# "Don't call me 'cisgender'!" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 30, 2015, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903 "2015-04-30T15:23:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 42
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/821 "2016-03-31T04:20:57Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > I did, in post 815. Well, maybe you just think wrong. I don’t think that. I also don’t think that football, hunting, and drinking beer are strictly manly pursuits. I only pursue one of those, and I am a gender-typical male. Perhaps you need to expand your thinking to include other sexes in your definitions of human activities. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/822 "2016-03-31T04:30:28Z")
FWIW, I was hanging out with a bunch of trans people today and we got into a discussion about people trying to move “Genderfluid” as an umbrella term instead of “transgender”, nobody liked it, but when groping around for alternate terms everyone agreed “gender-atypical” would be pretty good and probably more descriptive of the vast, vast swath of things currently described by “transgender”. I agree “gender-typical” could be mistaken for talking about gender presentation rather than identity, but we already have “gender-conforming” and “gender-nonconforming” for that, so I think it’s not too big of a concern. Edit: We “invented” the term independently, I didn’t bring it up because of this thread or anything. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/823 "2016-03-31T04:31:39Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > I guess this is the part that I’m not getting - why? > > Why does there need to be a way to describe that I was born a guy, I like girls, and I’m still a guy now? Because those are three different statements referring to three different characteristics: 1. You were “born a guy”, i.e., you were assigned male gender at birth based on your genital anatomy. 2. You “like girls”, i.e., your sexual orientation is heterosexual. 3. You’re “still a guy now”, i.e., your personal gender identity is male. There are guys who have all three of those characteristics, and guys who have only one of them. There are guys for whom (3) is true but (1) is not, and for some of those guys (2) is also true, while for some others it isn’t, just as with guys for whom both (1) and (3) are true. So obviously, the word “guy” isn’t precise enough to determine which combination of (1), (2) and (3) applies to any given guy. [QUOTE=bengangmo] If, I was born with female genitalia but in all other respects saw myself as a guy - what’s wrong with transgender (when it’s really necessary) or simply a “guy” in day to day conversations? Likewise - if I male parts but consider myself female in all other respects - what’s wrong with a term to describe that? [/quote] Nothing wrong at all: in fact, that’s what the term “transgender” means. And, as you note, when the gender identity you consider yourself to be doesn’t align with the “parts”, identity takes precedence over anatomy. As you note, a transgender guy in ordinary interactions is just called a “guy”. [QUOTE=bengangmo] I guess what I’m trying to say - what’s wrong with “Male” and “Female” as the null hypothesis and everything else modifying these positions? [/quote] But that’s pretty much how it **does** work. That is, for instance, someone who presents as a guy is categorized as “male”, and then we use qualifiers such as “transgender male” or “cisgender male” to convey additional information about his gender identity/anatomical sex, in situations where that happens to be relevant and appropriate. [QUOTE=bengangmo] When it comes down to it - if I get asked I would describe myself as “Male” - not “Cisgender” - if more information is needed - people can just mind their own damn business in anything other than an academic study. [/QUOTE] Why sure, that’s perfectly reasonable. Somebody who, for example, identifies as male doesn’t owe random strangers any further explanation about what **kind** of male he is, whether he’s cisgender, transgender, gender-nonconforming, or anything else. Likewise, he doesn’t have to tell people whether he’s a heterosexual or homosexual male, or a vanilla- or kink-preferring male, or a single or married male, or a smooth-chested or hairy male, or anything else about his personal version of maleness that’s none of anybody else’s goddamned business. If the people complaining here about being called “cisgender” are merely objecting to being **nonconsensually labeled** as “cisgender”—in other words, people explicitly calling you “cisgender” based only on their assumptions about how you present and statistical likelihood—then yeah, I agree those objections are entirely valid. Nobody should be taking it on themselves to **assume and assert** you’re cisgender without your explicitly identifying yourself as such. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/824 "2016-03-31T04:43:35Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > FWIW, I was hanging out with a bunch of trans people today and we got into a discussion about people trying to move “Genderfluid” as an umbrella term instead of “transgender”, nobody liked it, but when groping around for alternate terms everyone agreed “gender-atypical” would be pretty good and probably more descriptive of the vast, vast swath of things currently described by “transgender”. > > I agree “gender-typical” could be mistaken for talking about gender presentation rather than identity, but we already have “gender-conforming” and “gender-nonconforming” for that, so I think it’s not too big of a concern. > > Edit: We “invented” the term independently, I didn’t bring it up because of this thread or anything. My guess is that your friends will be considered “outside the norm” and therefore their opinions will be dismissed by the rest of the Dope folks. