'Cis' is Not an Insult

About six months ago, I became aware of the term cis (or cisgender). I thought to myself "oh, neat; an actual word that indicates not-trans." I came across the word in Susan Stryker's Transgender History. The author explains the term like this:

The prefix cis means "on the same side as" (that is, the opposite of trans). The idea behind the terms is to resist the way that "woman" or "man" can mean "nontransgendered woman" or "nontransgendered man" by default, unless the person's transgender status is explicitly named; it's the same logic that would lead somebody to prefer saying "white woman" and "black woman" rather than simply using "woman" to describe a white woman (thus presenting white as the norm) and "black woman" to indicate a deviation from the norm. Similarly, "cisgendered" or "cissexual" names the usually unstated assumption of nontransgender status contained in the words "man" and "woman."

Cis is intended to stop the tacit assumption that there are two classes of men and women, i.e. (1) woman/man and, (2) trans woman/trans man. There is no debasement inherent in the term; it is simply the literal opposite of the word 'trans' (both are latin) and it is only an attempt to place trans people on the same level as cis people. I accept the term trans as it is applied to me because it is a mere statement of fact. The  term cis is applied with the same intention.

So good so far, right? Not quite. Some individuals have begun to take cis and cisgender as an insult, or a label forced on them that they do not identify with.

I feel that the response to the term stems from misunderstanding and, more importantly, some malicious disinformation. Just for the record, 'cis' is not a slur. I think it is critical that this term not be burdened with undeserved baggage, because its connotation is tied up with the connotation of 'trans'. If one is a slur, or negative, then so is the other.

Cis-diazene manages not to
get offended

There are other alternatives to cis out there, but these are not free of implicit value judgements: 'natural woman/man' (anything else is therefore unnatural); 'genetic woman/man' (this espouses a bio-essentialist view, that declares that genetics are everything, thus invalidating people with conditions such as CAIS). When all is said and done, cis is the most appropriate term. It is unfair to ask trans people to live with their prefix, while non-trans people reject an analogous one.

Now let's unpack the criticisms of 'cisgender.' Here is a piece that I think typifies the sort of malicious spinning the term is occasionally subjected to (the link redirects through anonym.to, so as to not draw the sort of people who peruse the blog back here, through trackbacks). When all is said and done, the sort of definitional gymnastics employed to slant cisgender amount to nothing more than bad science.

Cisgender (and cis, which is a prefix) is derived from the latin 'cis-', which is a *preposition*. It's literal definition is "on the near side of, on this side of," and it is an antonym of 'trans' (also a preposition).

Use it properly, or don't use it at all
Photo courtesy of anthonynelzin

Generally, when people seek to spin cis, they give a slightly different definition. Namely, "to strike down, chop, beat, hew, fell, slay," then go on to claim that cis is also the root for terms like homicide and genocide. Well, the obvious explanation for all of this is that all trans people not-so-secretely wish to kill all of the cissies. Apparently, in the minds of such people, members of the trans community are capable of an insidious form of linguistic ninjitsu heretofore unseen in the realm of vitriolic epithets (especially when the best the opposition can muster is the painfully uninspired 'tranny').

There is a slight problem, however, with the cis-to-genocide manoeuvre. Words such as these are not derived from cis- (prefix) but -cise- (or, more commonly -cide-). Just as I said before; bad science. Why, by the great and luxurious beard of Methuselah, would trans people go to such lengths to craft an insult that only those cis people who happened to take Latin in college would understand?

Regardless of the intent behind the misinterpretations on blogs like the one above, cis is not an insult. It was chosen because it was a baggage free Latin word that indicates the opposite of trans. If one intends on being active in (or even just in contact with) the trans community, he or she may encounter this term. Or maybe not. Either way, it is important that people know that the trans people using the term are not flinging insults. There is no grand homicidal conspiracy. Trans people are merely struggling to resist the implicit declaration that woman/man is the default, and that trans is something else.