'Pregnant people'

Trans-identifying women can of course get pregnant as Freddy McConnell made sure we all knew. The fact that Freddy identifies as male has nothing to do with the fact of her female body doing what it developed to do. That is why the court ruled that Freddy had to go on the child's birth certificate as the mother. Words have meaning and the female person who gives birth to a child is that child's mother, not father.

It's like some dystopian comedy without the laughs.

Anyone who has ever been pregnant has been a female.
Trans men are women.

We know you know this.

And not having a uterus and ovaries has specific health consequences for women.

All these euphemisms are harmful because they prevent clear communication.

Trans men, who have a uterus and ovaries can also become pregnant

A uterus and ovaries = female.

Even if you are one of the 1.5% of mothers who give birth under the age of 18 in the UK annually, you're still female. Even if you are one of the few hundred females who are trans-identifying who give birth in the UK annually, you're still female. Because only females can get pregnant and give birth.

There is another thread currently discussing men lactating. The practitioner who is championing this openly states that men may wish to bring about lactation to 'feed' children but also out of curiosity, for fun or for 'sexual gratification'. What are your views on this? Do you believe that men should be able to abuse children in the name of 'inclusivity'?

Breastfeeding, like childbirth, are female-only preserves. If men could just let us get on with it, that'd be absolutely smashing.

It’s not trans men that are the issue tbf - I think most feminists who are sex realists would very much welcome trans men in any woman-only setting

I think the reason for egregious language mangling like this is much more to do with concerns that trans identified males won’t accept the word “woman” being used in contexts that exclude them

@Mouldemort I don’t believe that this is what you really believe!

You know only women can become pregnant and that trans men are women.

Are you quibbling about age categories?

Girls can get pregnant because they are also female. With luck, for most of their lives they will be women. This means that they will continue to be affected by their sex and the fact that they were/are/could be the kind of person who could become pregnant, regardless of whether they actually are pregnant.

Trans men can get pregnant because they are also female. They also deserve rights on that basis.

treating women as a subset of people harms no one and is a fundamental feminist principle.

No idea what you mean here. I don't think anyone is suggesting that women are not people. They are just also unavoidably the kind of person that has the kind of body that gives birth. It's the main reason that they need specific rights.

Your anger is simply based on not acknowledging trans men exist and everyone else gets hit in the fallout.

Thank you for trying to tell me what I believe, however, I think you will get on better if you let me tell you what I believe. It's more accurate, and that is so important.

I am happy to acknowledge trans men as women dressing and presenting however they damn well choose.

I'm simply not prepared to condone their sexist belief that something in the way they think or feel is incompatible with being a "woman" when the truth is they have no idea how other female people think or feel about themselves, it's all just their own prejudices and assumptions.

The words "women" and "girls" already encompass the female half of humanity in all our diversity. That trans "men" have a lesser view of us than is their problem not mine. As a person who is a woman by reason of having a female body and nothing more, I'm not going to accept a redefining that reduces and lessens what a woman or a girl can be.

@Mouldemort “People can become pregnant, and some of them aren't women.”

They are ALL women!!

@Mouldemort “Trans men, who have a uterus and ovaries can also become pregnant.”

They have a uterus and ovaries because they are WOMEN!!

"44% of women have given birth by the age of 30.
vs
"44% of people have given birth by the age of 30."

Think about it.

How have we got here! It’s absolutely absurd!!

Girls can become pregnant. Trans men, who have a uterus and ovaries can also become pregnant. People can become pregnant, and some of them aren't women. You've acknowledged this, so what is your problem with using "pregnant people?"

This has not a single thing to do with men who are not transgender.

Of course transmen can get pregnant, because they're women.

...who are still women. So no need to refer to them as 'pregnant people'. 'Woman' does the job just fine, as it has always done.

Language is important. Particularly when it comes to medical settings.

@Mouldemort NO man on earth has ever become pregnant. It is biologically impossible as they lack a uterus and ovaries.

EVERYONE knows this!

Trans identifying females can indeed get pregnant, and nobody disputes that. Guess why?

Only women give birth, and that impacts their entire lives, whether or not they have children. Deliberately obscuring this fact does not help women in any way.

This is straightforwardly not true. Girls can get pregnant, and trans men can get pregnant, and treating women as a subset of people harms no one and is a fundamental feminist principle. Your anger is simply based on not acknowledging trans men exist and everyone else gets hit in the fallout.

Trans men are WOMEN. That’s why they can become pregnant!

A 'pregnant person' under 18 is still female. There is an argument for inclusivity here, whereby we refer to 'pregnant women and girls' in some situations where the age of the mother informs the care she requires.

All who get pregnant and give birth are female. There is no need to be 'inclusive' beyond that; pregnancy and childbirth, by their very nature, are exclusive of the other half of humanity, ie males.

At least you acknowledge that not all pregnant people are women.

Trans men can definitely get pregnant. This whole thing has f-all to do with women "not being acknowledged" and everything to do with GC people not wanting trans men to be acknowledged in any way.

As I said in the post that precedes yours, it's the avoidance of the word 'woman' that is offensive.

Words should be allowed to have a neutral meaning.

In the example you give, the word for a 'birthing parent' is 'mother'.

A 'mother' can be the worst person in the world, but she is still a mother. Many people will have birth certificates that list a mother with whom they no longer have contact, but that does not change the circumstances of their birth.

When you render accurate language taboo you take away the power to communicate clearly.

Only women give birth, and that impacts their entire lives, whether or not they have children. Deliberately obscuring this fact does not help women in any way.

Do you understand now?

So SO disingenuous (or just dumb?) to frame this as though the problem is that anyone is offended by the notion that women are people. We all know they are people. They are that particular 50% of people who are the only kind who can get pregnant and give birth. Yes, not all do or can - but if they can't, that's for a specific reason which they will very likely have been concerned about and checked out at some point from puberty - and the reason won't have been found to "they're the kind of woman that has a penis and testes".....

So, given that they are of that 50% of people who can get pregnant and give birth, would it not make sense for there to be a word for that.... like .... woman?

* ‘Most pregnant people are women. Some are girls., Some are neither.’*

Two out of three... you were so close.