'do cis people question their gender' is an interesting question and i'd basically argue that thinking about your gender position at all already moves you beyond cisnormativity insofar as that system presents gender as a completely unanalysable given that doesn't admit any kind of complex or nuanced relation

so in this sense:
(1) questioning your gender does make you a little bit trans; and
(2) that's precisely why cis people should do it

but in many people's usage the label 'trans' comes with obligations: even if they don't require medical transition they will implicitly expect you to change your pronouns, maybe start dressing a little different, etc. to me if a person considers their gender and comes away having concluded their doctor-prescribed one does ultimately fit them with no revision necessary, that person has meaningfully moved: they no longer occupy quite the same gender position they previously did

does that make them trans? depends on where you want to draw the line. we could say that their social and political needs remain basically continuous with the ones they had (in contrast to someone who realises they're not the gender they were told to be and now needs a new passport & a wardrobe) & it would be diluting the concept to call them trans. but they are, at least, differently cis than someone who hasn't analysed their position

what's significant to me is not the movement from one preëxistent gender-category to another, but rather the movement from the viewpoint of not having thought about gender but simply accepted it without judgement to having thought about it & either accepted or rejected it

here i'd like to deploy the existentialist concept of authenticity: we act authentically when we do so in an understanding of our freedom of doing otherwise; we act inauthentically when we pretend our actions or choices preëxisted us. for gender, an authentic gender position would be one that is approached with an openness to the idea that it can be revised, regardless of what, if anything, that leads to

@esvrld yea same. and i mentioned it in a reply in my thread but i really think it’s an important thing to normalize to help take away the idea that cis is the default/cis until proven otherwise etc

@esvrld so, in conclusion cis people don't have real genders

@esvrld Hmm, this feels like a very long-about way of avoiding to have healthy-cis, people who are cis, e.a. happy with their assigned gender at birth but have thought about it. Like it would need a separate classification because cis can't be healthy?

If cis is supposed to be a morally neutral term, I think cis needs be able to be healthy and something someone can be if that fits them.

"You've questioned so now you can't be cis", seems pretty problematic to me...

@esvrld it did feel somewhat anticlimactic to go on an epic journey of self-discovery only to end up back where I started

@esvrld following a call for cis people to question their gender was precisely why I ended up this beautiful trans mess that I am, so I propose:
(3) don't be afraid of the slippery slope

@esvrld to me....its a spectrum. We are all somewhere on said spectrum. Or we reject classification.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!