Debunking The Argument That Cisgender Isn’t a “Real Word”

So, as a cis person who sometimes would debate transphobic people online, I’ve noticed that so many anti-trans people have this weird vendetta against the word “cisgender,” or it’s shortened form, “cis.”

If you don’t know, the word cis(gender) is an adjective, and it is the antonym for trans(gender), referring to someone who is not trans.*

(*Cis also is not synonymous with straight by the way, which is a common misconception. Cis people can be gay, straight, bi, asexual. Trans people can also be straight, gay, any sexual orientation. Sexual orientation and gender identity are not the same.)

For a more wordy definition, cisgender means that the relation between your biological sex and gender identity are congruent. You were male at birth, and you identify as a man. Vice versa for cis women.

That’s it. It’s just a word to refer to non-trans people. For some reason, a lot of anti-trans people will argue that this shouldn’t be a word, or they won’t take you seriously if you use the word. It’s really weird. This is becoming common enough to where it needs to be addressed.

When you get down to it, I think they just want to distract from their anti-trans arguments by fighting over this silly little semantic issue because they can’t really defend their arguments. It’s quite resemblant of the “I’m not homophobic, because phobia means fear, and I’m not afraid of gay people” argument.” Pointless arguing over semantics, instead of actually dealing with your point. You know what I mean, why are you arguing about the tiny technicalities? You’re moving the goalposts.

At least, whenever I’ve argued about trans rights with anti-trans cis people in the past, this is what I’ve observed. In the grand scheme of things, whether I say the terms “cis,” “non-trans,” or “not trans,” that doesn’t really matter when it comes to my original argument. These terms mean the same thing.

But this is an opening they see to get into a useless argument over words rather than the implications of their own words. From the outside, this puts them at an advantage because they can control the conversation, and it portrays them as having set ideas while you have to justify and explain yours. It sets you as an annoying corrector and them as the victim of political correctness because they have to try to comprehend a word for themselves that’s new and unfamiliar. The original topic is forgotten and becomes a tangent about the words trans people use rather than a discussion about trans rights.

A recent Twitter exchange of what I’m referring to. Paul Embery nitpicks at Dr. Jo Grady’s use of the word “cis gendered” [sic] instead of her actual point.

But this is getting ridiculous, and it seems that the anti-trans crowd are willing to push back against this word no matter what weird excuse they give. So here is a debunking of the anti-using-the-word-cis crowd. If you ever get one of these arguments, feel free to send this article.

1: “This word is useless and unnecessary!”

I believe this is the most common argument against the word, but I don’t see what makes the word useless. It has a clear and defined use: to reference a person who is not trans.

They rarely really say why the word is useless, they just claim it is. When they do, they say that it’s rarely used.” Sure, you wouldn’t use it all the time in a casual conversation. I don’t use the word that much outside of trans rights discussions.

But infrequency doesn’t make a word useless. There are many words that are valid words but aren’t often used by everyone all the time. I’m a biped. Most people are and this goes without saying, sure. But that doesn’t mean bipedal is a useless word that we should get rid of just because it’s the default state of being for most people, and we don’t often say it. But someone who is in the medical field or someone who may talk about disability justice might use it when talking about biped vs. unipeds.

Cisgender is a word with a clear definition and use, and it’s not even hard to say. Isn’t it easier to say “cis people” than saying “non-transgender people” when you’re referring to them? Or “cis men” instead of “people who are born male and still identify as male?”

Most cis people don’t really acknowledge that they’re cis because they don’t have to. Being cis doesn’t affect their lives in a way that they notice, much like how able-bodied bipedal people don’t have to think about their legs. Cis people do not have to think about their gender identity in relation to their biological sex because their sex and gender are congruent. But, if someone is discussing transgender issues and comparing something that is different between trans and cis people, then what word could be more useful?

2: “Don’t call me cis, call me normal!”

Along with other similar statements, such as “I’m not a cis man, I’m just a man” or “I’m not a cis woman, I’m just a woman.” “I’m a real man, and trans men are fake men.”

This is one of the more telling responses. If someone responds to being called cis with “just call me normal,” they’re just getting mad that you’re putting cis and trans people on an equal playing field. They name themselves as victims when the congruent relationship between their biological sex and gender identity is accurately named. It reminds of the saying “When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.” They think that by not explicitly calling them “normal” and calling them cis, you’re taking away their status as normal.

They want the opposite of transgender to be “normal” so badly because they see trans people as weird, and they want everyone else to as well. They don’t want trans people to be a more normalized thing. They want to make trans topics taboo.

I must reiterate, just because something is normal, doesn’t mean we can’t have a word to refer to it. If you use this argument, you probably see being straight/heterosexual as normal, but I don’t hear you arguing that we should get rid of the word straight or heterosexual, or that I shouldn’t call you straight, but call you normal. Likely because those words are more normalized and more commonly used than cis or cisgender. But again, just because a word isn’t used a lot, or because it’s not useful to you specifically, doesn’t mean it’s not a real word.

