John Hopkins University of Misogyny

Just seen what I wrote before. I must learn to proof read.

Again in English:

Think of the amount of professionals who will have seen that before it was published and not one of the fuckers said "hang on a minute this isn't right".

Fuck the lot of them!
Non-man!

Fuck off!

What does that make a transwoman! A Man-non-man? They aren't going to like that!

there that's better.

Ugh, slightly better. I may do an image, if I can be arsed, later

— M. W. NB
M. G. H. ?
W. H. L. L
NB. ? L. ?

Damn that didn’t format well

It’s almost like there’s no call for non-binary identifying women to get access to gay men, but there is call for non-binary identifying men to get access to lesbians.

I mean, we could do a truth table:
M = man, W = woman, NB = non-binaries, G = gay, L = lesbian, H = heterosexual
M W NB
M G H ?
W H L L
NB ? L ?

They’ve clearly not covered every possible case. The most common case is lesbian and the most uncommon is gay. It could be that the NB’s under some of those ? Are covered by pansexual, but in which case, why is that not also for woman + non-binary.

Think of the amount of pros who will have seen that before it was published and not one of the Vickers said hang on a minute this isn't right.

Duck the lot of them!
Non-man!

fuck off!On

What does that make a transwoman! A Man-non-man? They aren't going to like that!

I saw the Canada thread the other day so I’ve moved on slightly from blind rage and into some serious pondering.

The thing here is that they’re actually not trying to rename “women” as “non-men” are they… they’re trying to come up with a term that means “women and people who identify as non-binary”. So why can’t they just do that?!* That’s the most inclusive way. Just like the period thing. Fuck off with your “menstruators”, just say “women and people who have periods”.

They're still removing the word “woman”, whatever the reasoning or intention. That’s the crux of it. There is no valid argument from their side. Nothing they can say to justify it.

*not entirely sure I agree with this anyway, but as I’m not a lesbian I don’t have much ground here. Although I am baffled that men get to still be attracted to men with no mention of non-binary people there. And why can’t lesbian just mean women being attracted to women, because as soon as you start throwing other identities into the mix aren’t you just moving to pansexual anyway?

Imagine going to the trouble of inventing a brand new glossary with brand new meanings and leading with the proviso that it's incomplete due to the impossibility of the task 😀

Should have given them pause for thought surely.

Love to know what you as a non-husband makes of what your husband thinks.

loislovesstewie I will have to ask my husband what I think about it all

Probably not. Unless we all identify as men

Do you think “they” will let us keep the vote?

I’ve just realised this is America - I confused it with John Moores in Liverpool. Still…

I’m beyond sick of being described as right wing, bigoted, phobic. I am NONE of those things. How can anyone with a critical mind think that it’s a neutral or inclusive act to describe women as ‘non-men’?

Thanks for the email address. (A better one might be [email protected])
I do think we all need to start writing to organisations to express our views, in addition to discussing amongst ourselves. Real letters might be more effective (albeit more expensive) as they are less easy to delete.

Dr. Charles Lu
Associate Dean of Diversity & Inclusion
Office of the Dean of Student Life
Johns Hopkins University
3510 N Charles St
AMRII
Baltimore, MD 21218
USA

(as an aside, Maryland is a state. The university is in the city of Baltimore)

If you want to write to them as a minority (majority) then here's their email address to shut this down!

[email protected]

It's in Maryland, home of the biscuits and especially ironic as the whole town was named after a woman, Mary!?!

#Gogirls!

Just been reading this and the level of rage I have is unbelievable. I’m so fucking angry.

Women are being erased.

How this was reported in Newsweek
https://www.newsweek.com/johns-hopkins-accused-trying-erase-women-its-lesbian-term-1806134

A small subset of conservative online has expressed outrage at Johns Hopkins University over its non-binary-inclusive definition of "lesbian" in its glossary of LGBTQ+ terms...

On Monday, the glossary's current definition of "lesbian" came under attack from right-wing users on social media...

The flare-up comes amid a broader backlash among conservatives to LGBTQ+ rights and the embrace of queer communities by society. Numerous state legislatures across the U.S. have begun passing laws that target transgender communities, taking particular aim at the ability of parents to get gender-affirming care for their trans children. Spurred by a small number of far-right influencers, there has also been a vocal, if not definitively widespread, lashing out against companies and brands that market to LGBTQ+ communities or hold Pride Month events...

The definition provided by Johns Hopkins is notably distinct from those provided in similar LGBTQ+ glossaries maintained by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), casting doubt on the alleged conspiracy to "erase" women.

Just in case anyone hasn't noticed, this has all kicked off big time on AIBU.

By the look of it, many women are reaching the mountain tops this evening.

Knew

Yes it’s what we’ve been railing against

Anyone with a brain knee where it was headed

Non-man 🤬 Another one off the list.

What twats.