'Pregnant people'

I think we should very much encourage the idea that you can trans your DNA.

And that until your DNA test shows your transition has taken effect, you continue to be physically, legally and socially the opposite sex.

Indeed! I was having this argument the other day with someone who deleted ‘women’ and used ‘anyone who identifies as a woman’ instead. I said that they were no longer including me (a normal woman who doesn’t identify as anything thank you very much) and was that intentional? The argument totally and utterly went over his head. It was to be nice, apparently. Nice to who?

I don't. Because it's not true.
All of transactivism is about men.

Imagine if the only people who wanted to "change sex" were women? No transwomen only transmen. You can't imagine it because it would never have got off the ground. Women wanting to be men? Impossible, impertinent, delusional, arrogant... and everyone would have agreed and that would have been the end of it.
No one is going to upend the entire social order for a bunch of WOMEN who say they're really men. The idea is laughable.

Back in the 70s /80s and 90s the word used was transsexual and was universally understood to refer to men who wanted to be women. Men started this and it's still men who are driving it. Transmen are just the backup singers.

I understand all this. And I understand the reasons, within this analysis, that girls now want to 'transition'.

I was initially responding to posters who thought that this language was aimed at including TIMs. I do think it's important to be clear that it's not - the fact that it's aimed at including women who for nuts reasons don't think they're women makes it marginally less utterly insane than if it were trying to be inclusive of men who physically cannot possibly be pregnant.

This is also a self-soothing mechanism for me and I suspect others feel like this too - there's a scale of awfulness, of aggressor and victim, that I apply to prevent my head actually blowing up.

It doesn't mean I can't see the whole, or that I think everyone must use the scale. It helps me, but I agree with your overall analysis.

I do think the person choosing the language to use always needs to consider who they are aiming it at and who they might exclude.

so for pregnant women it’s fine to say pregnant women and other pregnant people. Sounds ridiculous but you’re not offending or excluding anyone. Pregnant people offends a lot of women.

Just to add - I also think that if we allow ourselves to be framed as objecting in bad faith ie "they're saying men can get pregnant!" we reduce our authority.

Is it women's importance being negated or the position of trans women being promoted, or a combination of both? Lunacy either way.

I may not be excluded by the phrase "pregnant women and other pregnant people" but I'm very fucking offended by it.

If there can be female people who are not "women" (or girls), what is the additional thing beyond being female that means someone is or isn't a woman? What has to be removed from or added to the official idea of a "woman" so that these other women-who-don't-see-themselves-as-women can have their line between us recognised? On which side of that divide do I put myself as soneone who had never thought to differentiate female people by their character but now find I need to place myself into a subgroup?

It's like saying "Scousers and people from Liverpool who aren't thieves". (There are other more obvious parallels I'm choosing not to make because they are so offensive).

It turns a word from something neutral that included everyone into something that makes assumptions. Why anyone thinks this is a reasonable thing to do is beyond me.

You've never met an Army kid then. Or heard of second mentions 😁

But sure, call anyone who says something you don't like a man. Never heard that one before.

The Beeb getting it right for once!

BBC News - Under-fives and pregnant women told to avoid runny eggs when eating out over salmonella risk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2krdggx6xo

I'm nb, born a cis woman.

Basically, because trans woman don't hate women for being women. They know how it feels to be scared of cis men, and unfortunately a large number of them have been sexually assaulted. They are aware of how scary it feels to be intimately examined, and how retraumatising it is.

When they transition, trans women experience that sudden fear of all men which cis women feel as girls. They feel vulnerable when they walk down a street in the same way we do.

Cis men, by contrast, never have to experience that vulnerability due to gender. Some are vulnerable in other ways, but it's not gender-based.

Therefore I would (while always asking for a chaperone) prefer a trans woman, over a cis man, yes.

I prefer a chaperone because some women react abusively to having power as well. Women can sexually assault and hurt other women. Having a witness is always best, and our right.

Why? Some of "them" are saying exactly that. Because transmen ARE men or summat

I'm nb, born a cis woman.

Neither of those things exist. What you evidently mean is you are a woman who doesn't conform to gender based stereotypes- like every other woman I've ever known.

Basically, because trans woman don't hate women for being women.

I think it's pretty clear by now that many if not most of them absolutely do. The jealousy is palpable as is the contempt and misogyny.

They know how it feels to be scared of cis men, and unfortunately a large number of them have been sexually assaulted. They are aware of how scary it feels to be intimately examined, and how retraumatising it is.

There is no evidence to suggest this is true at all. Although I'm sure some trans identified men have been assaulted just as many other men have, there's no data to suggest it's a large amount of them.

