Lost language

Has anyone noticed that trans identified males "transwomen" make the news for sports, business, and politics while trans identified females "transmen" make the news for having babies?

Once upon a time only women had the potential to get pregnant. And the penis was the male organ. 'The' not 'a'. Now a tiny bunch of nutcases are rewriting biology and language. Well, they can just fuck right off. I will never be persuaded.

And thinking if there's 3 people involved, then how is that a valid marriage? It might be something else, a civil contract of some sort maybe, but it's not a marriage

Can't comment on the pregnancy thing, but your thread's about lost language, so... it's not too long ago that there were religious types on the radio saying how marriage was between a man and a woman, and that anything else could be some sort of "civil contract"; but that "marriage" was taken! Marriage was for all those heterosexual couples, and that any broadening of that would make the very word and concept meaningless.

Thankfully we moved past that.

Years ago (before all the gender ideology really kicked off) I heard the news headline "the world's first male pregnancy" or "birth" or somesuch - and pricked my ears up, visualising some sort of scenario from Arnie's film 'Junior' - of course it was a transgender man - ie. a woman. I actually rolled my eyes. Woman gives birth is not news.

Never in the history of the universe has anyone other than a biological female given birth.

This nonsense with the language is pissing me right off. Men cannot get pregnant.

FF$!
I'd always understood that the potential to be pregnant was one of the defining features of a woman.
If you are pregnant, isn't that evidence that you are a woman? And if you were originally a woman but then transed, wouldn't being pregnant demonstrate that whatever drugs you take or surgery you have, it doesn't stop you from being a woman. And conversely, if you were originally a man, you won't be getting pregnant.
I dunno, the world's a funny place. I was listening to Jonathan Ross talking about how Ronaldhino is getting married to 2 women at once. And thinking if there's 3 people involved, then how is that a valid marriage? It might be something else, a civil contract of some sort maybe, but it's not a marriage .
Definitions change over time. They still need to make sense though.

As it could have been written 'that affects the care given to anyone in pregnancy' or similar, I have to wonder if that construction was intentional to make a point.