I know this topic sorta came up before but I heard a conversation last night which got me thinking about it again.  To be clear I accept the use of it within the trans community as a lingual convenience.

  I was at a bar where I meet with a group of friends regularly who are all older than me.  A couple of newer people have joined the group recently.  They are both highschool teachers.  One of them had to attend some sort of information session by the school board where one of the topics specifically introduced them to the term "Cis-gendered".  (He was already aware of the term "transgender" and I did not ask his opinion on that matter.)  He thought "cis" ridiculous because no explanation was given as to why the term wasn't completely redundant.  Everyone else in the group agreed, none of whom had ever heard the term before then either.  They continued to make jokes periodically about it throughout the evening.

  I wasn't sure how to take this.  It felt like I should have been offended by the way he spoke about it but at the same time understood his point.  And since I am not "cis" it didn't even apply to me anyway.  So the question I ask is, as the use and knowledge of "cis" spreads into the general population is this likely to be the attitude about it and will it be twisted into a ridicule of the trans community for using it?

I personally hate the terms "cis" and "trans" they seem derogatory to me and a way of classifying and segregating people. We already have enough ways to categorizes people, why introduce more ways. I'm not transgendered, I'm just a human being.

Well, I think that the term "cis" is an OK term to use while in the trans* community, in that it's very useful to identify those who would indeed fit under that term. Just like we, ourselves, use terms to identify ourselves in a way other people can understand. And I'm not saying that every trans* or andro or queer person does use terms to identify themselves and others. Anyways, I think outside of talking between ourselves and the community, it's not exactly necessary. As you pointed out, OP, a lot of cisgendered people don't know what it means, because they don't have to know what it means. However, I think it was very rude of them to make jokes about it. Did you perhaps ask them to stop? A lot of people who don't have gender issues sometimes don't realize they could be being offensive.  But I guess it's just lack of knowledge? Not sure.

Quote from: Hippolover25 on September 19, 2012, 06:41:14 PM
I personally hate the terms "cis" and "trans" they seem derogatory to me and a way of classifying and segregating people. We already have enough ways to categorizes people, why introduce more ways. I'm not transgendered, I'm just a human being.

But I AM different from cis people, in very definable ways. So why can't we have terms to describe those two very definable phenomena? Wouldn't it make discussion difficult not to have terms for them?

Well there has to be some term. I don't think that terms like normal gender or whatever are fair to trans people. I don't think we are abnormal-- we are different. I know that this term is controversial in some quarters as I don't think people in the majority are used to the minority using a term to describe them. They want to define themselves, and the term they won't to use is "normal". Normal is a dryer setting.

I actually think that some people don't like it because they don't know what it means. "Cis" what's that. It's just Greek for the same or matching. I think some people imagine it might be cissy gendered. Hey I'm no cissy gendered. I say the later in jest. I am not entirely sure it's not true though.

--Jay J

Where did the term "cis-" come from, anyway?

As for the word debate...I'm with agfrommd, we have to have words to make a distinction between people born in the correct body, and those who are in the process of changing their bodies...why? Because the "trans" people have different struggles than the "cis" people.

Surgeries, for one.
Acceptance--by themselves and others--for a second.
Work and social issues, for a third.

If I were to say, "Hey, I'm a woman and I have problems at work being a woman; they won't let me use the ladie's room", a cis-person would ask "Why?" I'd have to explain it's because I am not accepted as a woman, because I was born in a male body. So, we need terms that are universally accepted to identify people born in the correct body, and those transitioning to the correct body.

To deny it is to make communication difficult, if not impossible.

Myself, I would've asked why the group thought it was funny to make light of what is really a serious matter. (Would they have made jokes about African-Americans insisting on being called "blacks" instead of "Negroes"? Respect can only happen once acceptable names are used, imho)

  All I said to him was that I had heard the term before and I new what it meant.  (One guy couldn't even believe it was for real.)  I didn't challenge him on it because I understood why he would feel that way.  I also wasn't prepared to get into a discussion about ->-bleeped-<- either because I'm a lousy liar and would have likely been found out by my concern on the issue.  I've gotta get my own mind sorted out first before I get into a heavy-duty discussion about it - I was asked at the first support meeting I went to recently whether I was trans or genderqueer.  I paused and then had to admit I didn't know yet as I'm not far enough along in my journey to know for sure.  The people at the support group accepted that as a healthy answer.  I'm not sure the result would be the same if I was challenged on that by a non-trans group.

Quote from: agfrommd on September 19, 2012, 07:11:04 PM
But I AM different from cis people, in very definable ways. So why can't we have terms to describe those two very definable phenomena? Wouldn't it make discussion difficult not to have terms for them?

Sure I think it's valid.  The problem is that a lot of cis people feel they already have a definition for themselves and it is "simply existing".  Perhaps this is a bit selfish on their part but you can understand why a cis-man would find it silly to be called a cis-man rather than just a man.  Basically it's like asking someone cis to change their name just because a trans individual wants to exist as different.  It doesn't make sense to the cis individual because they see the trans person as the only new and different thing.  To them it's sorta like if aliens were to come and co-habitate and integrate and we suddenly all had to call ourselves cis-human.  The cis often look as us as 'alien' anyway.

Mmm, it is redundant when not talking about trans issues.

Quote from: aleon515 on September 19, 2012, 07:16:39 PM
Well there has to be some term. I don't think that terms like normal gender or whatever are fair to trans people. I don't think we are abnormal-- we are different.

I disagree. Yes, we are very abnormal, and there's nothing wrong with that. Personally, I think terms like "bio", "natal", are "normal" are perfectly fine. The only reason we have "cis" is because some transgender people are very sensitive to any terms that imply "weird" or "unnatural".

I dunno, some trans people are weird, but that doesn't make the group as a whole abnormal. I see some as people who merely lived through a mentally traumatic experience.  I would not call everyone who lives through something like that abnormal.  Says the person who wishes he was like everyone else...

I find the term cis to be quite helpful. It provides the non-trans community an acceptable (to me) way of talking about non-trans people when they talk with me. It helps them avoid using terms like "regular" or "real" when they are trying to tell me about a non-trans person they know. This is just my opinion.

I had never encountered the terms cisgender and cissexual before I came to this web site.

I am a woman. But, I am not a woman in the same way my daughter and ex-wife are. They were born female. They don't have to get their estrogen and progesterone at the pharmacy the way I do. But even then, my daughter is not a woman in the same way her mother (my ex-wife) is because my daughter is genderqueer. Sometimes, she's my son.

One of my son's best friends is with me under the trans* heading because he's FTM. But, he's pre-everything. While cis* my son's body produces testosterone, his friend, a trans* man who isn't on HRT yet, doesn't have any T in his system.

I like terms like cis* and trans* as these words are descriptive vocabulary. My son and ex-wife are cis*. My daughter and I are trans*. She has no intention of transitioning, but she's under the trans* umbrella with me.

There does seem to be a stigma around these words. I try to use them in a way that "normalizes" them in an effort to remove the stigma.

I don't think cis* is redundant at all. It's far better than saying "normal" or "regular." Hell, it's safe to say that I might not count as a "normal" or "regular" trans* woman.

To me, cis* and trans* are specific and descriptive. I will concede, however, that specific and descriptive vocabulary can be used in a damaging way. But then, many tools can be used as weapons.

  I'm personally a bit uncomfortable with the need to use some of the common terms to describe myself to the general public because words like transsexual and queer often get twisted into something sinister or fetish-like.  The problem of course is knowledge, but then again our own community is often either confused about or can't agree on a lot of the definitions.  Trying to explain to yourself what part of multiple spectrums you exist in can be difficult enough - then try to explain it to a cis who can barely get a grip on the polar definitions.  So many people still believe the various LGBTQ individuals have made a 'lifestyle choice' or are mentally ill or acting out rather than simply living by their natural-born biology.  As I said earlier I'm not even in a state myself yet to clearly and confidently define myself to the outside world.  Just think how difficult this would get if part of my definition was fluid.

  Cis is a perfectly useful term within the trans community, and I suppose it wasn't meant to expand beyond it.  It seems inevitable though that it will spread into general use, certainly now that a board of education has deemed it important to train their teachers on the use of it.  Cis people will not understand or appreciate why they need a label applied to them when they consider themselves the default state.  Maybe it will only be a problem until the gender spectrum becomes an accepted measure of existence.  In the short term I fear more responses like what I heard in the bar where a term people see as redundant to them indirectly and perhaps unintentionally has them making a mockery of our trans struggle.  It is specifically that the cis folks find the term redundant that is the root of the problem.  Perhaps this was why I initially put up my guard when the topic came up.

  I'm not strongly for or against the term, it just got me thinking because had I not identified as trans this year I probably wouldn't have seen the need for the term either.  I figured it would spark an interesting discussion on this site so that is why I brought it up.  It seemed like an important and timely societal observation and a weird milepost on my journey.

Quote from: ~RoadToTrista~ on September 19, 2012, 07:36:39 PM
Mmm, it is redundant when not talking about trans issues.

I disagree. Yes, we are very abnormal, and there's nothing wrong with that. Personally, I think terms like "bio", "natal", are "normal" are perfectly fine. The only reason we have "cis" is because some transgender people are very sensitive to any terms that imply "weird" or "unnatural".

Well perhaps "abnormal" meaning out of the normal or ordinary. But it has negative connotations. I don't have problems with bio and natal but they have their issues too. If a person takes hormones, they would bio male or female (depending on the hormone)-- at least chemically. And natal, well what was I born as? Neither expresses the body/brain asymmetry as well as cis-- trans.

