The "cis" prefix is most frequently used when there is a fairly equal
division between two different presentations.
Not in some of my circles.
Thus, using this prefix prefix inaccurately reflects the distribution of gender identities. Let's not kid ourselves, no matter what data are being presented, 70% or more of the human population *does* self-identify with the gender assigned at birth. (The whole first paragraph on the origin of the term is original research, but I'm not going to touch it with a 10-foot pole.)
Perhaps labeling that way is a matter of habit, but is it the right thing to do -- to make something other because it's minority?
We would never even consider calling people who have two feet "cispedal" or people who have blood pressure in the normal range "cistensive". In fact, there's a word for those with blood pressure in the normal range: "normotensive". But it wouldn't look politically correct to call people who identify with their assigned birth gender as "normogender", which would be the linguistically correct prefix, because that encompasses the majority of people. [For the record, I'd never advocate the use of that term, either.]
Let's just call women "women" or, if it's really felt that we need to be exclusive, "those who self-identify as women".
Risker/Anne
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap