The positive birth company don't believe that pregnancy and birth should be woman centered.

[JustcameoutGC]

Just thought you might like to know, in case you are deciding on where to go for education and support during your pregnancy

Sigh… including people that identify as trans and non binary is not erasing women. They are not refusing to use the word women, despite what you might read in the daily Mail.

An explanation from The PBC

@Scirocco

I think they're just trying to be inclusive. The wording is a bit clumsy but I don't think there's any malice to it. Being supportive of minorities and marginalised groups doesn't have to mean diminishing or excluding others.

True. It’s a shame people don’t read beyond headlines.

@ApplePie86

I started following them on Instagram after hearing how amazing they were. I had to unfollow them after seeing being all they advertise is minority people and their stories. Can't remember seeing a straight couple at all. All seemed to be very unique circumstances. Nothing against these people at all but given 90-95% of clients will surely be your average straight couple I found I couldn't really relate to any of their content.

What does “advertising minority people” even mean

The fact you unfollowed them for using non heterosexual couples is just plain bigotry. You know lots of lesbian parents use this forum don’t you? There is space for everyone.

Surely "birthing people" are all women by definition? Anyone giving birth whilst maintaining that they're not actually a woman would get the hairy eyeball from me. It's not something anyone who feels like a man would even contemplate, surely?

Christ. Don't step inside that house of mirrors.

Dear me

I'd probably ask them all what was the sex of the person who birthed them and ask them how babies are made.
I mean it's bloomin obvious to anyone with half a brain only women can give birth (no matter how they may try to present themselves).

What a load of shite. What the hell does "expand into the brilliance of pregnancy" mean?

It would be really interesting to see what their motivation is behind all this. They cannot be selling more packs or getting that much more sponsorship from it

It seems an odd choice of group to stand behind given that it’s actually a pretty poor choice commercially

@Mousetown, it's very depressing to read so many people on this forum who don't want to accept that there is a range of human experience.

I would like to believe that if they ever met a trans man who was going through pregnancy, they might come to the conclusion that that person was deserving of decent medical care that made them feel included and seen.

Heaven knows as women, we have enough experience of being ignored and told we should just fit in with a straight, white, male default.

I get that there's a fear of female erasure, and yeah, I've seen some pretty stupid positions taken, but it serves that default white male status quo very nicely if historically marginalised groups pick fights with each other vs challenging that default.

Anyway, rant over.

Some people might, some people might not. For some individuals or couples, the only accessible way to have a child might be for an individual who identifies as male or non-binary or another gender identity, to become pregnant and carry the child. Just because others may not understand their experiences doesn't mean they should be excluded.

Language matters, and it has been shown to be really important when dealing with healthcare issues. Using inclusive language when referring to cervical screening, for example, has improved uptake among people who might otherwise have felt excluded.

If adjusting language to include more people (eg. adding in phrases such as "and birthing people", saying "partner" instead of "husband", having written information available in different languages, having access to translators) can help encourage people to access support to have a healthy pregnancy, that means it can help improve outcomes for parents and babies. That seems like a good goal to work towards.

person was deserving of decent medical care that made them feel included and seen.
They would get the same standard of care as any other female on the maternity ward.

Being included and seen? Their female body is all that's actually relevant in a childbirth situation, they'll need to get their validation somewhere other than a bloody maternity hospital, instead of looking for a celebratory man gives birth! scenario.
Nuts.

The first paragraph of my post was addressing why might a person identifying as other than female want to give birth.

But it’s absolutely fine to have non-inclusive language. We don’t need to include every group ever when the scenario doesn’t actually apply to them.

I might be more on board with this if the same 'inclusive' language was being used for men's health/products etc. It's not. On a previous thread where a poster was insistent that it was, the single example we were collectively able to find was Prostate Cancer UK who list people who have a prostate but then use the word men throughout the rest of their website.

Why is it only language relating to women which is being changed?

@Mousetown

Personally my problem with the screenshot the OP has shared is the statement that ‘birth is not a woman-centred event’. I know what they’re trying to say. They’re trying to say that birth is not an experience that’s exclusive to women because non-binary people and trans men can experience it too. But that’s not what the statement ‘birth is not a woman-centred event’ means, and people who are in the maternity ‘industry’, for want of a better word, should realise that.

Birth is and must be a woman-centred (or birthing person-centred, if you prefer) event. That means that the needs and rights of the woman or birthing person are prioritised at all times. All over the world, including in this country, women receive treatment that is not woman-centred. The statement ‘all that matters is a healthy baby’ is a good example of failing to centre the woman or birthing person. Leaving women or birthing people to suffer in silence for years from incontinence and birth injuries is another. Denying women or birthing people Caesarean sections and forcing them through vaginal birth at any cost with devastating consequences in order to keep the hospital’s rate of Caesarean sections low (see East Kent, Shrewsbury and Morecambe maternity scandals) is another.

I know it might seem like I’m being pendantic, but that’s why I find the statement ‘birth is not woman-centred’ very problematic. Birth desperately needs to be woman-centred. Women and birthing people suffer if it’s not.

@velvethaze

I can't believe what I am reading. The world is going fucking mad. Absolutely fucking mad.

I agree. It's Clown World.

We don’t need to include every group ever when the scenario doesn’t actually apply to them.

But... it does apply to them? Isn't that the point?

@Waitwhat23 - this is a really fair point. V depressingly unsurprising that it's the "default male" that's the hardest to challenge. It should be both!

Personally my problem with the screenshot the OP has shared is the statement that ‘birth is not a woman-centred event’. I know what they’re trying to say. They’re trying to say that birth is not an experience that’s exclusive to women because non-binary people and trans men can experience it too. But that’s not what the statement ‘birth is not a woman-centred event’ means, and people who are in the maternity ‘industry’, for want of a better word, should realise that.

Agree with this post too!

Birth is absolutely a woman centred event, it is the woman centred event. If the PBC can't express what they want to express without being clumsy and having to post clarifications, then maybe they should stop preaching to the rest of us about our use of language.

And this isn't really anything to do with the OP but companies like this aren't in it for the good of women anyway. Courses like the PBC's really set women up for an unrealistic expectation of childbirth. So many people I know have ended up with PND because they genuinely believed it would all go smoothly through the power of positive thinking, and it didn't.

How can it be considered “hateful” if I believe women give birth? Am I so out of touch? Should a midwife - defined as being “with woman” now refer to themselves as midperson?

Notice the language.

Everything is always about “not centering” women. That’s what it’s about. They don’t want women to be the focus even when it’s something only women are experiencing.

Only women give birth period. No matter what someone calls themselves. Women give birth. Your identity and how you dress isn’t going to stop you from being a woman. If you’re pregnant and giving birth it’s obvious what you are.

What does all this virtue signaling actually do? Is it helping anyone? Women are still dying in childbirth but words and pandering are the priority?