SANDS sorry if upsetting

Who is trying to divide us like this?

Men.

I am kind of speechless at all this to be honest, but I wanted to send love to all those who have lost children. This is a powerful thread

The famous transman who gave birth and was refused permission to be listed as father on the birth certificate has characterised (on twitter) the reaction of distress from bereaved mothers as ‘bullying transphobes’ who must be stood up to.

I can’t see any mothers calling for the use of terms that deliberately exclude transgender people in this - it seems that ‘ mothers and other birth parents’ or similar would be accepted. I can’t imagine that this affects more than a handful of transgender people who give birth as the testosterone treatment is obviously not very compatible with getting pregnant.
The people arguing that this is intended to include lesbian couples in some way are obviously sadly deluded.

That distressed mothers who are merely asking for a word that is very important to them to remain included - are being characterised as bullying seems inhuman.

Apparently Tommy’s has gone the same way with an apology for using ‘mothers and fathers’.

”I think it was just to include the minority groups as well.”

I don’t think any grieving mother would have a problem if that was what was happening. The last two words of that sentence are crucial. Including people who are mothers in a technical sense but prefer not to use that term as well would be fine. Removing the appropriate (and so important!) language for the vast majority of the people who need this charity isn’t including others as well.

And I am going to take an awful lot of convincing that it is transmen who have chosen to go through the most female thing it is possible to do who are the ones who have a problem with the term “mother”. It isn’t, let’s get real. It’s transwomen who don’t like female language being used in a context that doesn’t include them, and it’s noisy people whose priority is virtue-signalling.

I’m on that Twitter thread, as one of the many women commenting in the context of having lost children. I’ve been accused of being a bigot as a result.

Nice people, the ones prioritising “inclusion”, eh? Anyone who aligns themselves with people like that needs to take a good hard look at what they’re doing and open their eyes. Nothing kind about this movement.

Who is trying to divide us like this?

I would hazard a guess that for the most part it's not actually the people supposedly 'included' with this move.

I could be wrong. Anyone who prefers the word 'birthing parent' for themselves want to chip in here?*

*I am asking specifically for the views of lesbians or transmen or non-binary people with uteruses. Because I have the feeling that very often, other people are speaking on behalf of these people and that in itself seems somewhat unfair, to me.

If it's about identifying the mother who gave birth in a lesbian couple, what's wrong with "birth mother"? "Birthing parent" is based on a fictional that men can give birth too.

@ArabellaScott

to you, Vanguard.

This tweet and reaction illustrates quite well, though, what I think people sometimes don't seem to get wrt the erasure of women. It hurts women to take those words away. It's not about negating other people's experiences. It's not about denying other people their feelings.

But women and mothers are as deserving of compassion, it hurts them as much to have their names and words removed.

It may seem a delicate balance - the word 'mother' or 'woman' apparently hurts some people by excluding them, so they wish to use a different word. But by replacing 'mother' or 'woman' with 'cervix haver' or 'birthing parent' and so on, if you don't also use 'woman' or 'mother' you are completely erasing those identities. It's hurtful, upsetting, offensive and causes pain.

Weird how the identities of some people apparently matters, but when women/mothers ask for theirs to be respected, it's 'bigotry' 'hatred' and 'weaponising their trauma' etc.

'Inclusive' has too often meant removing the word woman, instead of adding the other words that people find to apply to themselves.

Women are not invisible, or to be dismissed. Use 'birthing parent' for those whom it comforts, absolutely. But don't push away the word 'mother'. Please.

I had a late miscarriage before having my first daughter. I went from feeling "a mother" to feeling lost, but someone letting me know that I could still use that word meant so much to me. Motherhood is an identity, not my only one, but one of many and it carries connections and meaning that you can trace through our history and culture and connects you with other women in a way which is unique.

If you look at the comments of the people quoting the apology tweet then there are a disturbing number of people saying that women wanting to keep that word is "transphobic" and swearwords at the women who were upset. Who is trying to divide us like this?

It’s an inclusive word that doesn’t imply any kind of gender identity.

It’s possible to understand why some people reject the word ‘mother’ and also sympathise with their reasons, and also believe that ‘birthing parent’ is an unhelpful euphemism at best and deeply hurtful at worst.

Melroses
Somewhere on here is a fantastic powerful post from RedToothBrush about how the charity sector are failing to be 'client centred' and are pandering to the niche demands of their employees - usually young, white and middle class. The NSPCC is a classic example as is the Eve Appeal (women's gynae cancers) both of whom have deeply offended their target audience by getting involved in minimising porn (NSPCC) and the Eve appeal misnaming women as 'people with cervixes'.

Can they show one ‘birthing person’ who has gone through pregnancy and miscarriage/stillbirth and been offended by the use of the word mum or mother?

Can they then ask for those who were offended by the use of the term ‘birthing person’ and then think again.

What a powerful thread and thank you to everyone for sharing their personal stories.
For me this taps into something very deep in terms of loss. Not just the overwhelming loss of the bereaved but also the loss of those words that relate to our roles - women, mother, female

It does seem to be a theme running through the charity sector, irrespective of what the aims of the charity are. Charities seem to becoming an amorphous mass, with those at high levels flitting from one to the other and carrying with them the latest guidance, that must be permeated top downwards.

