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.

Bump. I so agree. If someone identifies as male surely they would want to get rid of all their womanly attributes like their child bearing bits. No?

No, my opinion is not valueless. People's opinions have influence and get translated into votes and thus into law, so, no, my opinion is not valueless. Clearly the opinions of TRAs are not valueless...

If you want to be called a pregnant woman then that's fine but the law needs to be worded carefully and feelings are immaterial.

Well, that is precisely the point we have been making all along; that many women want to remain known and described in law and common usage as women/mothers, and any other term to cover legally recognised transmen should be additional to that, not result in laws being rewritten to remove the word woman/mother and generalised to people.

'People' is not an accurate word to describe females. People could mean human males or females. If the meaning of 'woman' has become distorted/ reinvented to include those with male genes/biology, it is still not accpetable to use 'people' to refer to pregant females when you do not also mean males, as if the situation could apply equally to either sex when it clearly cannot. That is disingenious and dehumanising in my opinion. And hypocritically de-identifying when TRAs are all about enshrining their own feelz-based identity pronouns.

Biology matters and words matter. Removing all distinctions/ defintions between the sexes will not suddenly make the world a kinder or more humane place where women are treated equally and no longer discriminated against or abused. It will just make it harder to shine a light on it and therefore to stop it. Some people (and people is appropriate here because it does include both men and wome, males sand females) actually want to achieve or enable that.

But I don't know how we can properly debate with someone who thinks their opinions or mine have no value but yet persists in giving theirs, so I am going to stop responding to you.

So potentially you’d all happily see some ‘women’ who have changed their sex to Male, which laws allow, possibly being blocked from accessing abortion because of a legal loophole? Don't be silly! I suspect I answered that on in a post just above yours!

It is dichotomy's such as that that make all of us TERFs shout very loudly against Self ID. That you agree with us should tell you something! Same issue, same understanding of possible difficulties... so why not more working together?

Well, as TERF scum by mere dint of being female I am not welcome to join any debate!

Has anyone else just realised that there are less than 6 million people in Ireland and more than 6 million Jews were slaughtered in ww2 Hitler killed an entire country full of people? I'm not sure I fully understood the scale before

Anyway this debate is going to delay the law being put into effect why does no one give a shit about that call them biological women and add a side note stating doctors should ask which pronoun is preferable that should be it make it about biology and nothing less because at the end of the day when you are pregnant and in need of medical treatment biology is the only thing that matters as far as a nurse/doctor/surgeon is concerned

'People' is not an accurate word to describe females. And if you follow through with that as TRAs want you would have a world made up of Men and People or Men and Not Men.

As so many TRAs have posted and shouted, written on placards and spat - women would simply have to enjoy their erasure!

I think it’s almost certain that the Irish legislation will go for “pregnant people”. So many of the campaigning organisations already use that terminology (although they did dial it down during the referendum campaign).

Dragon

"Why is it so difficult to understand that it is incredibly important to me not to be called a cis woman or a pregnant person?"

Not sure. I guess I have a utilitarian approach and think that you being upset by a law using pregnant person instead of pregnant woman (plus a list) is less important because you're only one person. The law should be written accurately and succinctly to benefit all it is intended for. Your feelings are pretty immaterial in the grand scheme of things but in a one-on-one situation, I can understand why being teased by males made you feel the way you do about all these issues.

CuriousaboutSamphire

"Those legally male people who can carry babies are biologically female. The law does not change that."

But it kind of does and that's a pragmatic / semantic argument anyway. Biologically female but legally male - which one is important in matters of law?

"very dangerous for all sorts of reasons that have been outlined, detailed, argued over "

Very few convincing arguments or any from people with more education than ideology.

@Tabathatwitchett

"What I don't understand is, if a woman chooses to live her life as a man- why would "he" want to then get pregnant, carry a child and give birth to it?"

Do you understand what an abortion is?

Ohmydayslove

It's considered bad form to bring other threads into this one. However, I can see why you, with your exorbitant number of children, would be worried about mixed-sex sleepovers.

"What you are not entitled to do is to silence women. And you will not either on here or in RL."

I have no idea of the sex of any poster but I do wish there was an ignore function.

