Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Cis is hostile terminology? Really?

Written by Lisa Harney
June 29, 2009 at 1:44 am

http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/cis-is-hostile-terminology-really/ (http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/cis-is-hostile-terminology-really/)

A regular (a cis gay man) at Pam's House Blend expresses that he feels "cis" is offensive and demeaning, and that trans people who use it are basically bad people (plus we're bad people if we're unhappy with John Aravosis' transphobic remarks):

    For the record, I find cis- to be offensive. In general, I thought our community (I mean the whole LGBT rainbow here) uses terms that are acceptable to those being described.

snip

Cis is a neutral term applied to people who aren't trans. It's intended to decenter the notion that not being trans is the natural, default state for human beings and that being trans is a deviation, and that trans people are other. Most terminology that cis people use to define themselves as cis generally reifies cissexism and cissupremacy.

To the degree that a term is hostile or neutral depends on usage, not definition.  But hey, thanks for playing our game.

the cissies don't like the fact that a label was invented for them  :P

Everything is hostile if you say it right.
Just try with that sentence, read it out loud as a "matter of fact", then read it as "sarcastic insult" then read it as a "joke".

Sometimes people take things in ways they are not meant and when it comes to the internet, sometimes people read "tones of voice" other than were intended when the words were written.

My carefully considered and tactfully worded opinion is ... "what a load of old bollocks".

I tend to align with the previously expressed view that it's more about usage than definition, as it's the pejorative *usage* of a term that makes it offensive.

Anyway, a large number of folks out there apparently don't know what the term means anyway.  I've lost count of how many times someone replies with "cis-what?  What does that mean?"

I did chuckle at Flan's "cissies".  I hadn't thought of myself that way :) lol...

i suppose the problem with 'cis' is the presumption that someone else is comfortable with their assigned gender. 

Everything is hostile if you say it right.

Pretty much this.  Thank god. 

I had a guy one day who asked if I could say something without using a four/eleven letter word in every sentence.  So I said: "Mama and I shan't be going to the shore whilst Papa still has the shakes from the syphilis." He told me to go back to swearing.

PS
I've lost count of how many times someone replies with "cis-what?

If you are using words that other people don't understand, you are not communicating to them. 

Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2009, 02:57:41 PM

I've lost count of how many times someone replies with "cis-what?

If you are using words that other people don't understand, you are not communicating to them.

Yup.  It's not a term I was familiar with either until I came here.  I'd never heard it used previously and pretty much every one of the "say what?" responses was from other folks in here too.  I won't discard the term entirely but will certainly be very selective about my future use of the term.

Quote from: Mister on June 29, 2009, 02:52:41 PM
i suppose the problem with 'cis' is the presumption that someone else is comfortable with their assigned gender.

agreed!

Most language has quite a lot of assumptions attached. I personally don't like using the word straight, to me it implies that there is something "right" about it and thus something "wrong" with other sexualities...

Z

You know what the difference between genius and idiot is?  It's not about what you know.  It's about how you can convey it to other people. 

If I'm trying to explain something to you, or convince you of something, and I'm tossing around words that you've never heard in an attempt to a) make you think I'm a lot smarter than I am, or than you are or, b) confuse the issues by slathering on words that have no real meaning in an attempt to cover up the notion that I really can't even begin to explain to a total moron, much less you (somewhat smarter), what I mean.

[and I'm all about seeing it as the underlined part myself, cause, it usually is true]

If you do either of those things, your not smart, your not convincing anyone, your not enlightening anyone, your even not succeeding at beginning to explain it to anyone... then, you are an idiot.

I don't care how many degrees you have,
or where you went to school,
if you can't explain it,
then you be the fool.

And really, its a damn ugly word.  Yeesh, it was invented (coined) by someone who thinks the English Language is something to be rendered by meathooks and hammers.  I could have come up with a much prettier word - meaning more or less the same thing - and considering how many trans persons really, really, want nothing more than to be considered 'cis' could not we have honored them a bit more and come up with something nicer. 

Rule one is in convincing people of something, anything, is not to use words they don't get, or will not like.  There are very real language reasons why one side is "Pro Life" and the other is not "Pro Death" but "Pro Choice" while the other side avoids being "Anti-Choice."

cis- (Prefix) From the Latin preposition cis ("on this side of").

1. On this side of.

2. (chemistry) Forming names of chemical compounds in which two atoms or groups are situated on the same side of some plane of symmetry passing through the compound.

