Dr. Bob

Chemists have moved away from cis and trans partly because of all of this. We use zusammen-together or entgegen-opposite now. I can attest to how politically charged a class about organic molecules can become.

I am not deeply versed on the socio-cultural side of it all, and there is clearly space to learn. I am reluctant to let cis hinge on a doctor’s proclamation but I’ll let it sit there for the moment.

I also have a PhD. Not in genomics but in physiology. But we all do genetic work now.

The Dr. says that XX persons can become cis men. “CIS men” is explicitly about gender. I was trying to make the point (not very well as it turns out) that all of this hinges on definitions. So you have to unpack CIS men in this context. Without a sound understanding of the basics, all the rest is supposition.

And the gender identity and expression parts have nothing to do with gene expression, penetrance (giggity), DNA, RNA or epigenetic factors in gene expression.

Also the better example for the counter argument would probably be CAIS.

I can try. The cis part means the person’s naughty bits are aligned with their gender identity. The male is their gender identity. So post-bottom surgery it’s perfectly possible. If you use different definitions for concepts though you will have difficulty making it work.

None of this has anything to do with the claimed PhD in genomics though. These are socio-cultural concepts. So they should stick their PhD where it belongs and address the arguments head on instead of trying to argue from authority.