KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime said:
The problem is that non-transgendered and non-transgender and any permutations there of are kind of othering terms and can be seen as insulting by either side. By that I mean non-transgender can be exclusionary language.
If you are cisgender then it's because you're not transgender. All labels are axiomatically exclusionary. You are being labeled as "this" because you're not "that". That people are insulted by labels isn't surprising, but they're there for classification. So they need to exist but they don't have to be offensive.
Consider this from my perspective, the words of yours that I'm reading, are words that I'm seeing as justification for the perpetuation of something that is now seen as a slur. I have seen truly offensive people using the same rhetoric to defend the most god-awful slurs mankind has produced. Though, you are absolutely not an offensive person and this word certainly hasn't reached anything close to that level. But it is entirely unnecessary to defend a slur unless the point is that you want the slur to exist. From what I've seen, there is a bit of smug self satisfaction coming out of enforcing the label against non-transgendered people who don't like it. As though enforcing the label is putting actual hateful people in their place whereas it's really just a slur against the benevolent and hateful alike.
Besides that cisgender is easier to say, and type. Plus cisgender is actually better in a comparative context when brought up than any similar terms and words once people know what it means.
"Fag" is easier to say than homosexual and "retard" is easier to say than mentally disabled. So what's your point?
Cis is not a better term because it has a language barrier. You acknowledging that it is not a known word is acknowledging that it does not easily convey the message. "Non" is a universally accepted term and readily understood. That's the entire point of language, to convey a point or message accurately and succinctly.
What's interesting is that people in the Trans community and specifically proponents of studies for the cause agree with me here. They think non-trans is more readily understood:
"Krista Scott-Dixon wrote in 2009: "I prefer the term non-trans to other options such as cissexual/cisgendered."[19] She holds this view because she believes the term "non-trans" is clearer to average people and will help normalize transgender individuals." (Wikipedia on Cisgender)