When they transition, trans women experience that sudden fear of all men which cis women feel as girls. They feel vulnerable when they walk down a street in the same way we do.

No. They may SAY this but it's all part of the fantasy. The way some of them admit to liking being catcalled because they find it validating not frightening or intimidating. Or claim to be afraid of sexual assault in men's spaces. They don't behave the way women do in respect of possible threat because they're not afraid.

Cis men, by contrast, never have to experience that vulnerability due to gender. Some are vulnerable in other ways, but it's not gender-based.

I think you mean sex based and trans identified men are not vulnerable on this basis either.

women react abusively to having power as well. Women can sexually assault and hurt other women. Having a witness is always best, and our right.

"Women do it too" well ok this may be true but it's vanishingly rare and I'm a lot more wary of a man pretending to be a woman than either a man who isn't trans or a woman because both are statistically safer and they aren't lying to me. Also I'd have a much better chance of defending myself against another woman than a man however he's dressed.
But you can request a chaperone for any reason you like of course.

What does "born a cis woman" mean?

Firstly, no one is born a woman. Even in the debased language of Genderism, a woman is still an adult.

Secondly, if we pretend for now to accept the debased sexism that is Genderism, "cis" means aligning with the standard gender role for ones sex. No baby aligns with gender roles. Even to Genderists, ones gender is a thing one comes to understand about oneself.

Thirdly, Genderists are very clear that one does not change from cis to trans. One might believe oneself to be cis then realise one is trans (I include NB under trans for brevity), but one is not born "cis" then become "trans".

One might think, if one did not know you are vehemently enaged with Genderism, that you had misunderstood what "cis" means and just used it to mean "actual female person". This is very much a concept that I agree shoud have a name, but in the Genderism to which you subscribe, it does not and never will because Genderism does not accept there are meaingful commonalities between those of us born female regardless of our gender identity that ar not shared with those born male regardless of their gender identity.

(The word you probably wanted was AFAB)

Your ignorance and transphobia about a minority are very much your problem.

Trans women are normal people. If you want to fall for far-right messaging which says otherwise, raging that a minority uou dont understand exists, that's very much on you.

There's no such thing as 'genderism'. Just normal, individual human beings, flawed in exactly the same ways everyone else is flawed, getting up each day and living normal lives.

Cis is just a clarifying adjective. Railing against its use is utterly pointless.

And I can describe myself how I want, cheers. I've given it a great deal of thought and time, and know who I am. Other people don't get to tell me that.

Just as the powerful majority do not get to describe the oppressed minority.

If you dont want to use cis, then don't. But no one ever had 'cis' shouted at them jn the street, or heard it as a justification for getting their head kicked in. This forum in general rails against 'cis' because most prefer to use slurs as handy shorthand for trans people.

Anyone who uses slurs (I have no idea if you do, I hope not) to describe a minority is punching down.

I don't have a problem thanks.
I'm quite happy believing what I do about this subject. Not at all ragey.

If calling me transphobic and ignorant is your only response to my points then I'm going to have to assume it's because you don't have any actual rebuttal to make.

Oh and FFS stop whining it's annoying. Like talking to an angsty teenager.

Men are not an oppressed minority in any sense of the word. Women are not a powerful majority. Women calling adult human males men is not punching down.
No one on this board uses slurs about trans identified individuals that I have ever seen. Correctly sexing someone is not a slur.

A clarifying adjective is not needed to describe what someone or something is not. I am not trans I am just a woman. I do not need to be described as cis to clarify this. Everyone knows what a woman is - even when they pretend not to.

It’s a term I’ve only heard men use. You have clarified that you’re a woman, so I apologise for thinking you were a man.

Did you clarify how you know whether the person examining you is a ‘cis man’ or a ‘trans woman’?

@TransParentlyAnnoyed “Trans women are normal people”

Define normal.

People who think they can change sex is not normal behaviour. Men who want to access women’s spaces is not normal behaviour.

The people who are 'offended' by the use of the word 'woman', particularly in relation to pregnancy, are not the sort of people I want to appease.

trans woman don't hate women

Are you sure about that, @TransParentlyAnnoyed?

"..for those people in particular who are young, elderly, pregnant or vulnerable...", which is an obvious cop-out.

I don't think that's a cop out at all. At one time, say up to twenty years ago, it was obvious that only one sex could get pregnant so the qualifier woman wasn't necessary.

I don't buy the argument that we need to clarify things for trans men. A woman who wants to identify as trans but then gets pregnant must know deep down that she is still a woman.

Some male trans activists are VERY vocal for their hatred of women!