Quite aside from the problems with labelling people as abnormal, in of itself "normal" doesn't mean that, you have to specify you mean the word to mean heterosexual and cisgender in context. Cis, (or in this case, cishet) is a much simpler and clearer way to do this.Paragon Fury said:1: "Normal" is a factually correct term for people who are born male/female and are interested in the opposite sex.
Any word which implies that cis people aren't the only kind of people is going to have those connotations, at least according to those threatened by the idea. Tell a privileged group that their viewpoint, their existence isn't the only one that matters, and you'll find a bunch of reactionaries who are deeply upset at this.Paragon Fury said:2: The LGBT community poisoned the well on the word "Cis" from the word go. I'd be willing to bet 95%+ of the people here and in general had their first experience with the word "Cis" not for a scientific use, but to be used as an insult against them or someone else. And not a mild insult either - every time I've personally seen the word or heard of other people being called it, it looks as if its being used on the same level as "******" or "*****" - something that is supposed to be a very vulgar and crude slur against the target.
Its likely to never be an acceptable word to use generally because of the connotations it has already.
In any case, even assuming that cis is an insult (which it is not), it's no way comparable to something like ****** or *****.