Which of your rights do you think are trampled on if the abortion law is genderless?

Now, as an Irish woman who had to have a 'trip to London' in the early 80s, I do wish you'd stop wading in to the issue.

Those legally male people who can carry babies are biologically female. The law does not change that. Legislation does not need to be changed to take them into account,

You say you ‘suspect’ you asnswered this. Can you be sure? I’m not a lawmaker and I don’t know for sure what rights or not legally changing your sex gives in Ireland. But it seems sensible to make sure all they cover all bases.

Just add a trans word after the word "woman". There won't be many anyway so it's a lot of fuss about nothing from men who like to dominate conversations as ever.

@unplugmefromthematrix

"not result in laws being rewritten"

Um... I flew home to vote hoping that laws would be re-written.

Are you Irish or simply wading in?

I think this does matter actually. I have no issue with women, non- binary and trans men as frankly I’m mainly just happy the legislation will be brought in and want anyone who needs it to be protected by it. I would not want trans men to run into any difficulty accessing a termination.

That said, the issues with abortion and reproductive rights are a massive issue with feminism and the oppression of women because of their female biology. To say “pregnant people” erases such important issues as being an issue affecting women because they are biologically women. That does matter when although Eire is taking steps to move out of mediaeval times, that is not the case for millions of women worldwide who do not have access to obstetric care or reproductive rights. It is damaging and dangerous to start down a road whereby it cannot be said to be a women’s issue.

doom I agree it makes no difference legally, but nor does it to say eg pregnant women, NB and trans men.

This is overwhelmingly a women’s issue not a trans issue.

Well to me it boils down to this:

A) born male stayed male- can't have babies
B) born male now identifying as female- can't have babies
C) born female now identifying as male- doesn't want to be pregnant as it is a "female" thing and/or is post op and therefore can't have babies
D) born female, stayed female- CAN HAVE BABIES.

Therefore, using the word 'woman' should be entirely appropriate surely?

doom

Wibble.

How about "pregnant XX people"? A kind of halfway point?

sensible to make sure all they cover all bases

All bases are covered with term woman when legislation and medicine recognise the term women to be addressing a person's sex not gender. As only women can get pregnant.

NOW I have peak transed. I am not a "gestator", I am a woman.

Perhaps, rather than trying to de-gender language around women, TAs could direct their energies into coming up with language around women who transition to men, but can still bear children, and around men who transition to women, but still retain their male genitalia?

Why should WE be the ones who have to be re-languaged?
Stamps foot and gets the kids ready for nursery

Doom. You remind me of someone.

Doom I actually said not result in laws being rewritten to remove the word woman/mother and generalised to people

You cannot think you can make a point by deliberately by mis-quoting only half of my sentence. And you accuse us of being uneducated...

But it kind of does How the hell does it? How? Does it carry out a gene swap?

You say that the semantics don't matter... and then you dismiss the arguments of MNers, some of whom, like myself, have varying degrees, post graduate quals and decades of work experience in biological sciences as Very few convincing arguments or any from people with more education than ideology Oh the arrogance of that!

Biologically female but legally male - which one is important in matters of law? And which is the biological reality that governs how that legally defined body actually works?

If you feel the need to play with words you have to remember that nature plays Top Trumps according to her own rules!

Thing is, there is no good reason to remove the term woman from legislation. You could easily have legislation that was: for 'women, and people who can conceive.'

But they don't want that do they, because this is all just about erasing women isn't it?

Mumsnet , can we please have a limit on how many anti trans threads can be permitted in one week please!!!! Ffs

How is this anti trans?

If you are pregnant or have given birth, you're a woman.

You say you ‘suspect’ you asnswered this. Can you be sure? No. Not because I don't know what I said, but because I am not 100% certain of your current understanding/belief.

Covering all bases does not have to mean we all stick our gingers in our ears singing "la la la" whilst giving lip service to the idea that a human being can physically change sex.

As I said in the post I referred to, transmen can be legally male, but biologically they are female. So if you really want to be sure you have covered all bases just add the word 'biological' to the laws and that would remove any need for the words gestators, pregnant people etc etc etc

World, can we please have a limit on how many anti women incidents can be permitted in one week - or better yet lets scrap them!!!!!! Ffs