Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to tell every mother on mumsnet...

999 replies

LastRoloIsMine · 25/02/2021 22:18

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
LastRoloIsMine · 26/02/2021 10:52

Parents need parental rights. I don’t like the title of the bill “Ministerial and Other Maternity Allowances Bill”. This bill should be combined with the paternity one into a ministerial parental allowances bill.

Parental rights already exist.
Maternity rights specifically protect women as only women get pregnant and give birth. Males do not need laws around pregnancy and birth so why include them?

OP posts:
viques · 26/02/2021 10:52

@DreamingofGinoclock

Why can't the legislation refer to women/mothers and transmen/(appropriate name trans community are happy for transmen who are pregnant /have given birth are happy to be referred to as)
The Freddie McConnell case has established in court that trans men who give birth are legally mothers and should be recognised as such on a child’s birth certificate. By using the term mothers rather than women in the legislation the wording includes trans men who have given birth. No need for clunky slash/ language when one perfectly good word already exists.
Cattenberg · 26/02/2021 10:53

It’s already been mentioned that in the UK, a trans man who gives birth is legally the child’s mother.

To me, the legal definition of “mother” isn’t just about sex or gender identity. It’s about the child and who has automatic parental responsibility for them. If we sever that link, there would be unintended consequences. Should any child be born into the situation of having no one who is legally responsible for them?

littlbrowndog · 26/02/2021 10:54

Plan

So my dad is just a parent

My brothers are just siblings

My sister is just a sibling

I can’t get my head around what you wrote

If a group of people are being discriminated against in law how can you identify these people ? Guess?

viques · 26/02/2021 10:56

@Erkrie

In addition, there have been genetically male intersex successful pregnancies in intersex/DSD people.

Can you post evidence to this please. Interested to learn more.

Interesting that Professor Lord Robert Winston didn’t refer to this yesterday, what with him being a world renown expert in the matter and all.
DreamingofGinoclock · 26/02/2021 10:56

@LastRoloIsMine

Why can't the legislation refer to women/mothers and transmen/(appropriate name trans community are happy for transmen who are pregnant /have given birth are happy to be referred to as)

Because this bill already includes them and covers them as they are women/mothers. This is legislation. It deals in facts not identity. They can request their medical staff refer to them anyway they choose.

Oh I get it already includes them in "women/mothers " definition ...this is just obviously the contentious issue so was trying to think how this can be resolved without the erasure of woman/mother ... Hadn't really thought as deep as "transman" not being defined in law ....
Sexnotgender · 26/02/2021 10:56

@LastRoloIsMine

We won’t be equal until we eliminate these cages of woman and man and are all people/human.n

We cannot eliminate biology. It is because of our biology that we are oppressed. Specific laws to protect us do not cage us they allow us to be recognised and protected. The Maternity rights allow women to access appropriate healthcare continue employment and fight discrimination. Why do you think that should be removed or available to men?

It’s all beginning to sound like the idiots who say “I don’t see race/colour”.
Dalyesque · 26/02/2021 10:57

@fastwigglylines

There is an attack on the word woman. The wording originally suggested in this bill isn't a stand-alone exception, it is part of a much larger movement which seeks to establish in law and society that the word woman means anyone who identifies as a woman, not actual biological women.

This matters because, without a word to describe the group of people who share female biology and experiences of the world, how can we organise together to defend our rights as a political group?

This isn't an academic argument, this is about practical, on-the-ground stuff.

Currently, if we talk about women's health, for example, we know we're talking about issues relating to having female biology - pregnancy, miscarriage, menstruation, menopause, PCOS, endometriosis, smear tests, etc etc.

What does "women's health" even mean, if the group women includes people with penises, prostrates, testicles etc? The trans lobby say that doesn't matter as you should pick whatever health condition or aspect of biology is relevant, and talk about that e.g. "people with cervices" or "birthing body". But what if you want to talk about - and advocate for or allocate funds to - supporting women's heath as a whole? If there is no word for woman that means biological women - and if group biological women together in any way that excludes transwomen is seen as transphobic - how can you advocate for women?

Similarly, if there is no word for woman that doesn't include males who identify as women, how can lesbians ever expect to have exclusively lesbian spaces? Well, these days they mostly can't. Lesbian dating apps and pubs (what's left of them) are full of males who say they are in the category of women. Lesbians who try to assert their boundaries and organise women only spaces are called and treated like bigots.