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/825 "2016-03-31T04:47:54Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > 1. You “like girls”, i.e., your sexual orientation is heterosexual. I have to admit, the words “gay”, “straight”, “bi”, and homo/heterosexual paradigm makes me a little uncomfortable as terms, because of how tightly they’re tied to the gender binary. For a long time I’ve always weaseled around and preferred wordy statements like “attracted to men/women/octopodes”. It feels really exclusionary to my agender or nonbinary friends, and the words make me feel like I’m insinuating their identity is invalid or doesn’t exist. At the same time, I’m sympathetic that some people identify **very strongly** with those labels, and they **are** a marginalized group, and it’s kind of scummy to try and take that away from them while they’re still fighting for rights. I don’t know, there’s no easy answer IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/826 "2016-03-31T04:58:14Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > My guess is that your friends will be considered “outside the norm” and therefore their opinions will be dismissed by the rest of the Dope folks. :rolleyes: Since **Jragon** ’s friends apparently aren’t silly enough to imagine that their “groping around for alternate terms” magically turns the alternate terms they come up with into some kind of generally recognized standard vocabulary, then they’re not making any claims that reasonable people such as ourselves would be inclined to “dismiss”. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/827 "2016-03-31T05:00:15Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > :rolleyes: Since **Jragon** ’s friends apparently aren’t silly enough to imagine that their “groping around for alternate terms” magically turns the alternate terms they come up with into some kind of generally recognized standard vocabulary, then they’re not making any claims that reasonable people such as ourselves would be inclined to “dismiss”. Yep, exactly what I said. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/828 "2016-03-31T05:03:42Z")
We were shooting the shit, not trying to find a new exciting term to thrust upon the world. We then went on to talking about cats and anime. (We also made fun of PFLAG for trying to push “gender creative” instead of “gender nonconforming” because it sounds like the best term possible to make people take gender identity and presentation issues even LESS seriously) ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/829 "2016-03-31T05:15:38Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Yep, exactly what I said. Exactly the opposite of what you said, actually, but good try! ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/830 "2016-03-31T05:19:04Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Because, as much as I may be a trans ally, I am not trans. I will never be trans, and I don’t have the first hand experiences of being trans. So while I and a transgender woman are both women, when we’re working together on women’s issues, there’s a distinct difference between us, our experiences, and our privileges. Pretending we’re exactly the same is erasing a whole history that we’ve each experienced differently in ways that matter for our communicating and working effectively together. She’s a transgender woman, and I’m a \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ woman. Fill in the blank with something that isn’t insulting to her (like “real” or “normal”) and isn’t insulting to me (like, “not-transgender”) or inaccurate (like “gender typical”). > > This may not ever be useful for you if you don’t work with transgender people. In which case, it’s pretty unlikely that anyone will need to refer to you personally as anything other than “male”. But for me, cisgender is a useful word. I’m sorry - but why isn’t “woman” adequate for a Cisgender woman? Then if an individual wants to modify from there - they can with “transgender woman” or “homosexual (lesbian?) woman” or whatever else. What I’m imagining is that “woman” is a good enough default - and people can modify from there as and when required - For example - if she wants to present as female, then the descriptor of “woman” is good enough for restroom selection. If the same person is talking about bumping uglies with her new bloke - she might want to elaborate with transgender woman. If it’s a case of filling out a dating profile - she could use the descriptor of Transgender, Homosexual Woman (or whatever else is appropriate). Again - I’m feeling stupidly obstinate here - but I am suspicious of wanting to “relabel” people and the motivations behind it, when I can’t quite grasp what the difference is. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/831 "2016-03-31T05:30:27Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > I’m sorry - but why isn’t “woman” adequate for a Cisgender woman? > > Then if an individual wants to modify from there - they can with “transgender woman” or “homosexual (lesbian?) woman” or whatever else. Well, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to use the term “woman” to mean **intrinsically** “cisgender heterosexual woman”. Being a woman is fundamentally **independent** of being cisgender vs. transgender, or being heterosexual vs. homosexual. Saying _“a woman can be either transgender or cisgender”_ is a meaningful rational statement. Saying _“a woman can be either transgender or a woman”_ isn’t. So if we’re going to recognize “transgender” as a characteristic that a woman can have, then yes, we do need some corresponding term to refer to the characteristic of being **not** transgender. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/832 "2016-03-31T11:09:38Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > So if we’re going to recognize “transgender” as a characteristic that a woman can have, then yes, we do need some corresponding term to refer to the characteristic of being **not** transgender. Well, again, that’s why I prefer “non-transgender”. It’s why, way back on Page One, **Una Persson** said _If I am lecturing to a mixed audience largely unaware of transgender topics, or doing a media appearance, sometimes I will define quickly the two terms. Or if time is short, simply use “non-transgender.”_ – because unlike a term that often requires a definition of terms, “non-transgender” already works. It’s why GLAAD’s media guide does likewise – explaining that ‘cisgender’ is “used by some to describe people who are not transgender. ‘Cis-’ is a Latin prefix meaning ‘on the same side as’ and is therefore an antonym of ‘trans-’. A more widely understood way to describe people who are not transgender is simply to say _non-transgender people_.” Of course it follows the long first part with the short second part; the second part speaks for itself. It’s why, if you google “cisgender (non-transgender)” you get a _ton_ of hits. Because of course you do; it’s as if someone gets halfway through typing the word, realizes an instant explanation would be helpful, and concludes that “non-transgender” would _be_ the instant explanation that the other term _cries out for_. