The Lancet calls us “Bodies With Vaginas”

[42SrauvP]

On behalf of all women and girls, I am f*cking livid.

twitter.com/thelancet/status/1441372277786951681?s=21

Be in no doubt, when society removes the words we use to define ourselves they remove the means for us to gather, to push back, to protect ourselves, to fight for our rights, to roar. It’s slow and almost imperceptible and then, BOOM…you have the likes of Ed Davey proclaiming on prime time radio that we can’t exclude men.

I am NOT a Body with a Vagina, I am WOMAN hear me roar.

To clarify - I'm not saying that their opinion is more important but I'm saying I'd like to think we can fight this together.

I clicked on the link and there are actually toilets in pubs in the uk with options of ‘men’ And ‘gender neutral’ and that’s it!
Wtaf

Well MedTwitter is starting to react to this, and none of it good.

I am absolutely astonished and outraged by this. I’m seriously struggling to understand that choice of the word ‘bodies’ to describe a group of human beings, and then of course they add on ‘with vaginas’ to really double down on the insulting language.
What the FUCK were they thinking?

This feels like an incels wet dream. Horrific

Well they seem to have got the hang of using the word 'woman' this morning.

Perhaps because they're more afraid of being called racists that they are of being called misogynists?

How dare they. Absolute misogynistic bastards. They are not safe to be around women or advising on their medical care, with those attitudes.

My organisation receives complaints of this sort.

Please consider that:

1. The people reading the emails won’t have a clue about the trans v women’s rights issue.
2. Any mention of trans in a negative context will cause the email to be pigeonholed as anti trans.
3. Being too angry can also cause it to be dismissed

I’d recommend you keep it simple and focus solely on the problems this particular action causes to women.

Sadly some of the complaints my organisation receive are ignored for the above reasons, and it’s hard to defend them as it would expose my views.

We received one that, I, knowing the contexts knew made sense and linked our actions back to the key wider issues… but everyone else was totally confused. It was far too complex and detailed and angry.

Perhaps we could coordinate and each send emails that tackle one issue each? It’s easy for an organisation to ignore half the issues if you raise all of them at once.

Suggested wording:

I am writing regarding The Lancet Volume 198. The cover features a quote which says, “Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected”.

What is the reason for this wording?

Does it mean human women, or does it include animals?

Pineapple, the problem there is your organisation’s failings, not complainants’ presentation!

@Penistoe

I clicked on the link and there are actually toilets in pubs in the uk with options of ‘men’ And ‘gender neutral’ and that’s it! Wtaf

Is that even legal?

@Dozer

Pineapple, the problem there is your organisation’s failings, not complainants’ presentation!

Well obviously the organisation’s actions are a problem. But the complaint’s writing is a problem too.

The presentation of the complaints sometimes means that people reading them can’t take any action. As much as they’d like to.

I can’t do anything with an email about the Kafkaesque capture of the whole world to trans issues. I can do something with an email that states your organisation did X which negatively affects women in X way.

I just said that I didn't appreciate being called a body with a vagina, especially as men got to be called men, and could they explain themselves?

Looking back into history and what the next steps after dehumanisation are and what a weird woke world awe are in at the moment, it's not looking good for us.

Rubbish, Pineapple, abusive messages aside the action to be taken - to use the term ‘women’ - should be straightforward. It’s the organisation that is being ‘kafkaesque’, not complainants.

@Pineapplepyjamas

I would have thought that an international media publication might have a more robust approach to interacting with its readership and the public at large than just leaving correspondence to be farmed by people who are ignorant of and/or oblivious to the point of the correspondence.

But I don’t know where you work or how comparable that organisation may be, so accept I may be wrong about that.

@Pineapplepyjamas

My organisation receives complaints of this sort.

Please consider that:

1. The people reading the emails won’t have a clue about the trans v women’s rights issue.
2. Any mention of trans in a negative context will cause the email to be pigeonholed as anti trans.
3. Being too angry can also cause it to be dismissed

I’d recommend you keep it simple and focus solely on the problems this particular action causes to women.

Sadly some of the complaints my organisation receive are ignored for the above reasons, and it’s hard to defend them as it would expose my views.

We received one that, I, knowing the contexts knew made sense and linked our actions back to the key wider issues… but everyone else was totally confused. It was far too complex and detailed and angry.

Perhaps we could coordinate and each send emails that tackle one issue each? It’s easy for an organisation to ignore half the issues if you raise all of them at once.

Suggested wording:

I am writing regarding The Lancet Volume 198. The cover features a quote which says, “Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected”.

What is the reason for this wording?

Does it mean human women, or does it include animals?

The people who work at the lancet know all about this issue because the woman who wrote the article is full on TWAW and tweets about it extensively.

Richard horton is a doctor and knows exactly what a woman is

They have zero excuses

@timeisnotaline

There must be some perfect clip from a movie with men sitting around talking about women as holes that should be shared on that Twitter thread.

I started going off sex when I started viewing women as holes. Not because (I think) they are but because it dawned on me - through the media especially - that this is how society in general and a lot of penis and scrotum-havers view women.

Sex, to me, feels like being a hole for a penis-haver, thanks to sex-craved, male-gaze entertainment industry. Just a hole with a body, and that body must make sure to make irritating noises and squirm like so, just to give that penis-haver some satisfaction and boost his ego, making him feel like he's doing the best job in the world.

Nope! You can keep your sacs, thanks!

Regardless of how objections are phrased, it is the volume of objections that will highlight to the Lancet their need to consider and respond to this issue.

Being too angry can also cause it to be dismissed

Best not be too angry, you bodies with vaginas.

@MintyCedric

Well they seem to have got the hang of using the word 'woman' this morning.

Perhaps because they're more afraid of being called racists that they are of being called misogynists?

Yes clearly someone somewhere decided that black bodies with vaginas would be a step too far. Probably too many images available of mass graves and piles of black bodies, some of which have vaginas.

Women should take pains not to appear too angry, in case they seem unattractive and unladylike.

FFS

Going to draw on chinstrapbobblehats excellent email.
@Penistoe I was thinking reading those that I’d explain to management I needed to pee and only used Women’s toilets so I didn’t want my drinks after all. And offer they could check the gender neutral and stand outside if they wanted me to pay for my drinks. Just on principle.
@TheShadoutCrepes is ‘medtwitter’ a thing or just medical people who tweet?

How the Lancet can hold their arrogant heads so high after some of the shit they publish I’ll never know.

This is entirely depressing. I will also email the body-with-a-penis editor.

I came across a dr the other day who referred to a pregnant woman as ‘the gestating parent’. I’ve never heard this before. A body-with-a-vagina dr. Said this. There’s such an industrial farming tone to it. Utterly depressing. To my shame I didn’t tackle her on it. Yet.

Being too angry can also cause it to be dismissed

Tone policing?

I found some more stories about bodies with vaginas for the Lancet to do some peer analysis - here are approx 130 yazidi women www.icmp.int/news/yazidi-women-in-mass-graves/
And probably about 100 women in El Salvador. news.yahoo.com/eight-pits-full-murdered-women-115938588.html
Unsurprisingly, both groups were also victims of sexual violence. You know, when among other things men stick their penises in the vaginas of unwilling women.

@Sonarl

Funny we never hear about the bodies with penises isn't it?

This. ^

It's like the stupid fucking Green Party and their calling WOMEN non-men. Why not call the men 'non-women?' Boils my fucking piss this kind of shit does.

And don't even get me STARTED on actresses being called ACTORS now, and comediennes being called COMEDIANS. FFS.

@42SrauvP YANBU. This is disgusting! I am so sick to death of womens rights and existence being taken away and eroded.