Talk

Advanced search

The Last leg - stand up for cancer special....

(42 Posts)
rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 07:02:54

A bit behind on my telly, I watched the last leg last night which ended with Adam Hills having a prostate exam to show how easy and painless it is.

And they kept talking about MEN - MEN having prostate exams, men going to the doctor for prostate exams, men's prostate, men's health, men's bodies.

At no point did anyone point out that WOMEN have prostates too. And how can it be made more comfortable for women to have their prostates examined, can they please insist on a female proctologist? Can they please stop using language that excludes trans health care?

Not even Sarah Pascoe, who was a guest on the show, stood up for the poor, excluded, insulted transwomen, you would think she would have pointed out how transphobic it was to refer to a prostate exam as something only men need?

Shocking. I sure hope they got a lot of stick on twitter afterwards from Munroe Bergdoff et Al?

#isitokay to exclude transgener folk from essential health care by implying that prostate cancer only effects men, or that only men need a prostate exam? Look at the good example set by institutions, from charities to the NHS, to use trans inclusive phrases such as pregnant people, people who menstruate etc.

Why wasn't Adam Hills immediately cancelled online?

OP’s posts: |
PearPickingPorky Sun 22-Nov-20 07:36:08

It doesn't even register with The Woke when people talk about "men" that that's exclusive. It's the word "women" that pricks people's ears up.

PearPickingPorky Sun 22-Nov-20 07:41:45

I should also say, though, I don't think we should start demanding that prostate cancer services/literature/comms should include women (eg in twitter replies to Prostate Cancer UK), even though it's beyond hypocritical and insulting that men's stuff is left alone while women become neutralised vagina people/menstruators/gestators/bodyfeeders. Instead I think a better tactic is to praise the people/companies who resist the new woke language and continue to use the terms men and women by thanking them for their clear communication.

rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 07:48:29

I don't disagree....

But it blows my mind that people cannot see the absolutely breathtaking hypocrisy.... Not really blaming Adam or Mike the camera man..... They haven't done anything wrong, or anything that would even have registered as wrong a few short years ago.

I wonder how Sarah Pascoe could have sat there and said nothing, though. She is soooo supportive of the trans agenda and she was RIGHT THERE, she could have said something RIGHT THEN!!!

OP’s posts: |
rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 07:49:10

.... and there I go, absolving the men of blame and demanding why the lone female didn't say anything.....

OP’s posts: |
rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 07:49:59

..... but I doubt that Adam, Alex or josh really care about this debate whereas Sarah oascoe has entered into it elsewhere and has made her opinions clear.....??

OP’s posts: |
NancyDrawed Sun 22-Nov-20 08:00:38

I imagine it's because if you go down the whole TWAW route, then those very same TW don't want any attention to be drawn to the reality of their biology. In the same vein, medical. biological women's realities are relabelled, not for the transmen to feel included - after all, they are female, so who cares how they feel? - but so the TW are not excluded

A poster on another thread (sorry, I can't remember who, or which thread) pointed out that there is a drive to not use the word woman on things that TW can't be part of, on account of the fact that they are male, but it's fine on things they can identify their way into. So anything biological doesn't use woman/women but toilets as that's exclusionary to TW, but sports, changing rooms, prisions are all fine to be referred to as women's which allows TWs access. If they were all labelled in biological terms, the TW wouldn't be able to identify their way in. I haven't put that anywhere near as clearly as the original poster, but it really struck a chord with me.

TinySongstress Sun 22-Nov-20 08:14:57

You can put a Ford Focus badge on a Vauxhall Astra, but your 'Ford Focus' is still made entirely of Astra parts. If there's an urgent safety recall for the Astra then it should be announced as such. The recall won't affect Fords, so why would it be announced as 'There is an urgent safety recall on all Vauxhall Astras and Ford Focus's'.
There isn't a safety issue with the Fords at all.

Prostate cancer goes beyond it.

