Please help me reply to this defence of "Menstruators"

[colouringinagain]

Hi. I'm part of a FB group for women suffering with PMDD. I commented on a recent post where "Menstruators" was used. I suggested with a wink, that they meant Women.

This was the reply:
Nope... We had lots of feedback very early on that trans men and non binary sufferers need to be included... It's menstruators or those who menstruate for now. If you can think of something better so let us know. And if not... Then please feel free to step forward and take all the slack we get 😉

I am massively disappointed that this group has fallen for the trans line. Especially as it's one supporting Women with an ultimately Female health problem.

Any suggestions please - I am too

Men don't get chest cancer. Like women, they ALSO get breast cancer.

'Chest'feeding is another irrationality, because men have breast tissue, too, and men deposit fat around it, too (though in response to over-eating, rather than to hormonal changes), and men can lactate (in response to drugs), and men can develop breast cancer.

So, if a female wishes to call herself a man, yet gives birth and lactates to feed her infant, she can still call it breastfeeding without offending her 'manliness'.

All I'm saying is that to say that no biological woman has an issue with acknowledging that only periods happen to women doesn't account for people who might have an issue with it, MH-related or otherwise.

Point out where we tiptoe around the feelings of other people with mental health conditions and affirm their distorted or false beliefs.

Some trans men will still have periods, it’s offensive to them refer to them as women.

If a person has periods then it's a bit of a give-away: that person is a woman.

I'll pick what ever battles I want. And I'm not being called a menstruator as I find it offensive.

This ^^

But I don't like being called a menstruator. It offends me. Why do TIF's feelings get to play top trumps?

And this.

Is anyone is honestly offended by being called a mensturator rather than a woman? Really???

Yes.

Do people go on sites for say men with prostate cancer and tell them they can't call themselves men but should be called prostate owners? I'm guessing no. Why are women told to constantly perform mental and linguistic gymnastics to appease a minuscule amount of people with a particular mental disorder?

Many years ago, when I was involved with medical research, we stopped referring to 'diabetics' and said 'people with diabetes' because it was felt the term diabetics was reducing people to being a disease.

The same applies here. It is reducing women to a function.

When women trans to being trans men they should accept that there may be a downside to nominally rejecting their biology.

What is it about trans people wanting to eat their cake and have it?

You made a choice. Live with the consequences.

I am completely brassed off with the way 99% of the population are expected to kowtow to 1%.

When women trans to being trans men they should accept that there may be a downside to nominally rejecting their biology.

I think they generally do. Its other people who feel the need to try and change things on transmens behalf. I cannot see any transman being unaware that they are female. Yes, they may not want to be female, but its what they are. With all of the downsides that come with that. And in a group for people to support each other in female only illnesses..its absolutely bonkers to try and pretend that people with these female only issues are not actually female.

Its just so silly. Like the whole 'chestfeeding' bollocks. Transmen are also aware that if they feed a baby with their breasts, they are breastfeeding. Yet, apparently the word breastfeeding is 'triggering' rather than the act of actually breastfeeding? I don't get it. But from what I have seen, it seems to be others taking offense on behalf of transmen, rather than transmen actually demanding that the language of the world changes to accommodate their feelings.

Many years ago, when I was involved with medical research, we stopped referring to 'diabetics' and said 'people with diabetes' because it was felt the term diabetics was reducing people to being a disease.

Same as we dont say "downs baby". Its a child who has downs syndrome.

Most if this bollocks does not come from ACTUAL transmen. Not adult ones anyway

The only significant difference between men and women is their biology.

And female biology means they have the potential to conceive, gestate and breastfeed.

The collective term for such a person is woman.

If you're fine it with the individual functions, and being named by them, but not with the collective term, it means your definition of the collective term is skewed. Unsurprisingly, as the ideology defines woman in terms of stereotypes.

Accommodating this is accepting that definition.

So yes, it's offensive.

Fine, it's a mental health issue. But they're still a biological woman who has an issue with being described as a woman.

I accept your point that among women with PMDD, a very small number of them might feel that they are men and they may be unhappy about the word woman. Thinking about it, I was wrong - it's not that I don't believe any biological women would be unhappy about using the word woman - I believe that it is more important to use the correct terminology.

Sometimes I don't mind if people are offended or upset. I am sure that many creationists are upset by the concept of evolution, but I would rather that they were upset than that schools pretended that creationism was a valid scientific theory.

If it's a mental health issue then it's questionable whether endorsing an incorrect belief is helpful.

If somebody honestly believes that they have a gender identity that is separate to their physical body, I think they are wrong. This wouldn't matter if the acceptance of this theory - the idea that there is such a thing as a male or female identity wasn't so harmful. Insisting that women are somehow intrinsically different to men in a way that goes beyond their bodies, and failing to acknowledge and make room for people with female biology are essentially the two things that have oppressed women for so many centuries, if not millennia.

I watched the youtube video you posted, and agree that many people feel that the way they look in the mirror doesn't match how they feel inside, but if the issue is that you feel that a woman can't have short hair or wear a tuxedo or that having short hair or wearing a tuxedo makes you a man, I strongly feel that the problem is not your sex but society's narrow view of how women and men should look and behave.

I want to live in a society where we can use words clearly, and where we don't believe there is a wrong way for a man or woman to feel, behave or look.

It's why we don't call people schizophrenics, manic depressives, blacks, gays, etc etc

Hang on - transmen aren't biological women? What are they then?

Yes they are women, but lets be honest - the people who tend to be loudly offended are trans women.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoidant_personality_disorder
Avoidant personality disorder.

Please can you argue that this type of language abuse is not a symptom.

I'd be interested to hear an argument to the contrary.

but lets be honest - the people who tend to be loudly offended are trans women.

This is it. Women, as a cohort, simply don't have the power to change language. Otherwise we would have outlawed the words hysterical, bitch, feminazi, etc.

The reason why this is gaining traction is because men who identify as women want to separate the word woman from biological function.

So the word woman becomes a social category. That they can inhabit.

Then change the goalposts and access everything to do with women based on women's biology.

It's an ideological classic bait and switch.

There is a growing, vocal movement on social media saying that identity first language is important and should be the default. As it's being championed a lot in the autism community, people are indeed saying autist or autistic rather than person with autism. Person first language is considered ableist.

I have wondered about cross over with TRA and trans ideology for a while now.

In the autism community it seems to be more about 'owning' the label and not being ashamed of it, but as someone with autism myself I wouldn't expect everyone else to call themselves 'non-autistic' or insist that all discos were silent when I'm likely the only one there who has a problem with it.

Thanks oohmavis are you feeling brave enough to comment?

I completely agree with everyone who finds it dehumanising. And the gaslighting aspect - yes! I couldn't quite work out why this affected me so much last night but it is a combination of both

And yes yes yes to women having to such up being offended even if their one unique noun "women" is being hijacked!

Still

If a man went to the doctor and was upset that he was infertile because he didn't have a womb, he would join the non-menstruating man outside.

Snorted tea out of my nose reading this. Was worth it.