Well, it’s happened... the trans activists have waded into the 8th amendment issue in Ireland

[AngeloMysterioso]

And are apparently pushing for the language in the repeal legislation to be “gender neutral”.

Quote from the article-

“Despite what some may believe, men can become pregnant too. There are tens of thousands of transgender men and non-binary people in Ireland who can conceive, and when speaking about reproductive healthcare, we must always be mindful of that.

“It’s imperative that newly written legislation uses inclusive language. By including this, trans men and non binary people will not hit legal barriers should they need to receive an abortion. By using the term pregnant people in new legislation, as well as protecting women, we are also protecting and respecting all gender identities should a crisis pregnancy occur.”

So. That’s nice. Thousands upon thousands of women have suffered, many have died, because of bullshit like the 8th amendment. And after fighting so hard for so fucking long and finally winning the right to bodily autonomy and reproductive rights, if the TAs get their way, we get to be referred to as pregnant people

I’m a bit of a TERF at the best of times but this is beyond fucking insulting. Savita Halappanavar wasn’t a pregnant person. Michelle Harte wasn’t a pregnant person. Sheila Hodges wasn’t a pregnant person.

If the TDs capitulate and let this happen I will be really pissed off.

There’s lots of things people do in their bedrooms that I can’t imagine doing myself, if someone wants to identify as a man but still use their vagina for sex is it really for anyone else to query? The point is it doesn’t matter how it happens, it matters that it could potentially happen so the law needs to sate that those people can get abortions too.

@Grandmaswagsbag I'm happy for them to be included in the legislation. But not for the whole language to change and remove the word "woman" and make it gender neutral. They don't get to dictate the language for the other 99.9%.

I do see the point that Manic and the others are making - and, in the case of rape, a transman is more likely to become pregnant and want an abortion.

That’s why we want all parties to be included in the debate, isn’t it? So we can all raise our concerns and respectfully debate them?

You can’t get your head around 2 men having sex? And you can’t get your head around an unwanted pregnancy?

You see, that would be 2 men, 1 of whom wasn't a man, having sex.

So 2 homosexual men, one of who is a woman;

Or 2 homosexual men, both of whom are lesbians - oh, maybe not, that wouldn't end in pregnancy;

Or 1 is a heterosexual man having PIV sex with a woman and the other is a heterosexual woman having PIV sex with a man;

Or they are both trans and having sex inhabiting a body of each others chosen gender;

Or something is odd in how we are being asked to describe male and female!

You see, when you concatenate gender and sex, you get all sorts of ridiculousness!
.

I don't give a toss what people do sexually provided it is safe, sane and consensual. Don't conflate that with the fact only women can get pregnant.

I’m not. In today’s world where changing your gender is legally acceptable and having a gay relationship is also acceptable

It's not a "gay relationship". It's a man and a woman having penis and vagina sex, and if you think that distinction is irrelevant, people like you are why the law needs to be clear and not obfuscate things.

Do you understand how offensive many lesbians and gay men find referring to straight people as gay?

This is actually an area where I don't like the direction MN takes on trans issues.

Sometimes transmen/trans identifying females get pregnant, and I don't think it's constructive to pruriantly speculate on what kind of sexual activity they were engaged in beforehand.

It's hardly as if PIV is the only way to get pregnant; it's more like the most effective. Any form of what I used to call 'messing about' as a teen between people of two different sexes may end up with semen/semen residue from one party (e.g. on hands) ending up in close contact with the vagina of the other party. Which carries a risk of pregnancy. A very low risk, but nevertheless the risk is there.

pachyderm
I totally agree they shouldn’t get to dictate the language for the other 99.9%. Fabulous post upthread.

Transmen are biologically female.

With the repeal of the eighth amendment, they have access to abortion the way that other women do, @Tanith.

I'm not passing judgement on women who get pregnant for whatever reason. I'm saying that straight couples aren't gay, and that the law needs to be clear.

What exactly is wrong with "pregnant women and transgender people" if we have to spell it out?

“With the repeal of the eighth amendment, they have access to abortion the way that other women do, @Tanith.”

Yes, I know. That’s not the point being debated.

Curious. .
Well put. I wonder how a tra would answer that?

I find this mind boggling - you object to people being told what they can do with their bodies, but perfectly happy to dictate what people call themselves?

If a trans man identifies as male, who the hell are you to tell him he's a woman?

