AIBU to tell every mother on mumsnet...

[LastRoloIsMine]

We nearly lost the word mother and all that comes with it?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4176497-History-in-the-making-Watch-Parliament-Live-at-2-30pm

The maternity bill wanted to remove the word mother/woman and replace it with pregnant person.
Those words are important and women have fought for a century to be recognised yet we were nearly wiped out in favour of belief not fact.

I wont say "I am not transphobic" like some sort of plea! I dont actually have to I am just fighting for womens rights no need for me to explain myself any further.

Seriously some knobhead thought 'pregnant person' was appropriate instead of mother!

And I would wager that would be the reaction of 90%+ of the population. Not because we're a nation of transphobes but because it is a fact that women get pregnant, women give birth, mothers are women.

There’s an excellent and accessible podcast on Queer Theory on Gender: a Wider Lens. Worth a listen

Than you both. I'll read up on Queer Theory

Sigh.

This has been vastly misinterpreted all over the place and now seems to be causing mass hysteria.

They aren't replacing the word "mother" at all. They are just adding another term in order to be more inclusive. Why anyone sees this as a problem is beyond me. They are saying you can choose the term you want. If you want "mother" then that is obviously absolutely fine.

Complete mountain out of a mole hill. As if the term "mother" would ever actually stop being used.

It says a lot that Trans Women are trying to change the language around women, be it - women who menstruate, a person who gives birth or chest feeding while on the other hand Trans men do not talk about 'men' as someone who has a person with sperm they are just men.

What damage does it actually do to say only women can give birth
You would think none but apparently it can trigger suicide

But shouldn't people get counselling for this? Lots of things can affect MH and people seek counselling (sorry if I'm being too simplistic)

No this is a piece of legislation not a campaign around breast feeding. You don’t get to replace words in legislation with ones you feel like.

Complete mountain out of a mole hill. As if the term "mother" would ever actually stop being used

See upthread regarding 'cancel culture' and the potential consequences of using 'the wrong' word if this lunacy escalates

8 out of 10 women get pregnant ..... means one thing
8 out of 10 people get pregnant..... means something else entirely and should have been changed to
4 out of 10 people get pregnant.....

There are specific contexts which only impact women as defined by sex, not gender. By eradicating the term woman we lose the ability to define these, and also the ability to protect the rights of women.

@LastRoloIsMine

Crumpledandcreased

This is a Maternity Bill. It is legislation for pregnant women and women who have given birth.
Yes there are women who are mothers without having carried the child but they are not the women to which this legislation is for.

If anyone could give get pregnant and give birth then pregnant people would be accurate. However thats not the case. The fact is only women can so legislation needs to be accurate in order to include the right group of people.

People who are gender neutral or yes, even (gasp) identifying as male, can get pregnant and give birth, and may not want to be called "mothers"

That doesn't mean that you can't be called mother if you want to.

It just means that someone else might not want that, and so they are offering an alternative.

Look at the actual facts and not a mumsnet thread, and it is such an incredibly small thing to get worked up about.

‘Pregnant People’ are basically trans men who have decided to keep the best of both worlds. They want to identify as a man (or whatever else) when it suits them and have kids when it suits them. Why should they be catered to?

@nancywhitehead

Sigh.

This has been vastly misinterpreted all over the place and now seems to be causing mass hysteria.

They aren't replacing the word "mother" at all. They are just adding another term in order to be more inclusive. Why anyone sees this as a problem is beyond me. They are saying you can choose the term you want. If you want "mother" then that is obviously absolutely fine.

Complete mountain out of a mole hill. As if the term "mother" would ever actually stop being used.

You have this wrong.

The legislation really did not include the terms “mother” or “woman”, only “person”, and has now been changed thanks to the HoL.

But only to include “mother”. “Woman” was a step too far.

Complete mountain out of a mole hill. As if the term "mother" would ever actually stop being used.

This is very interesting though. ‘As if the word Mother would ever stop being used’. Well let’s think about that statement. Let’s replace Mother with Woman. As if the word Woman would even stop being used. And yet that’s happening right now. The word woman has stopped being used. It’s now being replaced with ‘person who’ or worse Menstruater, cervix haver. First they came for Woman, then they came for Mother..... what’s next I wonder? Let’s wait and see.

I find it shocking that to suit a small minority of people the government was willing to delete women and womanhood from regulation. Cuntish behaviour. Thank goodness for commonsense.

