One in 10 women and other people with a uterus of reproductive age have the disease.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.

People are not "called by a pronoun".

@DialSquare

So when you meet or see someone for the first time, do you think of them as "oh look at the nice jacket that neutral person is wearing" or do you think "oh, look at the nice jacket that man is wearing".

Do you use entirely neutral pronouns when you meet someone? Because you believe that appearance has nothing to do with calling them her/him?

I've argued on other threads about people and organisations removing the words women and men, and replacing it with people with cervixes or people with prostrates.

Removing the word and defining us all by our biology isnt right, and makes it harder for people with poor english etc. But what is wrong with being inclusive and saying "women plus" or "men plus".

I would normally be happy with this, if the punctuation was clearer, so:
Women, and people born female who do not identify as women - so everyone knows it's an identity thing and not some birth defect men can get.

However, I am 100% sure that trans men would have been excluded from this study - there is no way that someone presenting as a man would have had their attractiveness and breast size etc gauged. The criteria would not allow something so tightly linked to the outcome (attractiveness, to men) to mess up their results or need sub group analysis, they would have just excluded them. Non binary as well, no doubt, probably even disabled people or any other category (pregnant) who would confuse things.

So in this case, there is a little but of unnecessary virtue signalling going on, as it is only about women, not anyone else with a uterus, but only women. However, women are not allowed to have anything to themselves - so they have added this in. Therefore, this addition is unnecessary and wrong in this context, IMO.

So sexual stereotypes then. I believe people can wear and present how they like without abuse or discrimination. I don't believe humans can change sex. We should be doing all we can to make it acceptable for people to present how they like and still be classed as the sex they were born into. I don't appreciate being coerced into lying.

Woman' is far clearer

Of course it is...no idea how anyone could argue to the contrary

Personally I’m fine with ‘and Trans men’ but can see why others May not be

It's really pretty obvious in our society what living like a man or women is.
Refusing to acknowledge that doesnt make you right. It makes you belligerent.

A lot of people dont conform to gender stereotypes, but really we know which clothes are male and which clothes are female. We know which names are male and which are female.

If someone has gender dysphoria, a real condition - not made up, a real condition. Then what harm do they do by living with the appearance of the gender they feel more at home in?
Again, there are issues needing more dialogue like sport and medical treatment, but we cant solve it all in one day.

There are many transpeople who you cannot tell what sex they were born into. You identify them as the gender they appear. Dont pretend appearance doesnt make a difference and isnt a real thing.

[quote BobbieDraper]@DialSquare

If another person born female decided to live their life as a man... how does that affect you? Would you stand infront of them telling them "no. You're a women. I'm not calling you why the name you want you're a woman. End of"

For areas where biological actually matters, like sport, rape crisis centres, intimidate medical care... I understand that problems and the arguments and there is work to be done. If everyone could just calm the hell down, and be understanding and respectful of each other then solutions could be found. That also means the trans activist need to actually listen when they're told that someone women born female do not want to be examined by obviously male bodied people.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.[/quote]
How would they live as a man?

I don't need to listen to anyone.

@DialSquare

If another person born female decided to live their life as a man... how does that affect you? Would you stand infront of them telling them "no. You're a women. I'm not calling you why the name you want you're a woman. End of"

For areas where biological actually matters, like sport, rape crisis centres, intimidate medical care... I understand that problems and the arguments and there is work to be done. If everyone could just calm the hell down, and be understanding and respectful of each other then solutions could be found. That also means the trans activist need to actually listen when they're told that someone women born female do not want to be examined by obviously male bodied people.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.

@Floisme

Because these exclusion.

Women and girls menstruate.

Transmen and non-binary women also menstruate.

Now, I dont want to be defined as a menstruator. I am a woman who happens to menstruate.

As long as they said "women, transmen and others who menstruate" then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But if they remove women and just say "menstruators" then I would be annoyed.

Removing or silencing a group to include another isnt OK. But listing all the groups.. what is wrong with that?

I don't identify as a woman. I am one. And so is every other human born female.

I think you will find that we're not the people trying redefine the word 'woman'.

Quite! DARVO alert.

To anyone who thinks this can't hurt anyone and that objections are pedantic / uncompromising / hard hearted, may I refer you to the Julia Hartley Brewer thread.
JHB was investigated by Ofcom for saying on live radio that only women and girls menstruate.

Huh, the BBC is running a piece right now about sonography on 'expectant parents '. Do fathers get pregnancy scans too?Sounds odd. Everyone is toeing the line though.

What's wrong with "and other people with". Who does that hurt?

If they use the word woman, and then also "other people" to include transmen, non binary, new made up gender... then what's wrong with that?

They are acknowledging biological women who identify as women as well as those biological women who do not identify as women. Everyone is included. Why are you so offended by that?

I am woman. I was born a woman. I have a uterus. Other female born people dont call themselves women. That has nothing to do with you.

If someone wants to say "women and other with a uterus" then everyone is included. You're being called a woman. They're not. Why would you be against that?

Does 'women' include transwomen do you think? If not, then maybe this is a step forward!

That sentence shouldn't be in any article; my inner copy editor is appalled by it. It's horribly clunky and difficult to parse.

What's a uterus-of-reproductive-age supposed to be?

What percentage of reproductive-age-uterus owners have the disease?

Are they familiar with the purpose of punctuation?

There just looks like a lack of punctuation in that phrase... how do you know if your uterus is of reproductive age?

I appreciate, accept and respect that other GC women can make peace with conceding that the word woman no longer means all adult human females and therefore agree with alternate phrasings like women and ... to encompass all females being targeted.

However, I am no longer willing to do so. Compromise is how we got here in the first place. Any further compromise is unacceptable. And accepting that the word woman no longer encompasses all adult females because some of those females wish they were male or both male and female or neither, is a step too far for me.

Words have power.

That's why the word woman is under such sustained attack.

But that's not actually the fight that brought me to this conclusion. I was willing to compromise on this until I saw the emerging attack on the meaning of the word female.

Clue, a period app I really liked had a premium version I decided to buy because for the first time in years I knew when to expect my period thanks to its predictive algorithm.

So I went to their website and found they had removed the word woman from their content. Which led to entirely inaccurate articles (such as the one claiming that 80% of people suffer from PMS), which annoyed me first on a professional level - as a business writer I would have advised my clients against this approach for a number of reasons, not least the customer profile of those women willing and able to pay for their premium version.

And then I came across a passage where they apologised for using the phrase female biology when writing about menstruation and promised to find a solution that didn't present female biology as female (I am paraphrasing the promise, but it was a promise to erase the word female after already having erased the word woman).

That was the point where I realised that conceding the word woman is not the end point but the start of female erasure.

And decided no more compromise. The unjust man has moved me far enough. It's time for him to shift position.

I think we will be helping these vulnerable girls more by pushing back and showing them that their bodies aren't wrong. They can be who they want without going down the gender ideology route. They need to see there is support for them to accept their bodies.

This. 💯

Non binary people?

Biological reality check. You are born either male or female. That is it. Those who identify as 'non binary'' still have a biological sex and and they have medical conditions specific to that sex they were born as. Only women have a uterus. And they are women because that is their biology.

I am fine with that wording. As long as ‘woman’ is used.