Derived usages:
* In chemistry, cis- refers to cis-trans isomerism
* In molecular biology, cis- refers to cis-acting
* In gender studies, cis- refers to cisgender

Antonyms: trans- ultra-

Autumn's been heading in this general direction for months, hell, perhaps years.

It's always about her, as someone at Lisa's site pointed out there were some rather scary ways Autumn wrote about the Zapata trial, putting herself as "at risk" as if Andrade had home-boys out to find and slay Autumn.

The radio show recently where the "reporter" becomes the celeb out to speak for "trans-people everywhere." As if.

Clearly Autumn's gone way past any reasonable usefulness to anyone other than herself. Meet the new John Aravosis. :)

Quote from: Mister on June 29, 2009, 02:52:41 PM
i suppose the problem with 'cis' is the presumption that someone else is comfortable with their assigned gender.

I suppose the problem with cis- is that it perpetuates a cis-trans- binary. Why is there not also the word mediogender for androgyns?

It's things like this that are the reason "PC" is a disparaging term. Pretty much any terminology will be offensive to somebody. I don't mean that to defend being offensive, but just to acknowledge that language is thorny. There's a balance between being sensitive to other people and just speaking clearly.

So some guy doesn't like "cis." Well, I don't particularly like "trans" or any word that uses it. But you have to suck it up and choose a word at some point.

Yeah, and that Latin crap.  SO what.  Are not we way past that?  Does not American English have a rich vocabulary of words not fricking Latin?  Sure.  It's American English, the most frickin flexible (see, I bet you knew just what world to read into 'frickign' didn't you, of course - even when I misspell it - American English, its just that flexible) language ever frickin invented?  Of course it is.  Why not pull a word from say any of the following, which could be a list of all languages, as I don't think a word for 'this side' as opposed to, well, say, 'the other side' is all that frickin rare.

So perhaps a Chinese word, we use several on the west coast.  Or a Thai word, they might have a swell one, bonus points for it being hard to spell so bloggers look even dumber when they write it. Or, go American.  Hell, it's the frickign Forth of July, so why not choose an Ojibwa, or Kowa, or Apache, or Iroquois world. 

I'm really, really sure, if nothing else, the Sioux had a words for "us" and 'them'.  Damn sure they sounded better than Latin words. 

Quote from: Lisbeth on June 29, 2009, 04:23:33 PM
I suppose the problem with cis- is that it perpetuates a cis-trans- binary.

I don't see the problem. We use "bright" and "dark" to describe the density of visible spectrum photons in a room without any concern that the words perpetuate the "bright-dark binary."

Nice try Alyssa, but I'm not buying that for a NYC second coming from you.  You know a word like "albedo" [ed. note: its The spectrum of reflected light from a planet - Don't worry, I had to look it up too, the point is, I bet Alyssa did not] that measures the degree of light.  Like there is a measurement for darkness, or for ski slopes, or for degree of difficulty on an assent.  Photography has all sorts of wonderful measures for distinguishing between light and darkness too.  Nothing is really one or the other, but rather, simply shades in between.

So to does art, where in fact everything is a play between shadows and light, symbols and truth, light and darkness - and none really exist - it's all in the in between. 

Sure, at some point, way on down the road there is a binary, but before that point, its all probability baby.

Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2009, 04:39:40 PM
Yeah, and that Latin crap.  SO what.  Are not we way past that?  Does not American English have a rich vocabulary of words not fricking Latin?  Sure.  It's American English, the most frickin flexible (see, I bet you knew just what world to read into 'frickign' didn't you, of course, American English, its just that flexible) language ever frickin invented? 

Sure. There are lots of words in English that don't derive from Latin. Most of them are German, French, or Greek. English is so frickin flexible because it agglomerates words from every language it comes in contact with. By the way, that 'frickin' word is borrowed from Dutch. Maybe you want we should just go back to speaking Anglo-saxon? Dat wer no jenne kann.

Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2009, 04:39:40 PM
I'm really, really sure, if nothing else, the Sioux had a words for "us" and 'them'.  Damn sure they sounded better than Latin words.

I don't think 'lakotahgender' trips off the tongue very well.

more fun to type than cisgender is.  And so, find a word, find a good word, a right word but a pretty word, and go from there. 

Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2009, 04:39:40 PM
I'm really, really sure, if nothing else, the Sioux had a words for "us" and 'them'. 

Oh, and 'Sioux' is a hostile word when used in reference to the Lakotah people. They don't like being called snakes.

Tekla, exactly my point. Perhaps I wasn't clear. Words can be contrasting without being binary. Binaries are anathema to my world view, but we use binary terminology to make comparisons along a particular apectrum, like "hard" vs. "easy", "bright" vs. "dark", "hot" vs. "cold." Of course, those words aren't sufficient, but they are certainly useful. It's all in how you use the words.

As to albedo, poorly managed cattle grazing decreases the albedo of the spring snowpack in the Rockies because of winter dust storms blowing in from the Colorado Plateau, which is awesome if you like whitewater kayaking, but crappy if you like to ski on surfaces other than dirt. :( (No, I didn't have to look it up.)

As to albedo, poorly managed cattle grazing decreases the albedo of the spring snowpack in the Rockies because of winter dust storms blowing in from the Colorado Plateau, which is awesome if you like whitewater kayaking, but crappy if you like to ski on surfaces other than dirt.

Kudos, I've never thought of that, but I'm sure it works out, I've seen it in action enough living in the Midwest and driving out there a few times a year.

And I'm sure you didn't have to look it up, who in the hell would even know to look that up without knowing it first.

Quote from: tekla on June 29, 2009, 04:11:48 PM
[...]
If I'm trying to explain something to you, or convince you of something, and I'm tossing around words that you've never heard in an attempt to a) make you think I'm a lot smarter than I am, or than you are or, b) confuse the issues by slathering on words that have no real meaning in an attempt to cover up the notion that I really can't even begin to explain to a total moron, much less you (somewhat smarter), what I mean.

[and I'm all about seeing it as the underlined part myself, cause, it usually is true]

I agree completely and have made the same observations.  It's particularly common when people try to project an aura of sophistication - there's certainly a difference between being articulate and plain old linguistic posturing.

Although I don't mind cis, it ultimately feels rather limiting to me, again placing things in binary terms. I happen to be trans, although my partner doesn't identify as trans, I'd have a hard time identifying hir as cis. Sie is clearly something other.

Another problem with labeling cis, trans, inter, etc., is the assumption that we actually know what gender someone is.

Z

Quote from: Zythyra on June 30, 2009, 07:14:35 AM
[...]
Another problem with labeling cis, trans, inter, etc., is the assumption that we actually know what gender someone is.

Right!  I use the term either generically (not referring to any specific individual) or self-referentially because I know what gender I am.

Both Chrome and Firefox seem to think cisgendered is hostile.  There's an angry red line underneath it every time I type it.
:P

Mister, you can just tell 'em it's not (right click - add to dictionary) and they cool off about it :P

Quote from: Mister on June 30, 2009, 01:00:11 PM
Both Chrome and Firefox seem to think cisgendered is hostile.  There's an angry red line underneath it every time I type it.
:P

I believe you'll find that that is their spellcheck that's not updated yet to handle those words as being standard English. You could prolly type pugnatious rather than pugnacious and get that same red line. I doubt that the line is angry though. :)

Have to agree with Tekla on the word being kinda ugly. Always make me think 'cysts' when I hear it.
But I don't think we really have another word that doesn't 'otherize' us. Bio male, genetic female, natal female, non-trans, etc just further us as being 'unnatural'. I find this offense of the word 'cis' kind of disingenuous coming from a people who don't term heterosexuals as non-gays but straights.

Quote from: Nero on June 30, 2009, 03:45:56 PM
Have to agree with Tekla on the word being kinda ugly. Always make me think 'cysts' when I hear it.
But I don't think we really have another word that doesn't 'otherize' us. Bio male, genetic female, natal female, non-trans, etc just further us as being 'unnatural'. I find this offense of the word 'cis' kind of disingenuous coming from a people who don't term heterosexuals as non-gays but straights.

Or as breeders or other such words that are hardly unloaded when they are used.

In point of fact I suspect that "lane" was a provocateur who was waiting for something of the sort so he could make the "O, I'm offended remarks" and that Autumn ate the entire bait.

Some words may not be pretty. English isn't French and words aren't coined for the beauty of their sound and sense. English usage tends to either grab whatever's available or, like German, starts to pile on words in a series without leaving spaces between them to make it's new words.

