Bigoted reactionaries, like Elon and Jordan, want to make cis a slur so they can ban its usage and prevent inclusive vocabulary. They're not actually offended by it.

Transphobes have been trying to turn it into one for a while, so they can play victim about it.

Culture war nonsense. Try not to spend much time at all if you can.

They'll pick anything to get more airtime. I remember them going after Jill Biden for using the prefix Dr but not in the medical sense.

They don't believe the words they're saying and playing this fake intellectual debate to keep attacking the liberals.

Not really, but there are some particularly crazy/militant/extreme people in the left and trans community who use it like it is.

Often not on it's own, usually in phrases like "cishet white male". Usually implying that the simple existence of this particular combination of uncontrollable personal traits is inherently problematic. Sometimes outright stating it. Sometimes literally calling for genocide or eugenics, or saying that it is entirely impossible to be a cishet white male and also be a good person.

It's the type of behavior that young men see that drives them into shit like Andrew Tate, Jordan Peterson, etc.

I'd imagine the people saying these things think it is fair or payback for the sexists, racists, bigots, etc that call for the same for their group. Payback for the reprehensible behavior they have had to endure. Hearing similar things directed at them may have driven them into the arms of extremist shit stirrers on their side.

Makes for a shitty, shitty cycle of reciprocal attack on people defined as "other".

Personally, I don't think the target makes a difference. It's reprehensible behavior either way. Go find a healthier output for your hurt. There are times where being the bigger person or taking the high road is not effective, but that should never be the assumed default or a situation to look forward to.

All that said, anyone arguing that those extremists are somehow leaders in the wider community is more interested in fanning the flames than anything else.

You see, "cis" implies the existence of "trans" and some people just really don't like the fact that they exist. Despite the it being fact.

Because it can be used as an exclusionary term to minimize cis voices. Stay with me, this isn't going where you think.

When trans folks engage in community discussions, it's very typical for cis people to insert themselves into the conversation so they can tell trans people who they are and aren't, what they should and shouldn't do. This actually happens with a lot of minority groups hoping to have serious discussions in public. Black folks hear about all lives matter or black-on-black violence, atheists here from religious proselytizers, etc.

So when trans folks - very rightly - let cis people know not to talk over them in their own communities, bigots believe -very wrongly- that their rights are being abused. Therefore the conclusion that "cis" is "discriminatory." See also "anti-white racism" "Men's Rights," etc.

All of these grievance perspectives are based on real-world difficulties, but provided without context. There are certain specific situations where it may be disadvantageous to be male, white, and cis. But those specific circumstances are not a part of systemic bias. If you don't care about context, and you don't care about systemic bias (particularly because it tends to benefit you), it's easy to view these isolated situations as a cause for victimhood.

Anything can be an insult in politics.