@Nimbleknitter we are not telling anyone what they can call themselves. We're defending our right to be named as women in legislation affecting women's health. I've said I have no objection to add-ons like "transmen" being inserted. Read the thread.

With the repeal of the eighth amendment, they have access to abortion the way that other women do,

How will they? If they have legally changed their sex to Male and the law only sates that pregnant women may access termination they could easily be left with no legal protection. ‘Pregnant women and trans men’ might be fine but either way they still need to be acknowledged in the law and it seems a lot easier to me to just say ‘pregnant people’. Why risk any hold up or complications? Most Pps have said that they have no problem in trans men being included in the law, so I can’t grasp what the actual problem is other than the replacement of women with people, which I can’t think is truly offensive really. We are all people, it’s not a lie.

Most Pps have said that they have no problem in trans men being included in the law, so I can’t grasp what the actual problem is other than the replacement of women with people, which I can’t think is truly offensive really. We are all people, it’s not a lie.

Because it contributes to the idea of pregnancy not being a woman's issue. What is your objection to "pregnant women and transgender people"?

NimbleKnitter
I’m not sure who you’re addressing this to? Women don’t want to be called a pregnant person. If you’re talking to us saying we wish to dictate what people call themselves, you’re talking to the wrong audience. You need to talk to the trans rights activists, who think they can call us whatever they like. I haven’t noticed many people on this forum refusing to call a ftm person a transman. I’m really baffled by your comment.

@Grandmaswagbag - no, it is NOT easier to "just say pregnant people". Why do you think the abortion rights campaigners dialled down on the "pregnant people" language during the actual referendum campaign? Because they know women don't like it. I have never seen a thread on Irish social media where "pregnant people" didn't get questioned, although they've been very good at shutting up and banning those that do. Problem is, we have votes, and they know that in the real world, everyone knows that women get pregnant, not "people", hence the reversion to "women" for the campaign. Stop being so dismissive and ignorant. You do not get the right to erase the word "woman" from half the population. How dare you.

If a trans man identifies as male, who the hell are you to tell him he's a woman? The obvious response to that is.... read the thread!

What right to TRAs have to tell women what they should be called?

Warning, Repetition Alert: Nobody has an issue with trans people. Some posters here are trans. The issue arises when TRAs try to insist that they get to define who, what and why women are, e.g. cis, people, Not Men, Other...

Of itself that is obnoxious but when TRAs choose to leap into a landmark legal issue and make it all about trans issues it becomes even more fucked up!

Women in Ireland have long fought for this repeal, nobody gives a monkey's what flavour of woman they are, ALL women have won this. Why the hell should some angry self centred TRA twats get to hijack that?

@Nimbleknitter we are not telling anyone what they can call themselves. We're defending our right to be named as women in legislation affecting women's health.

^^
This exactly, and not just health.

Words matter. Think how much of life basically comes down to what contracts and legal documents actually SAY. Real, based-in-law legal definitions inform everything.

Sorry, Terfsup - I missed Granny’s point that transmen may be denied abortions if they present as men.

I think she has a point, too.

I do understand the objection to “pregnant people” for all the reasons given, but I think the transmen point is a valid one.

No problem, @Tanith! Glad of the clarification.

Grandmaswagbag
I can’t grasp what the actual problem is
Then I suggest you go back and reread all the very valid reasons for why women don’t want to be called pregnant people. To be over 500 comments on this thread, your statement show just how bloody minded some people are and how blatantly obvious is is that some people really couldn’t give a shit about others feelings. I can only assume you do not grasp the politics of the situation nor the subjugation of women and currents tra attempts to erase womenkind.

The difficulty is when these special snowflakes feel they have to have speshul laws created just for them. Because they're so speshul. Diddums.

Apart from considering whether it's worth having a debate of any sort with anyone who replies like this, nobody is asking for a special law for them, is it? They're asking for inclusiveness. They're asking the law to be as broad as possible from the start.

In a way, it seems to me that the problem was when pregnancy and abortion was considered to be strictly a woman's issue. When it's actually a human rights issue.

To be over 500 comments on this thread, your statement show just how bloody minded some people are and how blatantly obvious is is that some people really couldn’t give a shit about others feelings.

I'd say pure disingenuousness. Grandma knows full well why women don't like it. It's just that this cause is more important, so hard luck. Some people are allowed to care about language and have their sensibilities pandered to, but not others.