reason. Voting should be compulsory, and non-voters fined (at source via PAYE / benefits).Absentee Dads should be fined, and half their income diverted to a national child benefit scheme.Birching in place of ASBOs.One year’s compulsory national service – can be in the army, or doing community voluntary work. The point is to put something back in to society. Who’s in lol
100%
100%
Re: Twitter. “ But short-form posts are the perfect tool for sifting out extraneous information and getting to the bones of any matter. “ Is the author serious?
Re: Twitter. “ But short-form posts are the perfect tool for sifting out extraneous information and getting to the bones of any matter. “ Is the author serious?
Twitter is a very bad idea. It’s a forum for ill informed and odd people to broadcast statements that are often quite wrong.
Twitter is a very bad idea. It’s a forum for ill informed and odd people to broadcast statements that are often quite wrong.
are you ‘ taking the cis”?
are you ‘ taking the cis”?
Thanks for this. The baseline problem with accepting “cis” is the same as accepting “trans:” the terms falsely convey that there is more than one way to be female or male. (Never mind the conflation of “sex” with “gender,” a word that needs to be put in permanent time out after behaving so badly.)
Unfortunately it seems that gender, a social construct, is in fact replacing sex, a biological reality. Fantasy versus reality. A sign of our times.