More generally, how can anyone talk about women's rights if the word woman includes males? And if it's considered bigoted or transphobic to have any definition of women that means just biological women?

If there is no word for women allowed that means actual women, we cease to exist as a group of people united by a fundamental shared characteristic (being female) and lose all rights gained on that basis.

This is what the gender ideology lobby are fighting for. They want to dismantle sex as a meaningful category and are angry with women who want to organise or group together as biological women, they see this as bigotry.

That's why this is important. The gender ideologists are totally out of touch with reality, but somehow have got a lot of traction and are trying to change the definition of woman in law.

Children and young people are being taught that it's bigoted for women to organise together and that sex is a social construct, not a biological fact. If we don't fight it, it will be coded into law.

Yes yes yes. This is why it matters. Thank youfastwigglylines
grannyinapram · 26/02/2021 10:57

@Thelnebriati

If the language used in legislation harms no one, why change it? If it matters so little then why get so enraged that women want to keep the words that are accurate terms and definitions? Of course language matters, especially in legislation. New terms can be used as well as sex based terms of replacing them.
This exactly and forever. It does matter.
youvegottenminuteslynn · 26/02/2021 10:58

@Glamflimfloogety

The difference between people and women is crucial.

For example (below are made up numbers just used for demonstration - I've plucked the numbers out of thin air to make the point)

A) 1 in 4 WOMEN will experience a miscarriage
B) 1 in 8 PEOPLE will experience a miscarriage

The wording changes the data due to the extra group now included. As men are people, they must now be included in the data. Now which set of data sounds more alarming? 1 in 4 sounds much more common, and is fact a more accurate reflection as a man can never experience a miscarriage.

Now let's take it one step further. Which set of data should be used for provision of medical services? If something occurs in 1 in 4 women, that sounds like something that a significant proportion of women will need medical assistance for at some point. But if you take the second set of data, you could view it as only 1 in 8 people will experience it, and therefore the provision should be less.

So how it affects us, is it marginalises women's experiences and specific medical needs. Less funding can be allocated to our specific needs.

This is just one example, but I hope those arguing can see that clear language is absolutely essential when it comes to legislation and data.

Can posters like @AnnaPotter acknowledge this example of how language really is vital when it comes to protecting the health of women?

It's really frustrating that well thought out, sensible and factual examples like this often seem to get ignored on similar threads.

feelingverylazytoday · 26/02/2021 10:58

littlbrowndog well I assume that's the whole idea. It would just be open season on women - no maternity rights, no women only prisons, refuges, hospital wards, toilets, sports, etc etc.
It's so transparently obvious. Do they think we can't see right through them?

Erkrie · 26/02/2021 10:58

In addition, there have been genetically male intersex successful pregnancies in intersex/DSD people.

Can you post evidence to this please PlanDeRaccordment

PositiveNegative · 26/02/2021 10:59

If we cannot name it, we cannot protect it.

BrumBoo · 26/02/2021 10:59

@PlanDeRaccordement

Mother is a sexist term? I've really heard it all now Grin. With a huge presumption that you are a female parent (as the majority of MN are) have you EVER taken offence at someone referring to you as a mother? After the first day of school, when the teacher asks 'sorry, who's mother are you' did you angrily react 'I find you to be sexist' and stomp off without your child? What gender-netural terms should children use instead on 'mum' so they risk not offending parents?

Sexnotgender · 26/02/2021 11:00

@PositiveNegative

If we cannot name it, we cannot protect it.
Exactly.

Don’t see race? Excellent, racism is gone!

Can’t name sex? Excellent, end to sex based discrimination!

Imbeciles.

PlanDeRaccordement · 26/02/2021 11:00

@Erkrie

In addition, there have been genetically male intersex successful pregnancies in intersex/DSD people.

Can you post evidence to this please. Interested to learn more.

It’s called Swyer Syndrome where the person has 46, XY DNA, or male DNA but all the organs and appearance of a female. Here is an article regarding two pregnancies that were studied. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2305050013601219

Summary of the DSD from rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/8538/46-xy-disorders-of-sexual-development

A 46, XY disorder of sex development (DSD) is a condition in which an individual with one X chromosome and one Y chromosome in each cell, the pattern normally found in males, have genitalia that is not clearly male or female. Infants with this condition tend to have penoscrotal hypospadias, abnormal development of the testes, and reduced to no sperm production. Some individuals with 46, XY DSD have fully to underdeveloped female reproductive organs (e.g., uterus and fallopian tubes), while others do not. People with with 46, XY DSD may be raised as males or females. Treatment involves surgery and hormone replacement therapy. People with 46, XY DSD are at an increased risk for gonadal tumors and benefit from regular surveillance or surgery to remove abnormally developed gonads.

