Using the cis- and trans- taxonomy to reference gender behavior was used as early as 1914. The transgender community didn’t invent its use, nor is its current use inconsistent with its use in 1914. When discussing gender, cis simply means same and trans simply means to cross. Whether it was 1914 or 2014, when someone uses cis regarding gender, it is simply a recognition that one is not trans. Likewise, whether it was 1914 or 2014, when someone uses trans regarding gender, it is simply a recognition that one is not cis.
From the Transgender Archive, Houston, TX
Some context: The above comes in the context of a sexology book from the beginning of the last century when it was popular to scrutinize (and sometimes overly-so) a great deal of human behavior through a psychosexual lens. Thus, whether one was dressing in a manner consistent with their sex assigned at birth or in a manner inconsistent with their sex assigned at birth, the vestments were viewed as sexual symbols that were distinguished through the cis/trans binary.
[su_cwbottom]
[…] they use in our culture. While the cis and trans dichotomy has been used to describe gender behavior since at least 1914, most people are encountering cis as if it were a retronym. Somewhat similarly, ipso (ipsogender) […]
[…] of the population, why not have a word for them? Moreover the origins of the term are relatively old going back to […]
[…] studied chemistry, or the history of Gaul. It has been used to describe people who are not trans at least as far back as 1914. But according to the TERFS (oops, sorry, did it again) “cis” is a hate word recently coined by […]
Danke!
[…] TransAdvocate and a researcher of trans history, the “cis” prefix, as applied to gender, has been in use (albeit obscure use) since the early 20th century. It comes from a Latin term meaning “on this […]
[…] as. These terms have been used in chemistry for many, many years. They are not new. In fact, using cis to describe people who are not trans* is actually pretty old too. Cis exists as the opposite of trans*, that is all it is. It is not a slur. It is not demeaning. […]
hmm. a rough translation of this is “cisvestite- the inclination to wearing clothes of another age (i can’t tell if they mean time-period or child/adult/elderly), profession, or ethnicity- for sexual play (think fetish wear).
So yeah, the prefix was used 100 years ago, but it wasn’t really used the same way we’re using it now. and definitely not in the “opposite of transgender” way.
Before you attack me for being trans phobic, or hating the word cis- I’m a trans guy. But i also love linguistics. Beware of false cognates. just because a word looks like a word you know doesn’t mean it means what you think it does.
Context is everything.
First, realize that this is talking about explicitly gendered behavior – crossing over or not.
Second, realize that this use comes from a dictionary of German sexology where almost everything a human did was motivated by a sexual urge – including smoking.
Criticising that the use is not 100% the same as our current use is to be purposefully obtuse. We use the cis- trans- dichotomy to indicate explicitly gendered behavior – just as they did in this context. You might as well assert that the trans+gender lexical compound isn’t linked to trans+vestitismus lexical compound because at the time the term meant using the clothing of the other sex for fetishitstic reasons.
Wow.
“Cisvestitismus” v “Transvestitismus” … “Berlin Ostern 1914”
Oh, too cool; congratulations on digging up this citation, Cristan!
***APPLAUSE***
thanks!
– bonzie anne