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.

exhorbitant amount of children

spat out my tea at that.

Yes you are right I have been a pregnant woman 6 times and very proud of that.

I can see how that would wind you up but frankly I couldn’t give a fuck.

I am proud to be a strong woman and no one, let alone any silly bloke, alters that.

"Pregnant Person" worries me because it could potentially be perceived in the future as including either parent of the fetus. We want access to abortion to safeguard the rights of the female carrying the child, and we can't let males gain rights to force an abortion through careless wording.

WhoWants2Know blimey good point

Nope. Women - and only women - can get pregnant. That's as inclusive as the language needs to be.

This is not an anti trans thread Strongmummy it’s a thread about women’s rights.

Surely there's a need for 2 sets of legislation then, one for women and mothers, one for anyone else who happened to get pregnant but isn't a woman (although it's more than confusing how someone so determined to be the opposite sex could then get pregnant) .

Gestators is wholly inappropriate, as is pregnant person. Totally lacking in humanity.

It's depressing that such a landmark moment is being derailed by a minority group over terminology. If Ireland has only just accepted that termination can be legal for women, I think there may be a wait for trans people to be recognised at all let alone in this legislation.

Boom, you keep on talking about non-Irish wading in, but there are Irish on this thread.
This is absolutely fucking ridiculous. The whole ideology is ridiculous. Women have been treated like shit in Ireland because of religion and it’s need to control their BODIES. Nothing to do with how they presented. People weren’t thrown in Magdalene laundries were not because they had long hair and wore dresses. Ann Lovett didn’t die in a grotto because of how she identified. I don’t really understand when people say trans women and women face the same difficulties for the same reasons, they don’t. a trans women might risk getting beaten up in Belfast but for the same reason as gay people have been - hatred against the gender non-conforming. Not misogyny - but homophobia/transphobia. And trans men (as well as transphobia) might face issues because of their female bodies. I just don’t understand say that trans women and women are the same and trans men and men are the same - they clearly aren’t. It hurts my head, it’s so illogical.
Anyway, rant over!

doomRaider = JAPAB. Same screed of tediousness. It's a mistake to engage, it derails otherwise interesting threads.

max!!!! Of course! I knew I had met that idiotic wall of verbiage before!

I dint like the wording pregnant person. For the reason WhoWants say.
However I wouod be very happy to settle for pregnant female.

Transmen who are getting pregnant are transgender. As in they want to live their life as a man but still retain all the biological function of a woman.

I think it’s time that we review our use of the vocabulary and stop using interchangeably woman, female, female gender and female sex.
Gender and sex need to be clearly separated. And the areas where people will be related according their sex or gender clearly stated.

So health issues such as abortion, smear tests, prostate can et test etc... are sex related so people should be treated according to their sex and the law/rules should reflect that.
Other things such as segregated spaces are about gender and again shouod be treated as such.
The condition for the last one being, of course, that there is no self indetification or I’m a woman on Monday’s and Tuesday but a man on Sunday when I go to see my football match...

I think this brings a really major issue tbf.
What will happen when a transmen is ticking the make gender at their surgery? No screening for cervical cancer and breast cancer?? When they arrive at hosp with a heart attack, no treatment because they won’t fit the Male S&S??
Same with trans women btw.

I don't really get the upset about this. If someone legally identified as a man, who is physically female gets pregnant (be that through choice, ivf, abuse, rape - regardless), then they should have the same rights to abortion as any other woman who gets pregnant.

Isn't it just about removing ambiguity in the law to ensure that?

There are lots of trans related issues that I do get concerned about, but this isn't one of them.

The battle has been won, the war has not. Abortion is legal in the US yet women’s access to it is increasingly restricted. The law needs to be watertight to allow all female bodied people to access abortions, no loopholes. Are we so naive that we think that if there are any loopsholes at all extremists won’t look to exploit them to block abortion rights? Curiousaboutsamphire you seem to be saying that biology should trump the legal definition of men/women but that’s not actually how it works is it? Biological women seems a lot more complex that just using gravida, and having two sets of legislation when one will do the job seems ridiculous.

Doom
But I’m not just one person. My example is one, which will resound with many women. Women are being called defective/non female every time they are called slags for example. Thus many women, probably most actually are or have been name called by males at some stage in their lives.

