Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Unflip

1 2

Original poster

Department for Education on periods: 'person ... their ... their'

41 replies

WomanBornNotWorn · 18/01/2020 11:50

And retweeted by the Conservatives.

Girls just no longer a thing, then?

Department for Education on periods: 'person ... their ... their'

OP posts:

ThinEndoftheWedge · 18/01/2020 18:04

Risk of cervical cancer for all people included in the word ‘people’:

Key risk factor - female

Key exclusion factor - male

These idiots need to wake up. Agreed it is a political not a neutral act. Words and definitions matter which is why TRAs chase this.

They are happy to do so at the clear risk to the health and lives of young women. This is the depths of what we are dealing with.

Michelleoftheresistance · 18/01/2020 17:40

I think that's arguable, since 'people' explicitly moves away from women and girls to a mixed sex descriptor. Which is the political point. It's not a neutral action to women and girls. Who, let's face it, are 100% of the people having periods: this is a move to less than 1% of the population, male and female, who wish not to be reminded of their biological reality.

ACatWhoBinds · 18/01/2020 17:21

@Michelleoftheresistance I would've thought that's because women and girls come under the umbrella of people - they're already covered if not by explicit language. Not saying it's right or wrong, just an observation

Michelleoftheresistance · 18/01/2020 16:41

Why can't we have women, girls and people? Why do the women and girls have to be eliminated? Exclusion. Which is always acceptable if the person you're excluding was born with female biology.

Mockers2020Vision · 18/01/2020 13:44

As I noted earlier:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3798582-R4-Todaywatch

Helmetbymidnight · 18/01/2020 13:39

its fecking ridiculous - and all part of the ridiculous pretence that sex is unimportant/gender rules. does my head in that grown-ups, actual adults, come out with thiscrap.

Original poster

WomanBornNotWorn · 18/01/2020 13:34

This is a giant subject, needs Big Research. Does anyone have the time? And sure as hell there'd be no funding for anyone who did.

OP posts:

Starlink · 18/01/2020 13:19

But we all know what the wordi g means and who it is aimed at

Kit19 · 18/01/2020 12:53

That’s the thing that winds me up so much @chihaha

Women have to give up everything even the right to describe themselves purely as ‘women’ to accommodate men and men as usual give up nothing

Chihaha · 18/01/2020 12:47

Wow, I stand corrected. Why does it only go one way?

Original poster

WomanBornNotWorn · 18/01/2020 12:32

I have huge respect and gratitude for MacMillan.

I'm sorry that even they have fallen under the spell.

'Testicular cancer is more common in younger to middle aged men.'

'Each year more than 3200 people are diagnosed with cervical cancer.'

OP posts:

Chihaha · 18/01/2020 12:21

To be fair to macmillan, their take is that it's not just the person with cancer who is affected, it's their families and carers too. So a man is likely to look at the information.

Original poster

WomanBornNotWorn · 18/01/2020 12:19

Here's McMillan on cervical cancer

www.macmillan.org.uk/information-and-support/cervical-cancer