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
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,
Let's just call women "women" or, if it's really felt that we need to
exclusive, "those who self-identify as women".
Gendergap mailing list
To manage your subscription preferences, including unsubscribing, please
Communications Design Manager I Wikimedia Foundation
149 New Montgomery Street I San Francisco, CA 94105