Caster Semaya the famous runner has this DSD. She is genetically a man, but was raised as a girl. She can no longer compete in women’s sports as she is now identified as a man. So this is an example of how even looking like a woman, being raised as a woman doesn’t always entitle you to be legally considered a woman (or mother) if a DNA test comes back XY.

PositiveNegative · 26/02/2021 11:00

And - we all have a mother.

littlbrowndog · 26/02/2021 11:04

[quote BrumBoo]@PlanDeRaccordement

Mother is a sexist term? I've really heard it all now Grin. With a huge presumption that you are a female parent (as the majority of MN are) have you EVER taken offence at someone referring to you as a mother? After the first day of school, when the teacher asks 'sorry, who's mother are you' did you angrily react 'I find you to be sexist' and stomp off without your child? What gender-netural terms should children use instead on 'mum' so they risk not offending parents?[/quote]
I know. 😂

PlanDeRaccordement · 26/02/2021 11:04

[quote BrumBoo]@PlanDeRaccordement

Mother is a sexist term? I've really heard it all now Grin. With a huge presumption that you are a female parent (as the majority of MN are) have you EVER taken offence at someone referring to you as a mother? After the first day of school, when the teacher asks 'sorry, who's mother are you' did you angrily react 'I find you to be sexist' and stomp off without your child? What gender-netural terms should children use instead on 'mum' so they risk not offending parents?[/quote]
No, because I was at work? I never was at the school gate.
And in all other cases, say in parks or play areas people ask me “which one is yours?” They don’t usually ask “who’s mother are you” because I could be a other relative, a foster/guardian or carer or babysitter. They don’t know and didnt assume that me being there, means I must be a “mother”.

fastwigglylines · 26/02/2021 11:04

@PlanDeRaccordement

I know I’m in a minority opinion group here. But I’m fully a gender abolitionist, which means that all genders and gendered terms need to be abolished. This includes feminine abs masculine terms for the same role. No mother, no father, only parents. No brother, no sister, only siblings. And so on.
I can see this idea has some merit in a world where sexism no longer exists (I read Marge Percy's Woman on the Edge of Time as a teenager!), and I understand this is where a lot of the younger wokies are coming from - they think if you abolish gendered terms it will get rid of sexism.

But I think we're so far from living in a world free from sexism that we need terms that describe women and our experiences.

You don't get rid of racism by banning anyone saying race exists, do you?

Also, in Woman on the Edge of Time, they'd got rid of motherhood. Babies were grown in tanks, not in humans.

Unless women stop mothering, we need a term for mother. My relationship with my children as babies was entirely different from my (male) partner's not least as he hadn't grown the baby inside him and wasn't breastfeeding. Mothering is different to gathering, at least when they are babies. And the impact on our bodies, mind and careers is entirely different too.

Unless you're advocating for a world where babies are grown in tanks - or men can get pregnant - the word mother has real meaning - and power. I do understand some people are hoping for a future where mothering no longer exists as a meaningful concept and babies are grown in tanks - or possible poor women, sorry I mean "gestators", but it's a nightmarish vision of a future world we need to fight against in my opinion.

LastRoloIsMine · 26/02/2021 11:04

So this is an example of how even looking like a woman, being raised as a woman doesn’t always entitle you to be legally considered a woman (or mother) if a DNA test comes back XY.

Women are women because of our biology. It doesnt matter how a person presents. If you have male biology then you are not a woman. If you get pregnant or give birth you are a woman because only women can.

OP posts:
fastwigglylines · 26/02/2021 11:05

*Mothering is different to fathering, I mean!

PlanDeRaccordement · 26/02/2021 11:06

@PositiveNegative

If we cannot name it, we cannot protect it.
You can still name it. It’s called pregnancy. Ta da! Protected.
PlanDeRaccordement · 26/02/2021 11:08

@LastRoloIsMine
Did you not even read the rest of my post about XY people who are genetically male, but have a female phenotype and have gotten pregnant and given birth? You comment sounds like an article of faith more than science.

LastRoloIsMine · 26/02/2021 11:09

You can still name it. It’s called pregnancy. Ta da! Protected.

And which group of humans becomes pregnant?
Which parent needs specific rights relating to pregnancy and their healthcare?

OP posts: