Good ways of using inclusive language without excluding women etc

I personally would go with 'women including women who wish they weren't women but nevertheless are women' but then I am getting bored of this whole thing

So far there is just a lot of grumbling in the office as they try to out woke each other.

It's as if no one gives a shit about the women with poor literacy, or english as a second language or learning disabilities

There are no ally points for doing anything to make communications more effective for these groups. No chance for photo opps. Nothing to burnish your CV or achieve promotion within a network that might lead to lucrative opportunities at some point.

Just the dull, boring grind of doing your job and doing it well. And then turning up tomorrow and doing it again. There is the added kicker that if you do your job really well, nobody notices and there are no plaudits available except within your own professional peer network.

Proper laughing, time.

Actually, if I COULD change their sexualities it'd be helpful. I'm kind of behind in the diversity box ticking.

@FrancescaContini easy tiger! This is about accessible language, vivums staff can be whatever sexuality they want, I don’t think she is planning on putting them straight at all

Yup, just adding the 'and' works.
Changing paperwork where appropriate - when we were having our kids it was all 'mother' and 'father' and we would put a line through 'father' and write mother on NHS and nursery stuff but now we've noticed that some have duel forms. So a father/mother family still have their version and we're given a version that says 'parent 1, parent 2' or our kids birth certs day 'mother' and 'parent' rather than mother/father but a straight couple still have mum and dad on theirs.

When push comes to shove - we all know what language means.

I don’t want to be 50! I really don’t. But I won’t fight tooth and nail to be redefined as ‘youth’ or even middle aged (unless I’m planning to live to over 100). I also have Heath issues that I’d rather not have, but no amount of sugar coating language will hide the facts.

You may not ‘feel’ a certain way - but facts are facts.

Language evolves so that we don’t discriminate or insult people (think of the Scope and its old name, old words for mixed race, etc). Not so that we can pretend something is more important (gender based sex) or falsify facts (and then try to mainstream these ‘inclusions’ as fact).

I’m too old (possibly too wise) to NOT see where this can get us, and I’m not prepared to keep shtum in case of ‘hurty feelings’ of people who are grown up enough to stop playing games.

I don't care about inclusive language. It's all smoke and mirrors and people patting themselves on the back about how wonderful they are.

Medical language needs to be clear and unambiguous. Lack of clarity of language STOPS it from being INCLUSIVE.

Using self-ID and gender identity as the default position in healthcare is also problematic in that it means trans and non-binary people can be missed from routine screening etc.

A trans man who is part of a system that does not accede that he is biologically female will not be invited for cervical screening for example. Unless, as a part of healthcare records and GP registration, you complete a ticklist of what organs you do and don't have- which isn't exactly feasible.

“ People were fairly happy to join in the role play on social occasions, on the understanding that everyone understood it was just polite role playing. If the trans people no longer understand it's a polite role play, then we're stopping playing.”

THIS TIMES 100

Man, woman, boy and girl are not words that denote gender. They denote sex and age.

Even if they did denote gender, it would only make sense for them to do so in non-medical contexts.

In medical contexts, obviously they have to refer to sex. What "role" you're playing is not relevant.

This should be so self-evident (as Jesse here says). The fact that it isn't shows we've got a problem.

The problem here isn't so much with transwomen wanting to be called women in some contexts, or transmen not wanting to be called men. It's the totalitarian insistence on never using the words when we need to use them precisely.

This is why "transphobia" is now a thing, when it wasn't. People were fairly happy to join in the role play on social occasions, on the understanding that everyone understood it was just polite role playing. If the trans people no longer understand it's a polite role play, then we're stopping playing.

Tangential, but honestly, why isn't "women" plenty inclusive enough?

Transwomen (well, some them) insist they are women in every sense of the word. So why don't they feel included when people talk about women?

I've never met transmen with such a oddly loose hold on reality. So in a medical situation referring to women will give them the information they need, too. As vivarium pointed out, the important thing is to use language that speaks to all women, including those who forgot to get degrees in gender studies.

vivarium 🙌🏻 🙌🏾 all hail!
I can live with women and, although it can never be women and black women or women and lesbian women , the separating it out for transmen is solely to make them happy. However having had the suggestion of ‘women and…’ shot down pretty aggressively a couple of times, I do feel less charitable about catering to people who give no fucks about how I and others feel. (I do try not to think this way and penalise quieter trans people who are rational about their sex).

Majestic I'm pissed off, that's what I am!

Awful business, this malarkey. I've just read a whole heap of stuff on twitter about why lesbians are hateful for not wanting penises.

FFS.

Thanks, Platypus that is really useful.

Thank you @RedToothBrush

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria - you are inspiring - thank you

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria
I've seen similar here

service-manual.nhs.uk/content/how-we-write

To be honest, I don’t like the alternative of ‘women and …’.

Women should be enough.

Trans people experience gender dysphoria so they should be in contact with medical professionals about that already. Frankly, they should have a greater knowledge of this than the average person on the street precisely because of their dysphoria.

If they have had a surgical transition, then part of informed consent is knowing how to properly care for themselves, their remaining sex organs and their new sex organs.

Also ‘women and …’ might be seen to include trans women for procedures that they might not necessarily need or be anatomically possible. Surely, that is just as ‘triggering’?

Back when I was still being ‘nice’ and ‘kind’, I would have gone along with the idea of ‘women and …’ but now I just want people to face reality.

'If you are a health care provider talking about periods, menopause, cervical smears etc, then the only word you need is women.
Whatever gender transmen identify as, their sexcategory remains “woman”.
Illness and medical care are sexed, not gendered. '
This