As a large percentage of women have had similar experiences to me, they are therefore as individuals likely to feel the same as me - and I’m talking about irl, not just on here. All these women together thus become a collective far larger than the trans population. Therefore why do we as a collective not matter?

I do understand your utilitarian example re the law although I don’t agree. Once the law states “pregnant people” for example, this will then become accepted every day jargon. Then what next? To add “cis woman” as a legal term? The term cis gives me rage rather like a transperson being deadnamed.

"Men can get pregnant too" - if only.

I think the law would be clear using the word woman, as they would presumably (as they do in UK Equalities legislation) go on to point out that by 'Woman' they mean any human female.

Women who have legally become men are already a special case in law - it's a legal fiction, there are circumstances where their biological sex overrides their legal one - eg. Prisons, Clergy so there's no reason this couldn't also be the case with abortion.

There's no need to use a long sentence, or to make it pointlessly broad by using 'person'

TLDR: The facility to treat transmen as female already exists in law, laws don't have to be written to be inclusive of people's feelings, they need to be clearly defined and accurate.

There are lots of trans related issues that I do get concerned about, but this isn't one of them If you read the original tweet you might feel more anger.

As well as the parts quoted in the OP, they actually complain that the campaign to repeal the 8th amendment was unfair as it didn't invite transwomen to join in, have an opinion! That many trans men and women did join in, rallied, campaigned and voted is not noteworthy. The TRAs responsible for the OPs post wanted to be invited!

The whole "what about transmen?" question is an obfuscation, as you have pointed out, why would transmen be excluded from any appropriate laws/rights? Answer: they wouldn't! But it's a great fear inducing sound bite and causes a lot of tension - as this thread shows only too well!

Best of all it draws some of the attention away from women, and allows TRAs to wallow in yet more self pity/adulation!

Oh, what a win it will be for women's rights when a born female is denied an abortion for living as a legally recognised man.

Go forth, in the name of feminism, and ensure that only "women like you" can have reproductive rights!

Rat - Legislation and Medicine should already be based on sex only not whatever gender identity someone wants, otherwise things like smears and breast screening will also be missed out on for transmen. This is why the term woman needs to remain as "female adult" and be used to define sex. No one can change sex. If the 8th Amendment talks about women (as in the actual definition of woman) then no transman will be missed out as they are still biologically a woman.

Is anyone really surprised 😱 this men are entitled and privileged so why wouldn’t they think they can have a say on abortion after all

Their ladies don’t you know

Rat That s one of your best! 7 pages of detail to ignore! Well done xx

Legislation and Medicine should already be based on sex only not whatever gender identity someone wants, otherwise things like smears and breast screening will also be missed out on for transmen.

Nope, legislation (i.e. the law) is based on someone's legal status. When they have a GRC that is ALWAYS their chosen sex. A pp suggested that in law they are still sometimes their born sex (i.e. the exemptions). That is NOT TRUE. They are always their legal sex, and sometimes it is legal to treat them differently from others of that sex (i.e. the exemptions).

In medicine it is based on medical need. You can offer smear tests to all the patients with an "F", but if you're the doctor or an "M" who needs one you can add them to the list.

So no. Those things are not based on biological sex, they're based on legal sex and medical need.

7 pages of detail to ignore!

You say detail, I say missing the point. Just bringing things back on track.

Rat you missed the key word in my post should

Look, this is an own-goal for the TRAs. It will peak trans thousands, and it won't subscribe anyone new to the TRAs side.

The gender critical side need daft things like this to help expose the illogical nature of this whole debate.

Rat you seem to have missed the multiple posts where people said that the legal issue could easily be dealt with by one sentence saying that the legislation encompasses transmen and people who identify as non-binary. There. Job done. No need to erase women from something that is a women's rights issue.

Twittle you said it "should already be", except it obviously isn't already. What makes you think it "should" be?

Imagine for a second a person who fathers a child (biologically) and signs away any legal parental rights over that child. The law no longer considers their biological connection to that child, it considers their legal connection - or lack of it.

That is how the law works.

That is how it should work.

I can't think of any reason why it should be different.

FWIW I'm up for "pregnant woman or other pregnant person".