And by using Dani’s own terminology which Dani already implicitly agreed was valid, Dani is left without a clear counterargument.
For one, it’s fine, Lea would never use the term “cis,” that’s enemy speak. It passively acknowledges that cis is one kind of woman, meaning trans can be another.
For two, the counterargument I would offer is that “cis-woman” suffers the exact same problems that “woman” itself does. The distinction you’ll see offered is that cis-women are “assigned female at birth,” which you’ll notice does not actually explain what a woman is. If a doctor ticked the wrong box by mistake, then John Sutherland over there might be a cis-woman. Or trans, I guess.
The exercise Dani is trying to walk Lea through is that words are vibes. In all cases, they ask that you intuit what the other person is gesturing at by being just specific enough not to cause any problems.
For one, it’s fine, Lea would never use the term “cis,” that’s enemy speak. It passively acknowledges that cis is one kind of woman, meaning trans can be another.
For two, the counterargument I would offer is that “cis-woman” suffers the exact same problems that “woman” itself does. The distinction you’ll see offered is that cis-women are “assigned female at birth,” which you’ll notice does not actually explain what a woman is. If a doctor ticked the wrong box by mistake, then John Sutherland over there might be a cis-woman. Or trans, I guess.
The exercise Dani is trying to walk Lea through is that words are vibes. In all cases, they ask that you intuit what the other person is gesturing at by being just specific enough not to cause any problems.