I am not a "person who menstruates"

Here you go - 100s, perhaps 1000s, of examples. Some are behind a paywall, but I don't subscribe and am still blown away by the scale of it.

https://millihill.substack.com/s/the-word-is-woman

It's not rocket science.

Can you explain the difference between a "woman", a "trans man" and a female "non binary" person in a way that does not requiring reducing the range of allowable forms of womanhood from "the half of humanity that is female in all our diversity" to some subset of that based on the idea that some personalities are not compatible with being "women"?

We'll have to agree to disagree @FlirtsWithRhinos I still can't fathom why acknowledging there are women and that there are people who are trans, non binary and intersex is derogatory to women. I think it would be strange to pretend that there was no difference really, and that's before considering when it comes to health services there will be some practical differences that need to be considered. I appreciate you hold a different point of view though even if I don't understand it.

But anyone who accepts the validity of language that differentiates between "women" and other types of people with female biology is telling other women how they should feel and define themselves. That is the whole fucking problem!

I'm a "real.woman" and have no issue with these terms. What I do have an issue with is other "real.women" telling me how I should feel.

Sigh. I originally had a racism analogy which might have been clearer for you, but I changed it because as a white person who does not face those challenges I try to avoid using racism as an example, even though it is probably the closest equivalent scenario. Perhaps you can think through that yourself to other groups who might be subdivied in offensive ways.

I don't understand your arguements that if the sexism is in a different leaflet then it's ok.

Either "woman" means all adult human female people, or it does not.

If it does not, then what is the criterion that makes a "person" into a "woman", and are those of us who do not have it now not "women"?

I’m a woman and I won’t owner to these nonsensical terms

The worst thing is that these cases are women who inflict this on other women so they can pretend to be men. We shouldn't have to put up with nonsense.

It’s the loud trans people who have kicked up such a fuss and drawn so much attention to the trans community that leads to many of us women deciding that actually, no, we don’t want men in our spaces. We don’t want to be described as cis. We don’t want words like chest feeders or pregnant people. The trans people I follow on TikTok say things like “most women say it’s ok” …. Ok but you cant bypass consent. So one woman saying no is enough.

This is the start of the NHS page on cervical screening. Would you say this is offensive?

• 'All women aged 25 to 64 are invited for cervical screening every 5 years to check the health of their cervix. Cervical screening used to be called a smear test.
• Everyone with a cervix should go for cervical screening.
• If you're a trans man or non-binary and have a cervix, you can speak to your GP, sexual health clinic or transgender health clinic about getting invitations routinely

I genuinely can't follow your logic in your last paragraph sorry. I don't see how acknowledging there are people who have a cervix and don't consider themselves women, means that you aren't considered to be a woman, or aren't included when using the term women. And comparison to an association with thieves is a bit odd unless you think having a cervix is a bad thing? (I'm not being flippant I've re-read the post and I really can't see how you've come to that conclusion)

I am a WOMAN !! Don’t let them erase you !

If you really want to understand, to me as a female person (the group who used to be called "women"), the phrase "women and other people with cervix" is as offensive as the phrase "Scousers and residents of Liverpool who aren't thieves" would be to someone from Liverpool.

"Women and other people with a cervix" splits up what should be a simple category "women" by some artibrary additional quality, and thereby is telling people like me who hitherto were quite happily assuming the category women included us that unless we also have this additional, unrelated quality that someone else has decided is also required to be a woman, we no longer belong in that category "woman".

@TheChirpyReader

It is still happening.

NHS Blood and Transplant have rehashed the covering letter they send with the Donation Safety Check Questionnaire, the new version is from 22.12 25. It now refers to "sex assigned at birth".

I would say it's them that's very late, not the OP.

If you don't consider womanhood as a fact of the body, yet still believe some people are "women", you are saying "woman" is a type of mind, which means

1. you are implicitly saying there are some ways of thinking that are aligned to or correct for women and some ways that are not (because if the difference between men and women is mental not physical, how else could this difference exist?). And that takes society right back to the days of believing that there are some roles, jobs and education are fit for women and some that are not.
2. the other side of the same coin - you are disconnecting the position and challenges women face today from their causes in our biology, in society's framing of that biology, and in the history and experiences of the other people who share that biology. But disconnecting us socially, linguistically and legally doesn't actually switch any of those things off. We still face the same physical and social consequences. We have just lost the history and understanding of why and how they happen, and the rights and language to describe and challenge them.

So, while you think that to recognise your biological sex is to "limit" you to your reproductive organs, I think that to not recognise my biological sex and the social consequences that come with that it to reduce me to half a person.

My sex exists. It is not all I am, but it an intrinsic part of the complete human being I am and the experiences it brings, good and bad, are part of the story of me. To be female in a public and political society still largely shaped by and for men is not the same as to be male in that society, and if we give up the language and concepts to explain that believing that somehow not mentionjng our sex will free us from sexism we do ourselves a great disservice.

You believe that to recognise your sex reduces you. I believe that to not recognise our sex is to turn us into half people, to make parts of our lives invisible and unsayable. It reduces us from real flesh and blood human beings to cartoon characters

What's your problem? Its really easy to just accept people aa they are and when certain terms are used you arw well aware why and who they mean. Petty and mean

The NHS uses the term in relation to people who are born biologically female, ie trans men or people who are non binary, who have had breast tissue removed, and (depending on the surgery) may or may not be capable of producing milk still.

I've only ever seen the term used about biological men attempting to 'chestfeed' on Mumsnet. There was a video about it supposedly being celebrated, but that video only ever appeared in articles criticising trans people so I'm not sure it was real or made to be propaganda for those sites.

Yeah i must have. Sorry.

I've been through the huge gender critical frustration of all of this and have considered my daughters future and I've come through to the other side of 'Whatever'- each to their own.

I haven't seen those terms used other than on MN or rage baiting on Facebook. People will continue to use Man / Woman.

It's still breastfeeding though as mammary tissue is required to breastfeed.

Just shows the influence Stonewall managed to exert over so many major institutions - so many managers terrified of disobeying their edicts and - shock horror! - being seen as unwoke dinosaurs!

It’d be interesting to know what minute percentage of biological males have ever managed to ‘chest feed’ a baby - does anyone know?

I agree, i just looked up NHS website for menstruation and it references women and girls throughout, and I couldn't see any links to find trans friendly alternatives which actually shocked me! I do want minority groups to have the choice to access things that make them more comfortable

Clearly you cross posted with my post pointing out that if consideration for the many women who do not menstruate was the driving concern, the phrase would be "women who menstruate" not "people who menstruate".

The only reason to use the word "people" is to promote the neo-sexist belief that womanhood is a personality trait not a physical fact with physical consequences.

Yeah, I'm sure that will make all the difference...

How, exactly, do you think renaming breastfeeding as chest feeding would increase uptake?

@ManukaMoneyMaker the approach you're suggesting is what the NHS does, as far as I can see. I'm open to being corrected if anyone has examples where the language is being replaced with trans terms in material for the general population.

I'm a person who menstruates. One day I will be a person who doesn't menstruate. The distinction is important in health care. I'm struggling to see the issue with it.