Assigned Female at Birth - AFAB

[ShugarTits]

AIBU to get the actual rage every time I see this written down? Often in reputable sources.

Obviously this has come about due to people differentiating between gender and sex - I understand needing clarity between those two when talking to or questioning people.

but every single bloody time I read it I can only think of the horrific female infanticide statistics. AIBU to think ‘assigned female at birth’ is fucking offensive to women, as so many of us are killed at birth ONLY because we are female. Nobody assigned those infants a female sex, they didn’t just randomly pick half of the babies and murder them.

can’t we agree as a society to call out AFAB and AMAB as being horrific and change it? Happy to hear alternatives. Observed female/male at birth sounds reasonable to me if you need to specify birth sex vs gender.

Whether it’s in direct reference to women, men, or people who believe their gender is different than their sex - I’ve repeatedly explained throughout the thread why the term “assigned sex at birth” is an insult.

When many women and girls suffer death and violence due to their sex, it’s shite and indulgent to pretend that doctors ‘assign’ female/male sex to babies - as if a doctor could assign them out of crimes like fgm and infanticide.

People with different gender identities don’t always like “female” though. Are we not able to recognise that ?

Oh I certainly get that, and recognise it. And empathise. But to be blunt, tough. There's lots of things in life that people don't like but can't change. Sex is one of them.

Not everyone accepts the world is round. But it is.

Agreed. It's regressive. No one is assigned f or m.

So we’re telling trans people to suck it up, we don’t like the terminology they prefer and that they can’t have it.

I get that some women and girls suffer death and violence because of their sex and I recognise it. And empathise. But to be blunt, tough. There's lots of things in life that people don't like but can't change. Sex is one of them.

Tell me how trans people can’t have their needs met by the terms ‘observed sex at birth’ or ‘recorded sex at birth’?

why is AFAB/AMAB the only suitable term?

Well from today children can no longer access puberty blocking drugs from The Tavistock clinic. Maybe some of the madness of the last year's has caused a rethink, maybe children will stop being advised, assisted, affirmed that they are in the wrong body and sence will return.

Sure, but they're trying to be inclusive here.

There's quite the difference between me no likey some wordeses but tough, and some women and girls suffering death and violence because of their sex but tough. Bloody hell.

There's lots of things in life that people don't like but can't change. Sex is one of them.
Yes, we know.
Which is why the 'at birth' part of the phrase is redundant. Tacking it on makes it sound as though it can be changed.

I get that some women and girls suffer death and violence because of their sex and I recognise it. And empathise. But to be blunt, tough. There's lots of things in life that people don't like but can't change. Sex is one of them.

Really. Really?!

Sure, but they're trying to be inclusive here.

By trying to be inclusive you exclude a lot of people. Inclusivity is starting to be embarrassing. Not everyone has to be included in everything.

Like mentioned on another thread, the memes for 'people who have chosen not to be mothers' on Mother's Day. To be inclusive. I am one of them. It's ok not to include me! I'm not a mother.

The terms “sex assignment” and “gender assignment” have been around a long time though, not in conjunction with trans people but just generally. It’s just medical terminology for the process.

I believe “observation” isn’t generally used for that process because you can’t always observe the sex of intersex people.

This passage from a paper on androgen resistance in newborns made it easier for me to get my head around why this medical terminology is used:

“If the appearance of the external genitalia is sufficiently ambiguous to render sex assignment impossible, or the phenotype is not consistent with prenatal genetic tests, then investigations are clearly required. However, the ability to evaluate external genitalia fully may depend on the expertise of the observer and, before presentation to a specialist, the label of ambiguous genitalia has often already been assigned to newborns where the most appropriate sex of rearing was not clear to those present at the child’s birth. The birth prevalence of genital anomies may be as high as 1 in 300 births but the birth prevalence of complex anomalies that may lead to true genital ambiguities on expert examination may be as low as 1 in 5000 births.”

Rubbish. A one or 3 legged child doesn’t change that the human form is two legged. There are variations on everything in the world. There’s a phrase for it- the exception proves the rule. There are two sexes, no one gets to assign them, naturally there are some exceptions and it is not best to manage those by creating a whole new terminology that misrepresents reality.

Also, that ambiguous genitalia label you mention- that was observed. Not pulled out of a box and handed out at random. This language doesn’t even work for your exception case. It used to apply for the exception case when someone went oh well ambiguous so I think… we will call it a boy. Not for the example you give though!!

