Women and anyone with a cervix

[Zillyzillyzillymouse]

Women and anyone with a cervix is written in my weekly magazine. What absolute rubbish is this? It gives me the rage.

Was it present at birth when you were observed to be female?
Or do you not have a cervix because you were observed to be male at birth?

And?

Are people so lacking in their understanding of their logic that they think that 'only women can have a cervix' also means 'all women have a cervix'?

Wilfully obtuse in order to produce what they believe to be the trump card.
"I've only got one leg so clearly humans aren't a bipedal species!"

Seen it, sighed at it, rinse and repeat.

Are you so lacking in understanding that saying women need cervical screening is ridiculous as not all women have a cervix so don't need the screening. Women with a cervix need screening, is that hard to understand?

If people want to get in a froth maybe accept that their view isn't the only one.

As you well understand, I'm objecting to the terminology 'people with cervixes'

Stating facts is so hard to accept isn't it. I'm a woman, I don't have a cervix, I don't need cervical screening.

“Grow up” and pretend to believe bullshit? That’s not growing up, it’s giving in.

Who are biological women

Women with a cervix or people with a cervix both cover the fact, women doesn't.

As I said upthread, either you value accurate language or you don't. People with a cerc

Whoops sorry

People with a cervix indicates that those who aren't women can have a cervix, which is nonsense

Deliberate rage baiting.

Argument for both - are you biologically female? Born as a female. Had your cervix removed at some stage. You remain a female.

Or

If you believe you are a woman, live as a woman - but were born with a penis. You are biologically a man. And therefore don’t need a cervical screen.

I might be wrong but I’ll assume you’re the former - this is about protecting WOMENS spaces and not erasing women from humanity. Why would you argue semantics when the fundamentals are - men and women are different.

You know, I’m all for protecting women’s spaces (as well as making sure everyone has spaces to use that are safe for them) but I don’t buy the “thin end of the wedge” arguments about things like this.

Using language that makes everyone who needs to be feel included is no bad thing in my view. Even if technically the phrase could be more pin point accurate, it’s good if it means trans men realise “ok this includes me, I will seek this healthcare” - which could be lifesaving in some circumstances (say if it was talking about a smear test).

Lots of people might genuinely think “ah well I’m not a woman so that doesn’t mean me”.

If transitioning means women believe they no longer need PAP tests, or men believe they no longer need prostate exams, then transitioning is not benign or neutral.

A few women are born with a rare disorder that means they have no cervix. Some women need life-saving surgery that removes the cervix. They are all still women.
No man has a cervix. So ‘people with a cervix’ are all women, even if they choose to call themselves something else.

The only kind of people who have a cervix are women. That doesn't mean that all women have a cervix.

If you know you don't have one then presumably you know you don't need a cervical smear.

The use of the words people with a cervix is pandering to an ideology that most don't believe in. The use of people with a cervix is problematic for people who do not have English as a first language and people with learning difficulties.

Lots of people might genuinely think “ah well I’m not a woman so that doesn’t mean me”.

Really?

It is frightening to think that such vulnerable people have been pandered to and led to believe that they are no longer women. The only want to be a trans man is by being a woman and it's impossible to change sex.

What's your point?

I don't find a woman without a cervix "hard to accept" in the slightest.
Women have them removed on a fairly regular basis and some congenital disorders mean that they aren't formed "correctly" within females.

Outliers don't alter the fact that the female sex class is the only sex class capable of being born with a cervix.

Unless you're trying to tell me that males can be females because some women dont have a cervix?

Or is the lack of cervix chat because you are male?

Only women can have a cervix so it's drivel.

I wish people would stop describing this sort of language as ‘inclusive’. It often isn’t inclusive. The worst is when an essential women’s service is just advertised to ‘anyone with a cervix’, as I have seen.

This is non-inclusive to people with little knowledge of anatomy, or poor reading skills, or a limited grasp of English, or learning difficulties.

OP’s example isn’t too bad, as it says ‘women and anyone with a cervix’ . Still not good, as it spreads misinformation. It may also deter people who understand ‘women’ but not the rest, or who are put off by thinking this is a mixed-sex service.

Men do not have a woman's cervix.

When will this nonsense stop?

The language excludes them.

It is inclusive to those people as it also says “women”.

The number of transgender women (or men), the overall numbers are minuscule. I just dont understand the need to be so inclusive.

Exactly, it literally says "women".