I think the problems people have with it is from identity politics. People who do not think of this stuff sometimes don't like to be reminded of the idea that someone *else* is defining their experience. Thru privilege they are entitled to their own definition.

There is nothing in the slightest negative connotation about cisgendered. It lines up nicely with trans as they both use greek roots. I have heard of cisgendered persons identifying themselves in this way. They are usually spouses and allies. 
I think that if people just don't know the term, it can be defined for them. People who are allies could accept it.

--Jay J

Quote from: Beth Andrea on September 19, 2012, 07:23:46 PM
Where did the term "cis-" come from, anyway?

They are terms from Chemistry. Cis and Trans are isomers of the same molecule

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis-trans_isomerism

Quote from: brc on September 20, 2012, 02:15:32 AM
They are terms from Chemistry. Cis and Trans are isomers of the same molecule

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis-trans_isomerism

Oooh you beat me too it. Congrats, pretty obscure and impressive. 

"Technically" they're not the 'same' molecule, just the same molecular formula, structural changes can lead to pretty important differences.

But really I'm just being pedantic, kudos. 

Quote from: brc on September 20, 2012, 02:15:32 AM
They are terms from Chemistry. Cis and Trans are isomers of the same molecule

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis-trans_isomerism

There must be some way to co-opt HOMO and LUMO, not to mention SOMO.

cis- literally means "on this side of", and trans- means "across or on the other side of" - so the implication is that cis- people are on the same side of the gender drawbridge as their body is (so it's an inherently binary-reinforcing model).

I personally find the term "cis" to be tedious and I don't use it. I don't need to have a special word to describe someone who doesn't have gender/genital issues. To me it just seems odd to have a word that describes 99% of the world population. I am the exception, so of course there is a special term for me, not to mention I am transcending the physical realities my birth sex through medical intervention, hence "trans". I don't even use "cis" in conversations with other trans folks.

To put it in a different light - I explained the term to a friend of mine who is doing research about trans folks so she can gain a better understanding of our experiences (and began doing so after I told her) so she uses me as a "inside source" so to speak. After I explained it, this is what she said:

Quote
So, the T community has a word for everyone who isn't them? I mean, to me, that seems odd. I guess my hang up is this: I could have gone my entire life without ever even seeing a trans person and they would still have a special name for me. That sounds a lot like a slur to me. Don't get me wrong, dove, I'm not accusing you. But shouldn't a term for non-trans folks be created by the non-trans community?

The conversation ended up talking about (of all things) X-Men. Magneto creates two special terms - homosuperior (for the 1% of the population who was a mutant) and flat-scans for those who weren't, but it was used in a militant "We the minority are better than you". I have heard the term "cis" used by trans folks who claim that they are "transcending therefore better than those cis-scum". Seems pretty militant and too much like being a {insert group here} supremacist. On top of that, it isn't in the dictionary.

So, I don't use the term. I don't need a word that describes someone who doesn't have my body/mind conflicts. But, that's my opinion.

Quote from: brc on September 20, 2012, 02:15:32 AM
They are terms from Chemistry. Cis and Trans are isomers of the same molecule

  Good, a simple and logical explanation.  However the general public will consider this 'too smart' for them and therefore 'elitist' .  Appropriate though considering the supposed high number of scientifically gifted trans people.

@Ayden - You understand a lot of what I'm getting at.  Whether or not 'cis' remains a positive term is now beyond our control.

Quote from: Ayden on September 20, 2012, 08:57:21 AM
I have heard the term "cis" used by trans folks who claim that they are "transcending therefore better than those cis-scum". Seems pretty militant and too much like being a {insert group here} supremacist. On top of that, it isn't in the dictionary.

This is the kind of thing that really bothers me the most and is the most counterproductive to acceptance and understanding of the whole LGBTQ community.  I've heard that in Toronto there are a number of gay men that rudely refer to women as "the breeders".  The isolationist camps everyone divides themselves into in my city are one reason why it's taken so long for me to come to grips with my own condition - because I've never felt like socialising with people who behave like that.

I used to use the word bio, but it just felt weird.

Thing with cis gendered its just an easy way in my own mind to say someone that was born with XX(in MtF) or XY(in FtM), or in more blunt terms the genitals they were born with.  While I am a woman, reality is our bodies are quite different, otherwise I wouldn't put myself into potential harm by taking hormones if I did not have to.

I hate the word trans, only because outside of the trans community(actually sometimes INSIDE the trans community) people tend to take it as oh its a man becoming a woman, bla bla bla.  Obviously that hurts a good many of us because we are not men becoming women, we are women  who are trying to align their physical self with their inner self. 


The reason why we separate ourselves a little is because we need help...  we need to speak with people that understand what we are going though... someone born with XX probably doesn't know anything about SRS(even if labiaplasties are becoming common for everyone)