Non-trans is still othering to trans people in its own way (there’s trans people, and then there’s everyone else). It’s also kind of imprecise and awkward. To use the analogy from the comments above, it would be weird to describe someone as “non-black” or “non-blonde-haired person” etc.
Cis is a term that allows for better discussion and examination of intersectional issues. You could, for instance, compare the experiences of black women who are cis and gay, and black women who are trans and gay and figure how those two specific groups might face different unique systemic challenges. Once you tease apart novel issues at that level, you can better address them.
The right always is trying to muddy that puddle because they hate the clarity it provides, and they percieve the examination of the issues as a threat to the heirarchies from which they benefit. Same reason they have tried to turn CRT into some kind of toxic term, or why they came up with “All Lives Matter”.
No one is insisting or forcing anything though, it’s simply a descriptor in relation to another word. Both the terms cis and trans are simply in reference to eachother.
By your same logic we should then never refer to trans people as trans outside of sociology text books either, but that’s not how it works. Trans people aren’t “forced” to adopt the label of trans, it just is the term that describes what they are in regards to gender.
The topic of gender is a common topic of discussion for many people in their lives, the term cis was coined out of a need for the discussions to be coherent, accurate and neutral in regard to “normalcy”.
Removed by mod
To be fair, “cis” comes from latin which means “on the same side of,” in contrast to “trans” which means “on the other side of.”
Why use that instead of non-trans? I don’t know, but yeah, I don’t think the word is a slur.
It’s not an eiher/or. E.g. non-trans could also be non-binary. So cis is more specific and leads to more inclusive language and thinking.
Non-trans is still othering to trans people in its own way (there’s trans people, and then there’s everyone else). It’s also kind of imprecise and awkward. To use the analogy from the comments above, it would be weird to describe someone as “non-black” or “non-blonde-haired person” etc.
Cis is a term that allows for better discussion and examination of intersectional issues. You could, for instance, compare the experiences of black women who are cis and gay, and black women who are trans and gay and figure how those two specific groups might face different unique systemic challenges. Once you tease apart novel issues at that level, you can better address them.
The right always is trying to muddy that puddle because they hate the clarity it provides, and they percieve the examination of the issues as a threat to the heirarchies from which they benefit. Same reason they have tried to turn CRT into some kind of toxic term, or why they came up with “All Lives Matter”.
Removed by mod
No one is insisting or forcing anything though, it’s simply a descriptor in relation to another word. Both the terms cis and trans are simply in reference to eachother.
By your same logic we should then never refer to trans people as trans outside of sociology text books either, but that’s not how it works. Trans people aren’t “forced” to adopt the label of trans, it just is the term that describes what they are in regards to gender.
The topic of gender is a common topic of discussion for many people in their lives, the term cis was coined out of a need for the discussions to be coherent, accurate and neutral in regard to “normalcy”.
English loves antonyms.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator