Women and anyone with a cervix

They can be told, then the person telling them that loses their job. Then it is 2-3 years of tribunals.

Yay.

So why gets the fun job of telling these men they’re not women? I mean, if you’re going to use “inclusive language” and respecting people’s identities , surely you’d be including non cis men in the word woman as that’s how they identify?

Yes lots of people don't understand the importance of smear tests, - every single one of those people is a woman.

If women are making body modifications because they no longer want to be women then it is the duty of healthcare providers to inform them that they still need to have smear tests. Same with men who identify as trans women and prostate exams. People who do not have the ability to understand these things surely cannot have capacity to consent to such procedures.

The world has gone mad, truly it has. No one can change sex.

Which post? MN doesn't give the opportunity to just look at one person's posts so can you please give an example of a caveman 'living as a woman'.

Then they can be told they can’t have that healthcare as they don’t need it but I think better than the other way around, ie people being missed.

There are a lot of people who don’t understand the importance of eg a smear test for a vast number of reasons, so the more that can be done to target everyone the better.

There are definitely people who don’t understand what healthcare they still need as trans people.

I’ve already given an example in a previous post.

Define ‘women who live as men’ and ‘men who live as women’. How does one do that? What proof? It’s nonsense straight out of the TRA handbook.

We have proof of tribes going back into ancient times that had designations for more than 2 genders - with names for men who live as women or women who live as men for example.

However, whatever the historical culture - these persons were not termed the gender they identified as.

@Floatlikeafeather2I don’t know why you’re being purposely facetious when you’re a woman - and I’m advocating for safe spaces for women and to stop the erasure of women in society. For whatever reason you, as a woman, had to have your cervix removed, I’m sorry. But AS A WOMAN you HAD a cervix. As only women can have them?! I don’t understand what is difficult to grasp with that???

As@HorrorAndHaagenDazspointed out - there’s no gotcha moment. It’s a statement of fact. I am right. It’s been argued in law.

Men cannot be women. There is no need for all this “inclusive language” bollocks. Men do not need to have a cervical screen.

What was the article about? Was it a health matter than could affect a biological woman, who identifies as a transman, who doesn't have a cervix? If so it's still isn't inclusive language. Just to put another cat among the pigeons.

People do tend to stick their pennies in on open message boards.

And yes, its perfectly okay to say you no longer have a cervix, although the expansion on your original statement does make it rather clear that you were hoping to gotcha @DoubleShotEspressox with one of the gender debate's most overused and fallacious arguments which hinges around the pretence that those who state that only women have a cervix automatically exclude those who have had them removed from womanhood.

I was actually hoping that @DoubleShotEspressox would reply, as that's whose comment I was responding to, but as you've stuck your two penn'orth in I'll say that I no longer have a cervix. Is that ok?

And a lot of non cis men may believe they are women so it includes them.

Exactly, it literally says "women".

The number of transgender women (or men), the overall numbers are minuscule. I just dont understand the need to be so inclusive.

It is inclusive to those people as it also says “women”.

The language excludes them.

Men do not have a woman's cervix.

When will this nonsense stop?

I wish people would stop describing this sort of language as ‘inclusive’. It often isn’t inclusive. The worst is when an essential women’s service is just advertised to ‘anyone with a cervix’, as I have seen.

This is non-inclusive to people with little knowledge of anatomy, or poor reading skills, or a limited grasp of English, or learning difficulties.

OP’s example isn’t too bad, as it says ‘women and anyone with a cervix’ . Still not good, as it spreads misinformation. It may also deter people who understand ‘women’ but not the rest, or who are put off by thinking this is a mixed-sex service.

Only women can have a cervix so it's drivel.

What's your point?

I don't find a woman without a cervix "hard to accept" in the slightest.
Women have them removed on a fairly regular basis and some congenital disorders mean that they aren't formed "correctly" within females.

Outliers don't alter the fact that the female sex class is the only sex class capable of being born with a cervix.

Unless you're trying to tell me that males can be females because some women dont have a cervix?

Or is the lack of cervix chat because you are male?

Lots of people might genuinely think “ah well I’m not a woman so that doesn’t mean me”.

Really?

It is frightening to think that such vulnerable people have been pandered to and led to believe that they are no longer women. The only want to be a trans man is by being a woman and it's impossible to change sex.

The only kind of people who have a cervix are women. That doesn't mean that all women have a cervix.

If you know you don't have one then presumably you know you don't need a cervical smear.

The use of the words people with a cervix is pandering to an ideology that most don't believe in. The use of people with a cervix is problematic for people who do not have English as a first language and people with learning difficulties.

A few women are born with a rare disorder that means they have no cervix. Some women need life-saving surgery that removes the cervix. They are all still women.
No man has a cervix. So ‘people with a cervix’ are all women, even if they choose to call themselves something else.