Are we going to have to start using people with vaginas

I think there is quite enough using of people with vaginas as it is.

I think you can email to ask if you're not sure.

Trans women are not waging a war on women.

Something 'not in the spirit' is my guess

I wish we got some feedback. It's hard not to fall foul of the language rules again if you don't know exactly what the misdemeanour was in the first instance.

Nah. No. Nope. Nah-har.

All of them complete sentences 😁

Oh gawd what did I say?

Something 'not in the spirit' is my guess.

Let's just stick with woman. Adult human female. We don't need to change our language to describe ourselves.

The word woman is taken. It belongs to women. No is a complete sentence.

I'm struggling to hold out much hope for someone who puts her pronouns on her Twitter biography - but I'm all ears.

Sorry Signal I didn't see your post.

Oh gawd what did I say?

I'm pinning my hopes on Kamala.

Nope. Woman means adult human female. That's it.

Agreed. This is the line.

If you talk about women and men then people understand you perfectly. No-one really believes men can become women, we should not pander to those who say they do.

FGM - is turned from female genital mutilation - a crime against humanity based on sex, to forced genital mutilation - which denies the material reality that it only happens to girls and women - because female sexual pleasure is frowned on in many cultures, and is not prerequisite for procreation - unlike the male member.

The word woman is my red line. We all know what it means - even the TRAs who pretend they don’t - that’s why they get so angry. No obfuscation of language will satisfy them - giving ground emboldens them - puts them in charge of our language and dehumanises us.

I don’t use the word female when I mean woman because then I am not distinct from a cow, ewe, sow or hen etc. I also do not use natal woman - because we are by definition female. I am happy to say transmen and non-binary women.

They are going for the word female now - including in FGM. Obscene.

Nothing will ever be enough. Use language that you know is truthful.

What's wrong with wom-en, people with wombs??

I'm afraid I don't think any change of wording will make the slightest difference to Biden's plans, or Harris's. I think the time for that argument was before the election when there was still some incentive for them to listen.

I just use 'women'. It's our word. That's what we are. I refuse to have my whole existence parcelled up, renamed and taken from me.

Males who wish to call themselves women can try. But the word is a very simple descriptor.

Women are women. Nobody else.

I think Biden will be hopeless on this issue but I'm hoping Kamala, with her eye on 2024 and potential future repercussions for things happening today, will be a bit more savvy.

It will take longer for the wheels to come off in the US than it has here but when it does it's more likely to be her that inherits the mess, not Biden.

If you surf through FWR, in detail over the past few years, you will find a few TW, some of them well known speakers and writers, who have been willing to discuss politely here without abuse or death threats, and actually engage instead of groundhog day repeating of the same things. They come over as nice, civil people.

But you still find the belief there that they will make the decisions and tell female people what they may have, where they can put their boundaries, what they must just put up with and give up, and somehow they have this authority and superiority to anyone born female. It's sex based thinking, male socialisation, it is at core male supremacism. The inbuilt belief of the natural and right supremacy of those born male over those born female, the ownership of resources, and the same belief that women's spaces and bodies are not something women have any business denying men access to.

They will tell you that sex doesn't exist, but they show you they don't believe what they are saying.

I put on another thread recently that if the argument is TWAW (like black women and disabled women and Jewish women etc etc) then there should be a way to state adult human female not currently preferring to self define as anything else. Because no one would attempt to deny the right of TW or BAME women or disabled women or Jewish women to have a group or space exclusively for them to meet the needs and interests specific to that characteristic.

But however you phrase it, you quickly find:

• The goal really is not allowing women to have any space anywhere ever that they can say no entry to any male about. The no is the issue, and it's wholly sex based thinking.

• Any wording women come up with will never be respected by some males and activists - like no and boundaries will never be respected by some males and activists. There will simply be a shift in identification so male people can be that too (and get in the space, you can't stop me, nyer nyer ne nyer nyer.)

The issue is the misogyny, lack of respect, a bit of 'you're beautiful when you're angry darlin'' with the smirk, and absolute need for females to be present willing or not, regardless of the impact on them.

Trying to address it reasonably, rationally, and patiently explaining that female people have needs and it would be really nice if male people didn't snatch absolutely everything off females and make their lives so much harder - all hangs on the hope of someone who actually cares and has the same social reciprocation. It misses the issue. If 'no' worked in any form, there wouldn't be a problem and FWR would be about a dozen very clever women discussing dry university texts as it was in the dark ages.