It has been obvious for some time that larger charities have been stepping back from their core aims as the whole sector has become corporatised. Many people have moved from supporting them, instead going for the more focused small local charities.

It also does not appear to be a one off tweet, from looking at their website.

In a wider view, decoupling the word mother from the process of conception, and pregnancy takes the emotion out of the experience, which makes way for others in the charity sector to press forward their competing aims.

It is like the whole of the charity sector is now taking on shared goals.

Using small outlying minorities as a lever is emotional manipulation - people who are hurt and upset are usually very open to be compassionate of the hurt and upset of others.

Sexnotgender

Yeah I completely understand what you are saying. And I don't think they are right in what they are saying I just think so many people are so worried about offending someone and the backlash, that the backlash comes anyway because like you have said it then excludes the majority.

to you, Vanguard.

This tweet and reaction illustrates quite well, though, what I think people sometimes don't seem to get wrt the erasure of women. It hurts women to take those words away. It's not about negating other people's experiences. It's not about denying other people their feelings.

But women and mothers are as deserving of compassion, it hurts them as much to have their names and words removed.

It may seem a delicate balance - the word 'mother' or 'woman' apparently hurts some people by excluding them, so they wish to use a different word. But by replacing 'mother' or 'woman' with 'cervix haver' or 'birthing parent' and so on, if you don't also use 'woman' or 'mother' you are completely erasing those identities. It's hurtful, upsetting, offensive and causes pain.

Weird how the identities of some people apparently matters, but when women/mothers ask for theirs to be respected, it's 'bigotry' 'hatred' and 'weaponising their trauma' etc.

'Inclusive' has too often meant removing the word woman, instead of adding the other words that people find to apply to themselves.

Women are not invisible, or to be dismissed. Use 'birthing parent' for those whom it comforts, absolutely. But don't push away the word 'mother'. Please.

Thank you vanguard

I know you know. I know you understand. Your first post about grief being divisive and the collective loss hit home.

We all march on the best we can in our own ways. We all have our own views, our way of dealing and different perspectives.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. I wasn’t sure if I’d made sense so thank you for getting what I was trying to say.

I understand how upsetting this could be but transgender parents who still want to be referred to as daddy despite birthing the child do exist albeit the minority. Also surrogates I think some women may not want to be referred to as mothers in this situation but are obviously still deeply impacted by grief. I think it was just to include the minority groups aswell.

It was over 25 years ago for me. But the word mother is all I have. Just the word.

I just want to add that this really cuts deeply. Because this, I understand completely. We have the word orphan for a motherless/fatherless child. But I remember wondering, what is a woman who has lost her child? She is always a mother. Always.
You have my entire sympathy for a loss that remains with you, life long.

stillsomewhatsheldonesque

I completely understand your feelings about the word 'mother' not being used. You and I have the shared experience of the loss of a baby. And your post is so eloquent and yes, your feelings about the missing word mother are valid. I understand completely why this has upset so many mothers. It has not upset me at all. That doesn't mean I don't understand where mothers like you and those on this thread and across the country are coming from. Of course I understand. My mindset may be different. My view may be different. That doens't mean I am blind to the disappointment the missing out of the word 'mother' brings to you and others. There is a huge part of me that gets that. I have my views. I am certainly not here to offend but to bring a different perspective to the table, especially since I am one of those mothers who has held her lifeless infant and gone home empty-handed.
If it counts for anything, one of my personal examples is Jochebed, mother of Moses, buried in the tomb of matriarchs. Believe me, I am not anti-mother. I'm just pro-human.

You personally not finding it hurtful does not negate the pain it caused.

I'm not here to negate jack shit. But this isn't an echo chamber. It's a forum. And my views deserve as much respect as yours. It's called having a discussion.

TheVanguardSix

I absolutely agree with your last paragraph. Loss is devastating for all involved.

Sands do wonderful work. No arguments there from me. And I understand that they are trying to make sure that all experiencing loss are recognised. That is important.

I just wish they’d included the word mother.

We do indeed live in different times. It was over 25 years ago for me. But the word mother is all I have. Just the word. I don’t describe myself as that to anyone really. It is just for me.

Using birthing parent to be more inclusive felt wrong. It felt like it excluded me. And took away my word.

I really don’t want to upset anyone. The use of that word doesn’t mean that anyone else who feels this loss is less important.

But I’m glad they have acknowledged that ‘mother’ should have been in the tweet. It is how it should be.

for all

The point is for them to ‘be there for’ - roughly in this order:

1. the ‘person’ who carried and lost a baby - the mum
2. the other parent (male or female, doesn’t matter what they are called)
3. everyone else.

”I think we live in a world- at least I do- where families do not always tick the 'traditional' male/female, mum/dad box.”

What’s that got to do with it? It’s not only mothers within nuclear family units who are mothers! Every child has a mother. Every baby in respect of whom Sands provides support has come from the body of a mother. And in some families, there are two parents who consider themselves a mother. No reason to erase the word.