Had a reply from CRUK re "cervix havers"

[ShotsFired]

(Longstanding donor, I emailed them following this article: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/smear-test-campaign-drops-the-word-woman-to-avoid-transgender-offence-263mj7f6s?shareToken=84b68d81ce844a6f55b8e64b9a36757b)

The meat of their reply as follows.

================
We want to make it clear that this is not about disengaging women from the screening programme, or eradicating the word women. It’s our duty to make sure that everyone who is eligible for this screening programme knows about it. Research shows that cervical screening prevents at least 2,000 cervical cancer deaths each year in the UK so it is vital that we raise awareness that Cervical cancer develops in anyone who has a cervix.

In addition to this, screening might not be relevant for all women such as those who have had a full hysterectomy. We phrased our information on cervical screening to reflect this. Some women identify as men but still have a cervix, so we wanted to make it clear that they would still need to be aware of the screening programme.

We do always welcome feedback and so I do thank you for getting in touch. We definitely want to ensure that our messaging is as accessible as possible for lots of different audiences and do not want to discourage anyone who has cervix from the screening programme. We will make sure that’s considered for future communications.

Based on this I have now decided to withdraw my donation from CRUK and support a charity that focuses specifically on female gynae cancers instead.

Women cannot get prostate cancer.

They can get a very rare form of cancer that affects the Skene’s gland.

The Skene’s gland is not a prostate.

Apologies for the typo in my previous post:

A fertile female will be able to release eggs from her ovaries and have them fertilised by the male sperm.
A fertile male will have sperm that are capable of impregnating said egg.

"If you were identified as male at birth and you now identify as a woman then how are you a trans woman if you were already female?"

Think it through, think it through...

"If you were identified as male at birth and you now identify as a woman then how are you a trans woman if you were already female?"

Think it through, think it through...

Go on wakame, think it through for me. I am tired.

"The Skene’s gland is not a prostate."

This article seems to disagree with you:

www.healthline.com/health/women-health/female-prostate-cancer

The penis is also the same organ as a clitoris (just thought I'd throw that one in there for you).

Who knew that estrogen would grow breasts!

Alan Turing?

I really don't think it matters how individual contributors to this thread have decided to identify. It's just a distraction from the topic at hand - public health information campaigns that cater to people who don't need them and not to people who do - and a massive time waster.

I don't give a toss how people identify, on this thread or otherwise. I give a toss that cervical smear take up rates are awful and we need clear language that is not exclusionary of the very people who need the campaign.

To that end, CRUK and its desperate need of a good kick up the backside, and alternative charities who do not need a good kick up the backside because they haven't forgotten about the most needy of their service users, should be the focus of this thread.

There is no point aiming public health campaigns at woketopians who are hyper aware of services and resources they can access and are already monopolising more than their fair share.

Couldnt agree more. There are an awful lot of very vulnerable women (and men) out there with low literacy levels, low scientific literacy etc or language issues.

Even people with tertiary educations score fairly dismally on things like bodily awareness. It’s crucial that the messages that bodies like CRUK put out are clear, as simple as they can be and meet plain English standards. It’s too important not to.

It saddens me. I’ve worked with CRUK a lot and they were generally good eggs. I think a lot must have changed in the last 5 years or so. They really need to fix this, because if their public trust level drops, that’s a big deal. Not just for their fundraising, but in terms of public engagement with the messages they put out.

"I really don't think it matters how individual contributors to this thread have decided to identify. "

Gender identity is not a "decision", it's and observation.

They have to put women on otherwise how the heck are we who don’t know this stuff meant to work it out.
Like who is the everyone
What the feck are they up to

That nature opinion piece, which you keep putting here despite several scientists over several threads telling you why it’s meaningless

Is not a research paper
Does not summarise a coherent body of research
Is not reflective of the scientific consensus
Is someone’s opinion. Like the sidebar on the daily mail, but for journals. Journals do that, for exactly the same reason the daily mail does - it’s an attention grabber.

If all you can find to back up your opinion is a side bar op-ed, then it may be time to consider that the opinion is incorrect?

This thread is not about how FWR members identify. Not everything is about that.

It is about informing hard-to-reach women of potentially life-saving health screening and an idiotic major charity that is staffed by people who prioritise virtue-signalling over reaching those women.

Taking up thread space wombling on and on and Ariston about identification is emblematic of not giving a shit about those women.

U just bang on about u all the time wake

Most important that women and girls know who the everyone is.

Whoops crossed

Even people with tertiary educations score fairly dismally on things like bodily awareness. It’s crucial that the messages that bodies like CRUK put out are clear, as simple as they can be and meet plain English standards. It’s too important not to.

Exactly. And I would question the motives of anyone who wants to distract from this very important topic.

Gender identity is not a "decision", it's and observation.

How can it be observed? If it’s an observation it’s objective and measurable. What measures are used? Who standardises then?

Can one look at a newborn and observe its gender identity?

If I’m dug up by archaeologists in a few hundred years time will they be able to discern my ‘gender identity’? Or just my sex?

Wakame in most births sex is determined. There might well be a problem, such as undescended testicles, my son was born with this. He's fine now.

Sometimes there is intersex, which is totally different from transgender. Please do not conflate the two. Wakame

I don’t even know what tertiary education is tbh

But I do know that this sort of stuff has to be clear when I go to read it

Can you tell if a person is trans from a scan?

Asking for a friend?

when you muddy a public health message you do damage.

This will do damage. That’s the bottom line. Women’s health is secondary to woke ideology. That, quite frankly, is not OK.

Apparently you identify with your inner core to be trans and it's psychological.

The logical consequence of this is that one day inner cores in humans will be able to identify tumours.

Am I right?

So can you see an inner core on an ultrasound?

I don’t even know what tertiary education is tbh

University level education (primary = junior school; secondary = high school; tertiary = post 18).

Public health campaigns need to be accessible and clear to people with even primary levels of reading ability (whether that be functional illiteracy or poor ESL).

Kettle scan of what? Brain no. Surgically constructed facsimiles of sexual organ yes.