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/833 "2016-03-31T11:48:18Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Well, maybe you just think wrong. I don’t think that. I also don’t think that football, hunting, and drinking beer are strictly manly pursuits. I only pursue one of those, and I am a gender-typical male. Perhaps you need to expand your thinking to include other sexes in your definitions of human activities. Specific “manly pursuits” aren’t really the point there, rather a broader sense of typical masculine presentation and bearing, or not. (Obviously this is a matter of degrees.) A man may be cisgender male and absolutely heterosexual, and also effeminate or androgynous, right? That’s not “gender-typical.” ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/834 "2016-03-31T11:58:08Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > I agree “gender-typical” could be mistaken for talking about gender presentation rather than identity… IME, it is about presentation, and it seems more useful to me that way, given that (despite the objections of a few here), we have the terms to describe identity categories with precision. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/835 "2016-03-31T12:00:17Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > I have to admit, the words “gay”, “straight”, “bi”, and homo/heterosexual paradigm makes me a little uncomfortable as terms, because of how tightly they’re tied to the gender binary. For a long time I’ve always weaseled around and preferred wordy statements like “attracted to men/women/octopodes”. It feels really exclusionary to my agender or nonbinary friends, and the words make me feel like I’m insinuating their identity is invalid or doesn’t exist. > > At the same time, I’m sympathetic that some people identify **very strongly** with those labels, and they **are** a marginalized group, and it’s kind of scummy to try and take that away from them while they’re still fighting for rights. > > I don’t know, there’s no easy answer IMO. I’ve been thinking about this issue recently. But i dint are the language changing any time soon. I do tend to use “attracted to women” rather than “lesbian” or “straight” to describe the sexual preferences of a trans woman who is not squarely on the gender binary. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/836 "2016-03-31T12:14:50Z")
> [@puzzlegal](#): > > I do tend to use “attracted to women” rather than “lesbian” or “straight” to describe the sexual preferences of a trans woman who is not squarely on the gender binary. I don’t know exactly what you mean by “squarely,” here, but isn’t a transwoman in the gender binary by definition–it is _essential_ to her to identify as a woman. If one’s feelings on the matter are noncritical, temporary, or ambiguous, that’s a Q (or other) identity, not a T. Right? ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/837 "2016-03-31T13:29:52Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > I don’t know exactly what you mean by “squarely,” here, but isn’t a transwoman in the gender binary by definition–it is _essential_ to her to identify as a woman. If one’s feelings on the matter are noncritical, temporary, or ambiguous, that’s a Q (or other) identity, not a T. Right? I don’t think it’s a simple, one-size-fits all thing. This person secretly cross-dressed and secretly did other “girly” things for years before coming out. He was afraid to identify as a woman, because he believed the ONLY choice at that point would be to have radical surgery and take hormones, and the idea of that terrified him. But he also was miserable living as a man. He contemplated suicide to end his tension. He eventually found a good therapist, who has helped him come out to his friends. He now routinely wears women’s clothes and accessories, and grooms himself in a feminine way. He has always seemed like a very feminine person to me, and now is more open about that. He still uses his given name, but has told me what female name he might use some day. He has told his pre-coming-out friends to continue using male pronouns if that is easier for them. He and I bought “pronoun badges” for a group we are in, and instead of picking one of the standard ones (We bought “he”, “she”, and “they” badges) he had one special-made that says he answers to any of those pronouns. Is he a transwoman? He thinks of himself that way. He’s obviously not transexual, just transgender. Maybe not even that, but I’m not going to pick a fight over it. He has been very active in the local trans community since coming out. The words are all a little squishy right now anyway. Oh, and he’s primarily attracted to women, but has mostly dated rather masculine women. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/838 "2016-03-31T13:48:59Z")
> [@puzzlegal](#): > > Is he a transwoman? He thinks of himself that way. Sure, why not? That “he” had some difficulties in coming out, and is flexible about pronouns, seems to me to just reflect the social context. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/839 "2016-03-31T15:11:48Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > Count me in as one whom feels “uncomfortable” with Cisgender. > > It doesn’t offend me, nor would I like to see it banned or anything else - I simply feel that “male” and “female”, as the default are fine, and then everything else should be described from there. > > I don’t really see the need for Cisgender for anything other than academic discussions - > What’[s really wrong with heterosexual male, straight, homosexual, transexual — whatever other descriptor is required? > > It seems to me that Cisgender tries to achieve something that doesn’t need achieving… I agree. It has, like you said, specific applications where it’s a useful shorthand. I wouldn’t like to be called “non-blind” or “not-cancer-suffering” or “non color-blind” as a regular way of describing me, only in the most specific scenarios would it be acceptable. Also, using a specific marker for 99.5% of the population that is derived from one correctly used for 0.5% is linguistically unnecessary. Default meaning of words are necessary for economic communication. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2016, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903/840 "2016-03-31T15:12:10Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > I’m sorry - but why isn’t “woman” adequate for a Cisgender woman? Why isn’t “woman” adequate for a white woman? Then, if you’re something else, you just add to that - black woman, Asian woman, whatever. If you get why that idea is offensive, you’ll have some idea why your suggestion doesn’t work for a lot of people in this debate. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903.md?page=41) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-call-me-cisgender/718903.md?page=43)