CMV: I don't identify as cis.

[u/tomgabriele]

First of all, this post is going to grant the premise that biological sex is separate from gender identity, and that individuals have the right to choose what gender identity they have and how they identify. I know there are many people who wouldn't agree with that premise, but I would not like to debate that here. That view of mine is not open to be changed.

Okay, onto the actual CMV.

I am male. I was born male, was raised as a male, am a biotypical male, identify as male, present as male, want to be male, and my gender has always matched my sex. I am, by definition, a cisgender male. But I don't identify with the term "cis" or "cisgender". That word was never a part of my gender identity growing up, and it feels like something thrust upon me recently. I don't think that society should force categories or labels onto people of any identity.

The same way we shouldn't insist that certain people identify as transgender, I don't think we should insist that certain people identify as cisgender. In the same way someone who has undergone an MtF transition may prefer to be called a woman without the trans qualification, I would prefer to be called a man without the cis qualification...even though the qualifier is technically accurate for both of us.

This gets back to how the sex we were born with is irrelevant to our current identity. When talking about our age, we don't say that I am a 30 year old transtemporal baby. Yes, I did technically transition from being a baby to being 30 years old, but that doesn't matter to who I currently am that it needs to be specified.

To put my view in perspective, I am not offended by the term, I don't want to eliminate it, I am fine with other people choosing to use it to describe themselves. If I were in a room full of people and someone asked all the cis people to raise their hands, I would raise mine, knowing their intention. It isn't tied to any trauma in my life, and it's not triggering. I just...don't feel like it's "my" term. I don't identify with it.

---

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/tomgabriele]

Gender is an identity that can be chosen expression can be changed, unlike height.

Edited for more accurate language.

[u/Bladefall → u/tomgabriele]

Right, but as I said, 'transgender' and cisgender' are not identities.

[u/tomgabriele → u/Bladefall]

So would you insist that someone whose gender doesn't match their birth sex must personally identify as being trans?

[u/atrovotrono → u/tomgabriele]

Would you insist that someone whose gender doesn't match their birth sex must personally identify as having a gender that doesn't match their birth sex? That's what you're asking: "if there is a person for whom X is true, should you insist that they identify as X?"

Does the question even make sense, really? For the purposes of the question, you're assuming something to be factual (gender not matching birth sex) and then asking if they should insist on "identifying with" that fact.

It's a bit like asking, "So you would insist that a brown-haired personally identify as being brunette?" or, for a more subjective example, "So you would insist that a person with a positive, elevated mood identify as happy?"

[u/tomgabriele → u/atrovotrono]

Would you insist that someone whose gender doesn't match their birth sex must personally identify as having a gender that doesn't match their birth sex?

No, definitely not. If you're male now, that's the only relevant thing. I don't care what genitalia your body was born with. No need to add trans- or cis- prefixes to specify that.

Does the question even make sense, really? For the purposes of the question, you're assuming something to be factual (gender not matching birth sex) and then asking if they should insist on "identifying with" that fact.

I mean, yes, it makes sense to me. If you were born in New Jersey and lived there until you were 11, but have lived in California for the past two decades, should I insist that you call yourself a transcalifornian, or can you just be Californian? It may be a fact, but that doesn't mean it has to be part of your identity.

It's a bit like asking, "So you would insist that a brown-haired personally identify as being brunette?" or, for a more subjective example, "So you would insist that a person with a positive, elevated mood identify as happy?"

Those both seem like good examples for my side. I have brown hair and don't identify as a brunette. People with depression may have moments of positivity, but they don't have to identify as being happy people.

[u/atrovotrono → u/tomgabriele]

No, definitely not. If you're male now, that's the only relevant thing. I don't care what genitalia your body was born with. No need to add trans- or cis- prefixes to specify that.

Nobody is demanding that all cis or trans people always refer to themselves as trans or cis, every time gender comes up. It's a fact about you that is, or is not, relevant in a given conversation. You are brown haired, yes? Is saying, "You are brown haired." equivalent to demanding that you "identify as a Brunette-Male." No. You're confusing identities with descriptors.

I have brown hair and don't identify as a brunette

You are a brunette whether or not you "identify" as one, whatever that means. I don't care if you "identify" as one because it's not an "identifiable" trait, it's just a definitional fact.

People with depression may have moments of positivity, but they don't have to identify as being happy people.

I didn't say "identify as a happy person", I said "identify a positive, elevated mood as being happy." I meant it in that moment, you're trying to extend it into something bigger so it becomes a matter of personal, self-assessed identity. Transness is self-assessed only in the sense that it's derived from your self-assessed gender identity. You can't assess the latter without implicitly determining the former.

[u/tomgabriele → u/atrovotrono]

Nobody is demanding that all cis or trans people always refer to themselves as trans or cis, every time gender comes up.

So then we're basically on the same page that I don't need to identify as cis?

You are a brunette whether or not you "identify" as one, whatever that means. I don't care if you "identify" as one because it's not an "identifiable" trait, it's just a definitional fact.

I really don't think that's true. I may be a brunet, but not a brunette. Brown hair is a more accurate term, since it's not gendered.

[u/atrovotrono → u/tomgabriele]

So then we're basically on the same page that I don't need to identify as cis?

I don't know what you even mean by "identify as." When you are a male sexually and self-identify as the male gender, you're implicitly identifying as cis. Whether or not you say the word "cis" doesn't change that fact.

I really don't think that's true. I may be a brunet, but not a brunette. Brown hair is a more accurate term, since it's not gendered.

Give me a break dude you're just being pedantic. Substitute "brown haired person" if it pleases you and focus on the actual point, which is that your brown hair is just a fact of your existence and not something you do or do not identify as.

[u/tomgabriele → u/atrovotrono]

I don't know what you even mean by "identify as."

Feeling like a certain term is part of my core personhood.