Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Personalized organ inventories.

There are default settings for men and women as “cisgender” if they do not express a trans identity.

This is like hearing hoofbeats and assuming zebras. They might as well just come out and call us all “non-trans.” We still haven’t gotten ourselves out of the age in which “male” was the standard and default for everything, with women being considered aberrant, non-standard, or flawed. Now “trans” is the standard, and everyone else is ho-hum, run-of-the-mill “cis.” It’s an attempt at normalizing the abnormal, of turning the impossible into mental wallpaper instead of a material and moral imposition.

To be honest, when I saw the title of the post, and started reading it, I’d thought some rich dude was subverting the NHS to come up with lists of personal potential organ donors, should they ever need to harvest one at short notice. I think that would have been less sinister. This sneaking in ideology via software is pretty scary, as well as a stupid waste of time and money. It’s about as worthwhile as building a system in which it is assumed that everyone has polydactyly, and forcing staff to go in and enumerate the number of digits on each hand ad foot of every patient, and then ask whether or not patients ever planned to have digits added or removed. Are the parties responsible going to plead ignorance, or fall on their swords? This is a little more involved than adopting US software where there’s nothing more awkward being imported than the American spelling of words like “colour” and “neighbour”. This is much less benign, and intended to be so.