… Or: am I cis?
I first heard “cis” as equivalent to “born.” That seemed unobjectionable.
Some are born women (ciswomen), some choose to be women (transwomen), and some have womanhood thrust upon them (transmen).
Well, maybe not.
Because “cis” is about gender, not biological sex.
And trans* people are gender nonconforming. And cis people are gender conforming.
That’s got to be seriously off.
I have two X chromosomes, and I had the common womb environment for a XX fetus. I was born with female primary sexual characteristics and developed female secondary sexual characteristics. I am happy with my body.
(Well, I would like more flexible ankles and a better pointe; and I think being taller would have been cool, but yeah, basically I’m happy with my physical self.)
But my gender? The expectations of behavior and profession and relationship styles and emotional work and sexuality laid on people my sex? Hell, no.
I don’t perform femininity at all well. I never have. And it has never occurred to me that my inability to perform femininity happily and well was a fault in me. Nor is it a fault in my sex.
It is essentialist to claim that behavior (including feelings and their expression) is intrinsically female or male (sex related) when on the contrary it is feminine or masculine (gender related).
Bodies however, are male, or female, or intersex.
Bodies are particular, individual. Women and men act and feel. What I do is what a woman, this woman does. What I feel is what a woman (this one) feels. If a man does or feels the same thing, that’s what that man does or feels. Our actions are not representative of gender, but of people.
I am female. I’m not so sure Christine Jorgensen was.