N~

so.    why can't we grab a pretty world instead of that Patriarchal.Latin crap?  Or. Is it that, in the end, they are SO HOT, for all that Lain crap, Patriarchy and all? 

Quote from: tekla on June 30, 2009, 09:41:36 PM
so.    why can't we grab a pretty world instead of that Patriarchal.Latin crap?  Or. Is it that, in the end, they are SO HOT, for all that Latin crap, Patriarchy and all? 

Who's your daddy, Kat? :laugh:

To answer your question we have this strange notion in America that Roman/Latin means educated and good and right, apparently.

I mean the "founders" weren't really bashful about setting things up to look and follow Roman republican usages. And science has always had that penchant for things like Canis canis or Canis ordinare or other such Latinate designations for it's meanings and terms -- or add a bit of Greek with the Latin and you really have the pinnacle of learning exposed as being your own ability.

So, I suspect that a biologist like Serano, prolly thought "cis" was a pretty good idea and used it. Others used it because she used it and they liked it as well. Afterall, it sounds scientific, eh? I mean "third gender" or "women born trans" (again, no great terms for men born trans, prolly because the women have most of the computer techie type jobs and the men are school teachers or some other occupation. :)

You know how all of that works. OK, lets start working on a beautiful and flowing term for transsexuals or for androgynes or for cross-dressers, etc, etc, etc. I mean, when it comes right down to it not much sounds very flow-y when dealing with sex/gender, does it? I mean, even "man" and "woman" aren't all that "beautiful."

N~

Who's your daddy, Kat?

Oh mama Nichole, you are my daddy.  Really.  Please stop spanking me (over your knee) and I'll tell you all the bad things I've done.  Oh mommy. Please.

I mean the "founders" weren't really bashful about setting things up to look and follow Roman republican usages.

Of couse, the 'founders' read Greek too.  But somehow, well, Latin sounded so much more, like, offical.

And science has always had that penchant for things like Canis canis or Canis ordinare or other such Latinate designations for it's meanings and terms

Because science, like its antithesis, is Latin in base.


Everybody sing:
Worn out, wasted
Like a bird with broken wings
Sometimes grace reminds me
I don't get to be the king

But love it washes over
Love it pulls me closer
Love it changes everthing

Everything is beautiful
Even when the tears are falling
I don't need a miracle to believe
Even in the crashing down
I can hear redemtion calling
And everything is beautiful to me

Sweetly, You release me
From the weight of what I've done
The trigger trips the hammer
But the bullets never come

And love it washes over
Love it pulls me closer
Love it changes everything

Everything is beautiful
Even when the tears are falling
I don't need a miracle to believe
Even in the crashing down
I can hear redemption calling
And everything is beautiful to me

And love like a landslide
Like the wind
Spins around me pulls me in
At it's unveiling, I begin

Everything is beautiful
Even when the tears are falling
I don't need a miracle to believe
Even in the crashing down
I can hear redemption calling
And everything is beautiful to me

I don't mind the term cisgender.  I've known the word for a few years now, and I have no problem referring to myself as such.  I would, however, prefer not to be called a cissie. :P

If you are using a world to explain something to a bunch of idiots that they do not understand - then, congratulations, your much more than an idiot, you're a moron.

Quote from: Zythyra on June 30, 2009, 07:14:35 AM
Another problem with labeling cis, trans, inter, etc., is the assumption that we actually know what gender someone is.

Z

I don't think this is really that big a problem. We use ethnic terms to identify people as belonging to a culture or not, even though we can't reliably tell whether someone is really the ethnicity we assume. I don't label a person as "cis" or "trans" except in a tentative way to myself, until I find out for certain from the person. I just go with whatever gender a person is presenting, and if it's ambiguous, I'll ask.

I like to use 'names' but then again, I'm stupid.

Exactly. But sometimes I use pronouns too. She, him, herself, their, whatever.

The whole trans/cis thing is totally irrelevant unless the topic comes up for some reason. Kind of like ethnicity.

That is what I love about my job.  I tell people (regardless of gender) to do this, or do that.  If they can't.  Then off the deck.  Regardless of gender.

Quote from: tekla on June 30, 2009, 11:19:31 PM
I like to use 'names' but then again, I'm stupid.

No, but you do like sometimes to claim that you are.

Let's see, Serano, and in that case even Autumn, were both using the term in, for one, learned discourse and the other in what she calls journalism. The words were not used in conversation.