That passage is about babies born with DSDs @brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

It’s already been observed that the terminology originated from the science around DSDs. I suspect it hasn’t been used elsewhere until recently- the whole reason transactivists are pushing for that to be the routine terminology is because they want to introduce the false impression that there’s some ambiguity regarding which sex group babies are placed in, when of course there is no ambiguity in almost all cases.

I’m sure most midwives would merely be asked what sex the baby was. Nobody would ask which group she assigned it to as the baby’s sex is not assigned, it’s an observation that’s recorded. Thus that language only arises when circumstances dictate, which is when there is ambiguity due to abnormal development of the external genitalia.

And of course it’s offensive because it’s part of an ideology that is pushing the view that sex is not important and we must always prioritize inner feelings over reality. Men who want to invade women’s spaces are at the forefront, along with medics in the US who are raking in the profits of a huge wave of newly created lifelong patients.

It’s a preposterous suggestion and it’s bizarre it has taken such a hold on society. I can’t wait for it to pass.

Sex assignment isn’t medical practice for midwives/paediatricians. It might have been language used for people with ambiguous genitalia in the past but science and terminology has moved on.

If trans people are unhappy with the term “observed sex at birth” - what’s wrong with the term “recorded sex at birth” ?

Nothing at all, but "assigned" sounds like they have been forced into something so they are seeking redress

Woah. Are these two examples really comparable in your mind? Is it equal harm if I shout after someone ‘watch where you’re going grandpa!’ vs if I follow them down an alley, crack their skull open with a brick and take your wallet, leaving them dead? Sounds like you think it is, while those of us in the real world consider one of these a serious crime and the other just rude, with an order of magnitude difference in the impact.

So we’re telling trans people to suck it up, we don’t like the terminology they prefer and that they can’t have it. I get that some women and girls suffer death and violence because of their sex and I recognise it. And empathise. But to be blunt, tough. There's lots of things in life that people don't like but can't change. Sex is one of them.

Trans people who are unhappy about the terminology used to describe their birth sex (bless) are equated with women and girls suffering violence and death because of their birth sex. Okay.

"I get that some women and girls suffer death and violence because of their sex and I recognise it. And empathise. But to be blunt, tough. There's lots of things in life that people don't like but can't change. Sex is one of them."

Sex ISN'T one of them, and how do you have the temerity to say that it's tough that girls and women suffer death and violence? Females should continue to suffer for your kink wish?

Or even just “sex”.

Those with such severe mental health problems that they can’t bear reality, even when it actually matters, need a whole load of psychiatric help. What they don’t need is surgery and people telling them they’re fragile and will be incredibly distressed every time someone mentions reality.

Doctors offering transition years ago made sure their patients had plenty of counselling to ensure they understood that they could not change their sex and that any body modifications were superficial and done in order to make their bodies look a little closer to the sex they would prefer to be. The patient had to understand and accept the limitations of the treatment before it could go ahead.

It was a much more realistic approach and medically necessary. Any so-called treatment that relies heavily on the need for all of society to lie in order to preserve the fragile mental health of a patient is doomed to failure.

But if we twist language to the extent it looses all meaning, in the pursuit of being kind, not offending, we loose the ability to clearly articulate those real problems that affect women. Not those who identify as women, but actual natal women.

"AFAB" implies an element of choice- decision making on behalf of the assignor. That's simply not the case in the overwhelming majority of births. Language shouldn't hide truth.

So its not ‘tough’ for someone to have a word used that they don’t like used to describe their sex at birth

but it is ‘tough’ if a female suffers death and violence

i must be misunderstanding

Read the earlier posts to understand the context of that - be assured I definitely did not mean it literally. It was an amalgamation of quoted text from two prior posts by other people which I found contradicted each other.

Somebody was upset about the word “assigned” because they thought it meant a doctor arbitrarily assigned women to violence and death in societies where that is more common.

Another poster pointed out that for trans people, apparently it’s just “tough” and because they can’t change their circumstances / sex and just have to put up with the challenges they face because of it.

I considered that if it’s “tough” for trans people to be subject to prejudice and non-inclusive language due to unchangeable circumstances related to sex/gender - then the same logic should apply to women (or anyone of any sex).