3: “This is a word made up by the trans agenda! / It’s a new politically correct woke term!”

Again, wrong. And this shows a lack of education. I’ve seen some people claim that this word was created just a few years ago to please liberals and transgender ideologues.

And even if so, what’s the issue with that? New words come into our language all the time when the need arises. Every word we use is made up and new at some point. It’s not like the word cis doesn’t have any etymological background to it anyway. It makes sense when you know the root of the word.

Cis is a Latin prefix meaning “on this side of.” Trans is a Latin prefix meaning “on the other side of.” Cis and trans have always been oppositional prefixes. It’s been around for centuries. You know how there are “trans fats” in certain foods? There are also “cis fats.” So, if you use the word transgender with no problem, etymologically, you should have no problem using cisgender as a counterpart.

And the first time it was used as a prefix for gender was by academics in the 1990s, back when transgender issues weren’t even as widespread as now, so it’s almost thirty years old, older than many adults. Claiming this word is new therefore it’s an invalid word is ridiculous. The words heterosexual and homosexual were not coined until the late 1860s, but does that mean those words were invalid at the time just because they were new? No. And now we use them all the time.

You likely use words like smartphone and selfie which are words whose invention postdate the word cisgender, so don’t be a hypocrite and act like new terms are not valid concepts. New words and terms get added to dictionaries every year, and definitions change over time. This is a fact you have to accept.

4: “The term cis woman refers to a subset of women, which is offensive and sexist.”

What? This argument also makes no sense either, and usually the people using this argument are TERFs a.k.a. trans exclusionary radical feminists. I mean, yes, it does refer to subsets of people, but I don’t see how that’s bad, offensive, or sexist, because it also can refer to men. Cis men and trans men are subsets of men. Cis can refer to men or women, or any person, so the claim that it’s sexist is unsubstantiated.

I think this argument is just a cop out so they don’t have to admit that they don’t want to normalize referring to trans and cis people in an equal way, so they try to play the sexism card against trans people.

Having subsets of things and people is just how adjectives work. Is it also offensive and sexist to say “tall woman,” and “short woman,” to describe different subsets of women by their height? Obviously not, that would be ridiculous. People using this excuse are desperately searching for a reason to be mad at trans people and accuse them of sexism.

5: “I’m not trans, but I don’t want to be called cis. Don’t force an unwanted term onto me!”

Normally I’d agree, you shouldn’t refer to someone with a word they don’t want to be referred to as, but when you fit this term by its definition, I can’t think of any reason why you don’t want to be called cis when you just are. It’s not a bad thing to be, it’s not a bad word. It doesn’t hurt you. Why so much push-back? Again, I’d find it just as ridiculous if you fit the term “heterosexual” to its definition but get mad when I saw you are heterosexual.

If your reasoning is rooted in the idea that transgender people should be a marginalized group, they should be seen as inferior, and that cis people are superior; the only accepted way to be, so they need a special term that separates them from us, that’s not really a valid reason to reject a term. Your discomfort at not being treated as the superior is not trans people’s problem.

interesting point

The only real reason to reject this term is if you are not by definition cis; which would make you trans. This is how antonyms work.

Now, if you don’t want someone to refer to you as cis because you’re actually not cis, then that’s fine. But if you are not trans, shouldn’t you like this term? It distinguishes you as not being trans and it’s short and easy to say. I don’t see the problem.

If not being called normal or superior as a default makes you so upset, I’m sorry (…not really) but you’ll be fine.

If a bunch of straight people started demanding for me to not call them straight or heterosexual, despite them being by definition straight or heterosexual, but to call them “normal people,” I’d also refuse to censor myself.

6: “Cis is a slur!”

I feel like this is the most ridiculous one that shouldn’t even be addressed, but enough people actually believe cis is somehow a slur. No, it’s not. No dictionary describes it as a pejorative. This word is not used to oppress or denigrate cis people.

Sure, maybe somebody somewhere used the word in a mean way, but I think people who claim it’s a slur just heard a trans person complaining about cis people being transphobic, and assumed it was a insult. But does that mean if a gay person is complaining about straight people, that now straight is a slur? Obviously not. People say “gay” to mean “stupid” but gay isn’t a slur.

7: I don’t like it because it sounds too similar to the word sis!

Okay…? So? Homonyms exist. Build a bridge, and get over it.

8: We don’t need the word “cis” because saying “non-trans” is enough.

Okay, you have a point that actually makes some sense there. But by that logic, we don’t need any opposite words at all. Instead of big let’s just say non-small. Instead of dirty, let’s say non-clean. Instead of tall, let’s just say non-short. Instead of old, let’s just say non-young. See how ridiculous this argument is? This isn’t Esperanto. We can have multiple ways to express one concept.

Final words

At the end of the day, cisgender is not some evil slur invented in 2015 to shame people who aren’t trans. It’s just a classification that recognizes that trans people and cis people have differences, but it doesn’t posit one as superior than the other.

Being called cis does not make you a victim. You don’t even have to use the word, you can say non-trans and normal if you want… But stop getting weird when other people use it in conversation.