Why should they be catered to

They can be catered to, but they need to use their own words to define themselves, not snatch ours

I'm also concerned that if we change all legislation to be 'neutral' I can see a point at which a 'pregnant person' becomes, not necessarily the person who is carrying the child, but either of the people who were involved in conception, which could then be exploited by abusive arseholes to remove bodily autonomy of the woman.

Women give birth are mothers and breastfeed. I am glad we have preserved that. If someone with xx chromosomes is living as a man whether they have changed gender by law or not in England and that person gives birth I certainly don't mind what they choose to be called eg transwoman or previously male or xx or whatever but they are the rare exception and the rest of us should be allowed within legislation to use woman.

By the way one of the sets of covid regulations dealing with visitors are a birth referred to person who gave birth so it is not as if they had not already started a process to erase women. I am glad it has been stopped.

@GrumpyHoonMain why shouldn't they be catered for, out of interest? So long as the catering for doesn't come at the expense of any other group- such as women.

'Menstruator' is hideous

@Pugdoglife

I'm getting so lost. Transwomen want to be recognised as women and at the same time transmen are trying to airbrush women from all legislation. How do we recognise transwomen as women if we refuse to acknowledge women?

This gets to the crux of it. Trans women would benefit from the word woman being detached from female biology, since that is something they can't share. Trans men prefer not to be reminded of their female biology. Detach the word woman from female biology and reattach it to gender in culture, legislation and common speech and after a few years, job done. Womanhood has nothing to do with childbearing. A trans man who has decided to get pregnant is very rare and having decided to carry a child, they can not really avoid being reminded of it, so I'm pretty sure this push is not for their benefit.

nancywhitehead

Males cannot get pregnant.
It doesnt matter how a person identifies only women get pregnant and laws relating to pregnancy must include the word woman and mother. If a person wants to be referred to in a different way during their pregnancy care then they can request it however this is about legislation and who that protects. Its not about identity, politeness or choice.

@JackieWeaversZoomAc

When you talk about pregnant person instead of woman or mother you are inviting all people to participate in pregnancy. Inviting all people to have a say in pregnancy & women's bodies.

This then opens up men into having more of a say about pregnancy and maternity when it's really got very little to do with them. It's a woman's issue and it affects woman and their bodies and lives. woman should be mentioned in legislation dealing with these specific issues. Who on earth would object to that? What the fuck is going on?

And by the way in case you missed it, every single person who has ever lived on this planet ever, was grown and birthed by a woman, a mother. Without one single exception.

A woman is a specific type of person being an adult human female. When that female person takes up an entire class, being the only type of person who can give birth and become a mother it's perfectly reasonable and essential even to use the correct words to refer to her. Not using the correct word to describe her is erasure.

Nothing about this is controversial. Or at least it shouldn't be.

I really can't believe that this needs saying but it does. I agree with this post so much.

When I first heard the word 'CIS' being talked about on this board I was ambivalent, didn't think it made much difference, but it does. It really does take away the word and meaning of 'woman' to allow that to be applied to people who are not adult human females. The thin end of the wedge and there have been so many. Once it's lost, it's gone - and there is an enormous movement there with a specific agenda to do just that.

My niece, a young teen and keen runner thinks it's 'nice' to allow trans-women to run along side her and win. That's the 'be nice' agenda. Insidious and not created by women but by men, to keep us in our place.

It's horrifying that women are co-opting themselves into the plan to eradicate themselves and their daughters and it makes no bloody sense.

It's clear that many posts on this board didn't listen to or understand the significance of what happened yesterday but TLDR, it was and is important - and this was an absolute win in terms of turning the tide.

OP YANBU. Thanks to all the women - and men - who understood what was and is happening and stood alongside women in defiance of it.

Woman is a scientific and biological word.

To say any different is sexist.

Person is a scientific and biological word, but encompasses xx and xy people.

Xy people historically and currently abuse and oppress xx more than xx do xy.

It's basic logic to define xx and women in law due to the vast differences they have in physical, sexual and mental healthcare needs.

It's offensive that this was even thought to not matter.

Look at the actual facts and not a mumsnet thread, and it is such an incredibly small thing to get worked up about

Silly me posting about a topic I havent bothered to research...

but either of the people who were involved in conception, which could then be exploited by abusive arseholes to remove bodily autonomy of the woman

How so?

If the words are changed, employers could stop hiring women of child bearing age if they wanted to as, how could that be about not wanting people to go on pregnant leave? For all they know all the other people (I.e. men) in their employment are cervix havers and about to get pregnant.