Toni was using the terms to define what she saw as the topic of discussion. Again, not a conversation.

The use of the terms in all of those cases was general and not directed at a single or even a few individuals. No, "hey, lane, you cissexual gay-male blah, blah, blah."

Lane protested that he felt offended by the use of the term -- in general -- and took umbrage with it's use. Much as I might term you both as caucasian. Now, really, does that mean that I have slurred either of you by using that general term into which I can be catagorized as well?

There are some legitimate reasons for not liking the terms. Zythyra has related one of those and tekla another. That you don't like the usage is all well and good. But, I think the point of the entire deal was: are the terms used as slurs?

N~

No, but you do like sometimes to claim that you are.

Hey, if its working for you, why change?  I'm sure if I took a vote here....

---

Post Merge: July 01, 2009, 12:04:41 AM

---

Oh yeah, as slurs, most surely they have been and are used in exactly, and precisely that way. 

Quote from: tekla on July 01, 2009, 12:03:10 AM
No, but you do like sometimes to claim that you are.

Hey, if its working for you, why change?  I'm sure if I took a vote here....

---

Post Merge: June 30, 2009, 11:04:41 PM

---

Oh yeah, as slurs, most surely they have been and are used in exactly, and precisely that way. 

I've heard "trans" used as a slur, but never "cis" or kiss.

Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right - Ani De Franco.

So is every word, if you use it right.  Or wrong.

Quote from: tekla on July 01, 2009, 12:08:21 AM
Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right - Ani De Franco.

So is every word, if you use it right.  Or wrong.

Yes, the "tone" argument was used there as well. Although, as I recall, at the time the offense offended the only culprit had been the diary writer, the one who said the "tone" she had used was offensive.

Like I said, not saying there aren't better terms just waiting to be coined and used enough to supercede those two current usages. But, "tone?"

If I object to my "tone" in a post I can certainly go back and rewrite it without demanding that everyone else stop using the term that I had the "tone" problem with. Right?

Works for me.  Though, as a caution, no one has ever rewrote anything because of my eternal truth beaming down on them like midday in the Sahara.

Quote from: tekla on July 01, 2009, 12:18:36 AM
Works for me.  Though, as a caution, no one has ever rewrote anything because of my eternal truth beaming down on them like midday in the Sahara.

:laugh: Most of the rest of us aren't yet bright enough in shining eternal truth even as hotly as a flashlight might do. I think we don't re-write when you beam down on us because we are too busy trying to pull our coats over our heads to shade ourselves from the high magnitude brightness and heat of your personal sun, Kat! :laugh: 

Nichole honey, when everyone knows that they are as smart as I am, then they will understand just how stupid they are.  And that, dear, is brilliance.

Quote from: Alyssa M. on June 30, 2009, 11:13:38 PMI just go with whatever gender a person is presenting, and if it's ambiguous, I'll ask.

In order to make a living, my day to day presentation is that of my birth sex, not that I go out of my way to present as such. I often wear a mix of clothing, but am likely still gendered as male by others. I'm not immediately known as being trans unless I say that I am. So in that regard I have a certain amount of cis-privilege, however I am trans.

Many post ops (and pre-ops) blend in as their transitioned gender, and so also enjoy cis-privilege. Are they cis or trans? Both?

I don't actually have an issue w/ the use of the term in academic discourse, especially as a way to discuss privilege, however I still believe that it is flawed, and doesn't necessarily encompass the full range of gender possibilities.

Z

Quote from: Zythyra on July 01, 2009, 06:28:36 AMAre they cis or trans? Both?

I don't really care. I've lived most of my life in the closet about my gender issues, outwardly male, and yet I was trans the whole time. I don't assume.

Like I said, I'll use pronouns that match the presentation.

If you don't like cis and trans, do you have better terms? I think you are asking too much of these words. They are intended to contrast. Their existence doesn't preclude the use of other words. Words are shorthand for experiences -- they are always problematic.

Quote from: Alyssa M. on July 01, 2009, 01:00:58 PM
If you don't like cis and trans, do you have better terms? I think you are asking too much of these words. They are intended to contrast. Their existence doesn't preclude the use of other words. Words are shorthand for experiences -- they are always problematic.

Actually, I don't mind the terms, they make sense for academic use. For my own life, I really don't like labels at all, but use them as appropriate to explain who I am in something less than book length  :)

Z