If you avoid the feminist section then at least read this article

Stonewall is one organisation of quite a few, who are trying to de-gender every day terms.

According to their PR, they are responsible for something like 20% of this country's organisation's LGBT policy.

From the government, to schools, to universities, to the DVLA.

They will all have been drip fed this information from Stonewall.

How many people do you think would have to be already complicit, willingly or unaware, in order to stop a bill at the 11th hour in the House of Lords?

Meetings, minute takers, secretaries, cabinet ministers, committees, MPs. All waving it through.

That's one amendment, to one bill, at one point in time, in one organisation.

Scale that up in your head.

Quite.

It has already been discussed - I’ll happily discuss it again but I don’t have anything new to say from a few pages ago.

Remind me what a sea lion is, I forget

Pumperthepumper

Stonewall is one organisation of quite a few, who are trying to de-gender every day terms.

According to their PR, they are responsible for something like 20% of this country's organisation's LGBT policy.

From the government, to schools, to universities, to the DVLA.

They will all have been drip fed this information from Stonewall.

How many people do you think would have to be already complicit, willingly or unaware, in order to stop a bill at the 11th hour in the house of lords?

Meetings, minute takers, secretaries, cabinet ministers, committees, MPs. All waving it through.

That's one amendment, to one bill, at one point in time, in one organisation.

Scale that up in your head.

Just because the man in your local cornershop doesn't refer to his mother as his birthing parent, doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

Targeting the word mother, was probably a mistake. You might be able to do it in policy, but as soon as people get wind of it, there will be pushback. People are emotionally tied to it in a way that was always going to meet hard resistance.

But that was their mistake, not ours.

They're succeeding with things like announcements on the underground, and headteachers deciding to say good morning everyone, instead of boys pr girls. It's happening.

The words "mother", "maternity" and "pregnant woman" have been completely erased from all HR documentation in my university. I believe this is standard practice in the sector.

Why do you think JK Rowling copped so much abuse for making a sarcastic tweet about it?

I've seen so much erasure of women from female bodily processes and experiences on social media that I wouldn't know where to begin.

I’ve highlighted evidence that ‘mother’ is still being used everywhere

You've posted a few screenshots where the word "mother" is used once. So no, it is not evidence of this. People have posted evidence of female erasure and you have minimised, dismissed or like you just did with Datun's post, handwaved it away with "that has already been discussed". The point is that there was a concerted effort to use "gender neutral" language in the maternity bill, which was partially defeated. It still doesn't use the word "woman". So forgive me for not wanting to waste my time engaging with disingenuous nonsense.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4261748-The-Telegraph-Stonewall-advises-organisations-to-use-parent-who-has-given-birth-to-help-boost-ranking

This has already been discussed. So mother is still being used in the maternity bill?

Not "is still". It was about to be erased. Women stopped it. The House of Lords stopped it but only by voting on the back of relentless lobbying by feminists.

Imagine how far something had to get it before a handful of people in the House of Lords stopped it.

Your issue appears to be well how widespread is this?

The answer is, that everywhere it has been documented, women have tried to stop it. Some places they have been successful, some places they haven't. But you're not asking the right question. It's not how widespread is it?

It's why is it happening at all?

You're wanting to know how often women are having to playing whack a mole, instead of asking why they're forced to play the game at all.

Why do you think it's happening?

'De-gendering' terms is a well documented political policy, spearheaded by groups like Stonewall.

The fact that the campaign has run into a brick wall is because of the efforts of women like those on this thread.

This.

Would you?

If I were genuinely interested in the truth of the matter I probably wouldn't consider one link as the be all and end all of the issue either way, and would do my own research rather than asking for people to spoon feed me, but maybe that's just me and my crazy ways.

Pumper

A few months ago there was an amendment going through Parliament regarding the maternity bill. I can't remember the precise details, but it was something along the lines that provisions had to be made specifically for MPs, which it hadn't done for some reason.

The debate, according to Hansard, mentioned women or mother something like 300 times.

The amendment, when written up, didn't mention mother or woman once. It had been eliminated.

The bill was going through, and it was only stopped by the House of Lords, who flagged it. (I think it might have been due to Baroness Nicholson who is very aware).

They had to take a vote, but managed to reinstate the word mother (although not woman).

This is an amendment that was only stopped at the 11th hour, from completely erasing the word mother in a bill about maternity rights.

This isn't about ordinary, everyday people being aware they mustn't use certain words, or else. This is about a concerted effort to decouple women from anything to do with their biology. So that the word woman, or in this case mother, is not dependent upon it.

'De-gendering' terms is a well documented political policy, spearheaded by groups like Stonewall.

The fact that the campaign has run into a brick wall is because of the efforts of women like those on this thread.

I can't help thinking that if they hadn't relentlessly and painfully confronted the issue, many women, maybe even you, would be saying why didn't you say something? Instead of complaining that we are saying something.

That’s a Guide to Inclusive Language, that’s what the document is called. Would we call it widespread on the back of this document?

I don't know, would "we"?

It’s a shame this thread dumped in FWR before the evidence of organisations rolling back could be twisted, isn’t it?

Of course, SANDS apologised at the time and changed the wording back to Mothers after some very distressed bereaved mothers contacted them.

Honestly, for a problem as widespread as this, it sure is difficult to find any evidence of it.

Pumper I just thought I'd get you started.

Not wasting any more time throwing fish.

British medical association guide

www.northstaffslmc.co.uk/website/LMC001/files/BMA-guide-to-effective-communication-2016.pdf

bottom of page 11

lllusa.org/about-us/

Try this one, USA got there first.

Others will follow.