One of the problems with this kind of messaging is that it shows the disconnect in knowledge and attitude between the medical/scientific side and the people who run the campaigns.

As I said in the original thread on this, a part of my job is writing and editing and checking patient facing documentation for trials. This blurb would not have passed our processes because it’s not clear (and it reeks of POMO woke bullshit, but trying to be charitable and critique it just from a functional point of view...) it doesn’t do what it sets out to. It’s a poor bit of communication.

Absolutely. I'm afraid all of our third sector orgs have been infected with this social constructionist bullnonsense. Elite social closure has meant that even our bloody charities are blind to their own service users.

There is no point aiming public health campaigns at woketopians who are hyper aware of services and resources they can access and are already monopolising more than their fair share.

A female gender identity.

Something quite indefinable, which is neither necessary nor sufficient to make someone a female.

"Men and women both have breast tissue and both can get breast cancer."

Men and women can both get prostate cancer too:

www.healthline.com/health/women-health/female-prostate-cancer

"If you mean that you have had breast augmentation"

No - I have a very happy 36 B from estrogen alone. And I also have a normal amount of glandular tissue according to my last mammogram. Who knew that estrogen would grow breasts!

"Plenty of women have flat chests as well, not sure how that fits in with your narrative."

It fits perfectly with my narrative - it kind of sums it up. You might want to re-read my comments before you answer that.

wakame please can you answer the question that has been asked of you about in what way/ defintion or your own words, do you come to think you are already female.

You have stated it several times and I would genuinely like to know how you arrive at the thought that you are not just a woman but also female.

We cannot discuss properly unless we know what you mean.

I was already female.

If you were identified as male at birth and you now identify as a woman then how are you a trans woman if you were already female?

Please stop doing this Wakame You appear by your posts to be identifying as a bundle of contradictions.

And cervical cancer is a serious issue, like testicular cancer. Both are a young person's disease and are easily treatable. But if left or ignored, the consequences for both sexes can be devastating.

"a feminine body"

uh-huh.

Yes therefore

And according to the communication you have sent to CRUK

The words male / female should be decoupled from body parts like prostate / cervix.

You literally said you had written to them asking for them to stop referring to men.

Taking your ideas to their logical conclusion is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and to ask, what the medium to long term plan is around this if you and others agitating for these changes succeed.

"I mean, what is it that you have that makes you think/ know you are not male?"

A female gender identity.

"But you transitioned? From what?"

From having a masculine body and male legal and social identity, to having a feminine body and a female legal and social identity.

Always comes back to tits, seems.

"AS YOU HAVE SAID body parts like penises or clitorises or prostates are nothing to do with male / female / man / woman, a man or a woman could have any selection of parts "

You're trying too hard. Let me explain most men have penises and prostates, most women have clitorises and Skene's glands, but a small number of women have penises and prostates, and a small number of men have clitorises and Skene's glands.

This is that black and white thinking again.

Men and women both have breast tissue and both can get breast cancer.

If you mean that you have had breast augmentation, that doesn't turn them into the same as female breasts.

By what process has having your chest augmented with breasts that look like ones a woman might have, made that part of your chest a "female part"?

It's something that has been done to make it look female, surely.

Plenty of women have flat chests as well, not sure how that fits in with your narrative.

You mean my prostate is a male part but my breasts are a female part? What does that make me?

sardine does not say or mention breasts. male humans have breast tissue and a structure that is a breast. They are analagous structures in both sexes even though they are not entirely the same

Some organs and tissues are sex specific.

We can’t answer. We are just strangers on internet tbh

or dont have?!

Cripes only u would know the answer on that one

Just ask urself

I mean, what is it that you have that makes you think/ know you are not male?

wakame by what defintion/ science are you female?

I didn't have to change sex - I was already female.

But you transitioned? From what?

"Either certain body parts are connected to certain sexed bodies or they are not."

You mean my prostate is a male part but my breasts are a female part? What does that make me?

Perhaps i need to put this message across with flash cards done in blunt crayon, or interpretative modern dance

I want to see the dance

"Even though, they aren't allowed to be told."

Oh come on. Have you really managed to pull that out of my comments? I think you should re read the thread.

"Do you believe humans can change sex?"

I didn't have to change sex - I was already female.

There is no nuance required.

Either certain body parts are connected to certain sexed bodies or they are not.

IF you believe that sex is pretty shady and a poor way to tell about any of this stuff
AND you have written to CRUK to ask them to change their literature to remove references to men and replace with "prostate haver" etc
THEN clearly believe that these things are not do do with sex and therefore why should they be mentioned
AS YOU HAVE SAID body parts like penises or clitorises or prostates are nothing to do with male / female / man / woman, a man or a woman could have any selection of parts
SO it makes sense to refer to the parts only
This is the position you have taken all through this thread and across multiple others

The logical conclusion of what you ask for is that these things are decoupled. That is a stated aim that I have seen time and time again, and orgs (like CRUK) changing their literature and messaging to do so.

When asked a pretty basic question about how this plays out in the mid-long term - once these things are decoupled, how does anyone know which internal bits they have - which is an entirely logical question - you say it will be fine as somehow poeple will just know... Even though, they aren't allowed to be told. It's nonsense. Answer the question.

If parts such as cervixes, prostates, are not male or female specific organs, how is any person supposed to know whether they have one, and then proceed accordingly if they read messages like the one from CRUK.

We ONLY know we have these things because we know what SEX we are. I know I need to go for smears because I am female. My DFIL knows he has prostate cancer which is something his wife would not have got.

"Nobody is assigned a sex at birth. No one is flipping a coin and guessing."

Honestly - I have no idea how you manage to derive this from my comments. How would me saying that assigning sex according to genitals at birth is a good system that is almost always right, lead you to think I said that sex assignment is a coin toss?

"They are still male though"

CAIS women have XY chromosomes but also a vagina and sometimes a womb. And yet you say everyone is either male or female according to their sex characteristics. This is not logical - you are trying to squeeze the science into your box of political ideology, but it won't go. It's better to observe the science and adapt your politics accordingly.