I am not a "person who menstruates"

[auserna]

AIBU to think that terms such as "birthing person", "partner with eggs", "womb-carrier", "cervix haver", "people who menstruate", "chest-feeder" are not only insulting to women but downright hurtful to those who have any gynaecological and/or fertility issues, including DSDs?

Those terms may be considered inclusive to/by people whose gender identity doesn't match their sex (c.0.5% in the UK) but are exclusive to those with DSDs or gynaecological issues (c.12% in the UK).

NB My figures are rough, partly because the statistics relating to people with DSDs are very contentious and because "gynaecological issues" is a broad term, but they are clearly significantly higher for the latter group.

It depends on context. I'm post-hysterectomy so I don't menstruate or have a cervix. If the discussion is specific to those things, e.g. talking about smear tests, it's not relevant to me. If it's supposed to be some kind of 'tactful' way of referring to biological women as a whole, without using the word 'women' then it's a huge fail.

I just googled 'chest feeding' and the only NHS reference I can find is advice for trans people. Specifically, people who have had their breast tissue removed but may still be able to feed a baby. Which gives advice about what might be possible, or what complications there may be depending on the surgery they had. The advice wouldn't be relevant to women who hadn't had breast tissue removed, so it would be a bit strange to include it all under breastfeeding.
And theres advice about using both terms, so using the term in addition to breastfeeding, not instead of.

I have no idea why that undermines your identity as a woman OP.

Agreed. I have a good friend who found out as a teen that she had an intersex condition - her parents knew and hid this from her, it was back in the days that parents were just told to 'choose' if a baby was ambiguous at birth, and they got it very, very wrong, though that only became obvious at puberty. She is (and always has been in her mind) female but unable to carry a child, and finds this sort of thing pretty upsetting. Because her parents registered her as a boy she actually had to get a GRC, which according to many on Mumsnet, means she should use mens facilities.

That's interesting. I always think it sounds so odd but I won't now I understand so thank you.

Any poster or leaflet or other messaging about health has to be understood by the entire target group, which will include people who are barely literate and know next to nothing about how their bodies work. Cervix is a technical word. A significant percentage of women won't know they have one. The eyecatching message needs to be really simple. Something like 'The NHS provides free screening to all women aged 25 to 64 every five years to check for early signs of cervical cancer. Ask for details here.'

You forgot the huge impact of maternity leave or going part time on pension. I took a year with each child I wish I had fully understood the impact on my pension. Ex DH no impact on his pension.

I was volunteering at a new place today I honestly there were 20 people there and practically everyone has a pronoun badge and it made it want to scream - men clearly men wanting to be called her or she. Where is my right to have gender critical views / apparently not - everyone gets to be called whatever they want.

Can you share the video op?

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g you might be reassured to know the NHS provide material in different formats including pictorial for those with learning disabilities or who aren't able to read. They're not being discriminated against by the NHS naming body parts.

To be fair, there are many extremely intelligent and well-informed women on the Feminism board, and I think they would tend to have the sense to understand that this is an entirely separate case.

I'm afraid I just came across it during some Sunday afternoon doom-scrolling and wouldn't know where to find it now. If I see it again I'll post it.

My adult daughter has learning disabilities and really struggles with reading. This would exclude her as she doesn't know she has a cervix. She knows she is a woman and can read that word.

It is so annoying when women with literacy problems are excluded including those whom English is not their first language. Outcomes for adults with learning disabilities are rarely considered.

Of course men can’t become women imo. If that makes me a ‘bigot’ then so be it

I've mentioned her on a thread previously around the time of the European ruling, quite a few GC women said that it was sad for her but that her rights didn't trump the right of women to have single sex spaces. No sympathy and certainly no suggestion that there should be any exemptions for anyone with a GRC.

But why not say "woman who menstruates" or "mother who gave birth" then? The people who do these things are not subsets of "people" in general, they are subsets of the specific half of people who are female, aka "women".

If the only reason to say "person who menstruates" were truly to be more precise because not all women menstruate, it seems very odd to drop "women" altogether in favour of the less accurate, less specific word "person".

And for that reason, I think we can pretty clearly see that the aim of such language is not to be sensitive to the women (female people) who do not menstruate, but to disconnect the word woman from any physical meaning, making womanhood, and with that the rights and protections and even history and language that previously applied to the female half of humanity, entirely a matter of mental factors and alignment.

I hate the way when trying to argue for this trans/women excluding language, they fail to acknowledge that it's doesn't cover the millions of women who do not menstruate. It implies almost that women who don't must be men.

Partner with eggs 🤢 WTF

The NHS have easy read versions and picture based for those who need it

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cervical-screening-easy-read-guide

I agree on the body parts thing but as a 'person who no longer menstruates' I dont get offended at being excluded from, say, an advert for period products, why would I.

Yes I can be offended on behalf of the younger female generation but I feel no more excluded as an older non menstruating woman than I would if I saw an advert for a car and I didn't drive.

@FlirtsWithRhinos What's wrong with saying that a service for cervical screening is for anyone who has one? I don't understand why that's an attack on womanhood. If anything, if rather not think about my womanhood as being limited to my reproductive organs, that starts to feel a bit handmaids tale to me.

I feel that about the cervix. So often someone is criticising trans women and say something on the lines of if you haven't got a cervix you're not a woman. Well I haven't and I am.

What does boil my piss is when a transwoman who did the hormone-moob-secretion thing was lauded for BREAST feeding when plain old regular women get told they are CHEST feeding, cos to tell the TW he is CHEST feeding would be invalidating (cos its true)

Yes. I've had that as well, poor you it must be awful to not feel like a real woman anymore. I honestly never felt my being a woman depended on me having a cervix. It didn't feature much in my daily life.

Transwomen are men and men commit the majority of sexual offences (and violent crimes) This does not change, even when men identify as women.

I don't understand what you mean about "sensationalist stories on social media" and "gutter press" because we have seen that the media often hide the biological sex of offenders and have referred to transwomen without the trans prefix. This is misleading as the general public may be confused; they might think a "transwoman" is a woman identifying as a man; which is exactly why language should be clear and unambiguous.

As for the terms 'chest feeding' 'cervix-havers', 'menstruators' etc etc- these terms have been used in NHS literature. What is most concerning is that this does not help women whose first language isn't English, or have learning difficulties or simply do not understand biological terms. Therefore, inclusive language is potentially excluding a number of women. I have worked in Womens health and have experienced women being unfamilar with their biology.

Interestingly, you do not see posters, information leaflets about mens' health aimed at 'prostate-havers'. I wonder why that is?

To be concerned about this does not mean you are reading in the wrong place, or 'hanging around' in the wrong places- it is showing concern for women. I cannot see why that is a bad thing.

@Birdsongisangry - a woman having had a hysterectomy may well be recommended to have a smear, depending on the type of surgery that se has had. Her gynaecologist would advise accordingly.The menopausal woman knows that period advice may not be needed- although her cycle may be erratic pre menopausal before stopping completely, so may need advice and support.
A woman isn't just someone who ' makes babies' - the definition is the sex that produces large gametes, whether or not they've been fertilised.

Women are defined by biology and it should never be offensive to say so