PearPickingPorky Sun 22-Nov-20 08:15:14

rabbitwoman

.... and there I go, absolving the men of blame and demanding why the lone female didn't say anything.....

grin

MichelleofzeResistance Sun 22-Nov-20 08:19:32

I wonder how Sarah Pascoe could have sat there and said nothing, though. She is soooo supportive of the trans agenda and she was RIGHT THERE

Sarah is validating as is this programme (and the rest of the woke world) that the agenda they are supportive of is solely about using these exciting language and concepts when they serve to suppress and erase women. The agenda is to suppress and erase women.

rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 08:47:49

MichelleofzeResistance

*I wonder how Sarah Pascoe could have sat there and said nothing, though. She is soooo supportive of the trans agenda and she was RIGHT THERE*

Sarah is validating as is this programme (and the rest of the woke world) that the agenda they are supportive of is solely about using these exciting language and concepts when they serve to suppress and erase women. The agenda is to suppress and erase women.

See, I know that the agenda is to erase women. Surely, so do lots of people on this board. This episode of the last leg was as clear a demonstration as it could be that this current agenda is against women; if people were genuinely concerned about transphobia, why wasn't Adam Hills accused of being transphobic? Why didn't Sarah pascoe at the very least pipe up 'what about women who need prostate exams, Adam?' doesn't she care about transgender rights after all? She says she does - well, there was blatent transphobia happening right in front of her, and she did nothing....

And if she, or Adam Hills or Alex Brooker or Dr xand do see this hypocrisy then why don't they stand with jk Rowling?

Adam's new dog, whom he introduced us to in lock down shows, was called Albus Dumbledog. Graham Lineham got nominated for Dick of the Year. They MUST be aware of the debate, why aren't they saying anything!?

OP’s posts: |
rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 08:50:33

.... I don't for one second, by the way, believe that Sarah pascoe, Adam Hills, Dr xand, Richard ayawade or any of the other guests support an agenda to erase women.

But they are definitely not ignorant of the debate. So......???!!!

OP’s posts: |
GeorgiaMcGraw Sun 22-Nov-20 10:36:44

I still can't believe they did that to Linehan. Funnily enough I stopped watching last year after the big JKR blow up because I figured they would go full woke and I didn't want to see it. Comedy these days is a mess.

Barracker Sun 22-Nov-20 10:43:23

The double rule though, is this:
1. In matters of female health, erase references to females (because that's a kick in the teeth for women, bonus) and bang on loudly about transmen and non-binary people (because this makes it plain that they are actually also exactly the same as women, with exactly the same bodies, and of course we're fine loudly associating them with women, because we don't expect anyone to really believe they are men)
2. In matters of male health, never bring up the fact that 'transwomen' are male. Don't reference them. You don't want to remind people that they are exactly the same as any other man.

The trans community are fine with the double standard because they are implicitly ok with transmen being lumped in with women and not at all ok with transwomen being lumped in with men.

Vulva-people: yes, fine
Prostate-people: no, how dare you

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg Sun 22-Nov-20 10:51:31

why aren't they saying anything!?

convenience innit? they don't want a twitter roasting

they're the equivalent of the kids that stand behind the playground bully going 'Yerrr'

or possibly Neville Chamberlain

BernardBlackMissesLangCleg Sun 22-Nov-20 10:53:32

I think it's also about the pre-progammed space in everyone's heads that says it's OK to have things that are just for men, but REALLY, REALLY not OK to have things that are just for women

people don't even see it, it's in the air they breathe.

So even fucking childbirth can't just be for women

StrippedFridge Sun 22-Nov-20 10:57:21

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TalkingtoLangClegintheDark Sun 22-Nov-20 10:59:47

NancyDrawed

I imagine it's because if you go down the whole TWAW route, then those very same TW don't want any attention to be drawn to the reality of their biology. In the same vein, medical. biological women's realities are relabelled, not for the transmen to feel included - after all, they are female, so who cares how they feel? - but so the TW are not excluded

A poster on another thread (sorry, I can't remember who, or which thread) pointed out that there is a drive to not use the word woman on things that TW can't be part of, on account of the fact that they are male, but it's fine on things they can identify their way into. So anything biological doesn't use woman/women but toilets as that's exclusionary to TW, but sports, changing rooms, prisions are all fine to be referred to as women's which allows TWs access. If they were all labelled in biological terms, the TW wouldn't be able to identify their way in. I haven't put that anywhere near as clearly as the original poster, but it really struck a chord with me.

All of this.

TalkingtoLangClegintheDark Sun 22-Nov-20 11:00:28

Barracker

The double rule though, is this:
1. In matters of female health, erase references to females (because that's a kick in the teeth for women, bonus) and bang on loudly about transmen and non-binary people (because this makes it plain that they are actually also exactly the same as women, with exactly the same bodies, and of course we're fine loudly associating them with women, because we don't expect anyone to really believe they are men)
2. In matters of male health, never bring up the fact that 'transwomen' are male. Don't reference them. You don't want to remind people that they are exactly the same as any other man.

The trans community are fine with the double standard because they are implicitly ok with transmen being lumped in with women and not at all ok with transwomen being lumped in with men.

Vulva-people: yes, fine
Prostate-people: no, how dare you

And this.

DrDavidBanner Sun 22-Nov-20 11:05:33

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

testing987654321 Sun 22-Nov-20 12:27:34

Ooh, I had just started reading the last message as it disappeared.

Well this is an interesting thread.

Has anyone seen any pushback about the last leg excluding transwomen from prostate exams?

No?

A discussion about why the word woman is under attack when used to describe women's biology? That's obviously highly contentious and must be carefully checked. Anyone stepping out of line must be silenced rapidly!

Oh, I am so glad to be reminded of how woman can only be used to validate male identities, I am writing my submission to the WEC today. I am going to entirely focus on language and how I, as a woman, am being affected by lack of clarity in language being used, and how women are fearful of abuse if they speak the truth.

WeeBisom Sun 22-Nov-20 12:28:03

Because the horrifying thing is this is not really about inclusivity or being kind to trans people at all. If it was about that, as you point out , there would be great efforts to make all references to men gender neutral and inclusive. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the “inclusivity” excuse disguises what is really going on - it’s simple erasure of the word woman and other related terms like mother. Trans women don’t want to be called dick havers or prostate possessors but at the same time they feel excluded from words like “woman” in relation to periods.

What is particularly upsetting is that when I’ve pointed out ways to make “man” more inclusive - by calling them “penis possessors” or “mxn” I get nothing but hostility. Men really don’t like it. And it seems they aren’t swayed by appeals to it being “kind”.

MichelleofzeResistance Sun 22-Nov-20 12:42:19

* I am writing my submission to the WEC today. I am going to entirely focus on language and how I, as a woman, am being affected by lack of clarity in language being used, and how women are fearful of abuse if they speak the truth.*

You may like to add that organisations using these language choices without also, to the same extent and with the same enthusiasm speaking out against the misogynist attitudes abuse of women and threats that are all over their own twitter threads, are colluding in the abuse and these appalling attitudes towards females. It ceases to make participating in the language an act of neutrally meant inclusion. By their silent collusion they themselves turn this language into hostile abuse of women, and by using it they join in with the abuse.

rabbitwoman Sun 22-Nov-20 13:22:13

It's obvious isn't it?

So Adam Hills, Brooker, pascoe et Al - do they not see it? Do they AGREE with female erasure (I just don't believe that....)

Do they not care?

Or are we really so very wrong to object to being called cervix havers and pregnant people, etc?

Maybe I could understand if everyone was on the same page - either trans inclusive language for the penis havers AND cervix owners? OR it is fine and dandy to refer to women as women and men as men....

BUT surely for one to be fine and not the other is a HUGE signal about the truth behind this agenda, can they really, really not understand that!?

OP’s posts: |
MitziK Sun 22-Nov-20 13:53:38

Maybe it's assumed that transwomen don't have to worry about Prostate Cancer because of the hormone therapy and potentially surgery? They're wrong if that's the case.

Treatment

would be relevant.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in