People with vaginas

[Thesepreciousthings]

Very confusing article from Everyday Feminism. Left over on my rarely visited Facebook feed from my flirtation with liberal feminism during my uni days this ‘feminist’ blog never fails to boggle my mind with it’s inclusion of men in what could be helpful discussions about female sexuality.

Referring to ‘people with vaginas’ and repeated use of ‘ciswomen’ to describe ahem, actual women I am left totally bewildered as to why a blog focusing on women’s issues somehow manages to alienate women. Is this what the third wave has come to?

everydayfeminism.com/2012/11/top-5-questions-about-the-female-orgasm-answered/

Woman's Hour just had an NHS gynecologist, Dr Anita Mitra, on to talk about vaginas and vulvas. Throughout the interview, she talked of "people with vaginas" and "people with vulvas" (I believe she's on SM as gynaegeek, "No nonsense information on 'down-there' healthcare"). The WH interviewer (Jane) said "women and girls" and neither picked the other up on their language. So if you didn't know, you wouldn't catch that little linguistic nuance.

I am struggling to understand why ‘people with vaginas’ is considered more acceptable than ‘women’. How is it inclusive to refer to ‘people with vaginas’ when men don’t have vaginas? Is it just the use of the word ‘women’ they object to?

Incidentally, a midwife kept referring to me as a ‘pregnant person’ last week. DP found it quite entertaining.

Everyday feminism blocked me on twitter for saying I hoped my daughters grew up knowing they had a right to set their own boundaries. I shit you not.

pregnant person Fuck off. Same school of thought as ‘we’re pregnant’ makes my bloody teeth itch.

'People with vaginas' sounds like something from Life of Brian.

'People called Romanes they go the house'

Transmen have vaginas and can get pregnant and give birth.

And of course because transmen are men, they can't be referred to as women.

That's why they are called 'people' instead.

@repeal shocking. And it’s all about individual agency? I’m guessing only if that agency means relaxing sexual boundaries for the benefit of blokes.

Pregnant person put me on edge. If I hadn’t been sobbing I’d have called her out on it. Surely a midwife knows that only women can gestate a baby? Given levels of biological denial these days I’m not so sure.

I have a friend whonover last 6mths has changed to this and has issues with the NHS adverts about lady garden etc.

Incidentally, a midwife kept referring to me as a ‘pregnant person’ last week. DP found it quite entertaining.

Pregnant person put me on edge. If I hadn’t been sobbing I’d have called her out on it. Surely a midwife knows that only women can gestate a baby? Given levels of biological denial these days I’m not so sure.

It's not too late to complain or ask to be assigned to a MW who knows basic biology appreciates the essential womanliness of pregnancy and childbirth.

"Pregnant person" would drive me insane, especially coming from an HCP in a one to one consultation.

I think I might respond to "pregnant person" by saying that I don't identify as a "person", but as a "mammal", (or perhaps as a "haemoglobin based life-form". I consider "person" too prescriptive).

My sister insisted on identifying as a life-form recently at a staff development session at her school, when she was asked to tell the group her gender and pronouns...

NHS gynecologist, Dr Anita Mitra, on to talk about vaginas and vulvas. Throughout the interview, she talked of "people with vaginas" and "people with vulvas"

Urgh. Just such dehumanizing and awful language. Can we also be clear that the word gyneacology itself refers to females. It wouldn't surprise me if eventually the TRAs want try to change that, too...

The other point I just thought about is that using "people with a vagina" when talking specifically about the female reproductive system can be construed as still being trans-exclusive, in a way. "Neovaginas" and "neovulvas," aka surgical alterations of male genitalia to look like female genitalia, will NOT have any of the same medical considerations as actual vaginas and vulvas. If a natal male with a neovagina has a problem with the neovagina, they need to go back to the gender clinic/surgeon who operated on them. It's absolutely nothing to do with gyneacology. No matter how a male identifies or whether they've had a genital operation, they will not have a female reproductive system.

So in trying to engage with these idiotic linguistic contortions to be "inclusive," you risk: confusing your audience, insulting women/girls, systematically excluding any women who aren't familiar with specific terminology for female genitalia, and forgetting to explain that surgically altered male genitalia is never going to be the same as female genitalia, so gyneacological health advice does not apply to some (male) "people with a (neo)vagina"....

We desperately need to retain language that accurately and specifically describes the reality of sex in healthcare. Anything else is unnecessary obfuscation, really cumbersome, and potentially dangerous.

I believe (though I'm happy to be corrected on this) that it's considered good practice to mirror the patient's language. There was a story today about the NHS moving towards "pee, poo, and sick" (in information leaflets and webpages) because those are the terms that patients use and search for. So you are well within your rights to ask your midwife to refer to you as a woman. She might be relieved to do so.

heresyisthenewblack I wish MumsNet had an upvote function. Yes to clarity in language.

What about 'women and girls, and people with a vagina who might identify otherwise'?

Everyday feminism are irrelevant and frankly, stupid.

I pretend EF don’t exist and I suggest other women block them instead of the other way round. They’re pathetic.

It's seems general only female biology is referred to in neutral terms.

The nhs website states The prostate is a small gland in the pelvis, found only in men.. Men's health seems under no pressure to stop mentioning sex.

I think women's health organisation have been targeted by tra to give information in sex neutral language. I don't know if it's male or female transpeople who have targeted these organisations, or who it benefits.

I thought it was supposed to be us who are genitally obsessed. Who wants to be referred to by their fucking private parts ffs. If my nan was still alive she’d be horrified.

I wish we could simply be referred to women or girls, but actually the term people with vaginas does handily not encompass those people with penises whom I may not wish to discover in a changing room or public toilet that I am using. So if the powers that be want to change public loos, changing rooms, sports competitions to be for either people with vaginas or people with penises I wouldn’t mind too much.

What about women and girls, and people with a vagina who might identify otherwise?

Yeah I'd get on with that.

Women, girls and other people with a vagina.

Or just being fucking straight forward "females".

Every transman knows they are included in the category of biological female whether they like it or not. Saves a million needless extra words and pussy footing about for people who are talking.

Anyway OP "Everyday feminism" is a pile of wank. Just so you know.

Everyday feminism is utter bollocks. And I use that word 'bollocks' for a reason.

I rarely go on Facebook so don’t often see Everyday Feminism however I was pretty mortified when on IWD one of their biggest posts was a celebration of people who identify as women, ie men. Don’t often read their dirge but on the occasion that I have it just feels like linguistic gymnastics. I’ll delete/block when I next see one of their fairly hideous posts.

WRT pregnant person (sorry, don’t know how to quote and am on mobile) I was incensed. It seemed totally bizarre to disregard my biological status as a woman. Thankfully it is highly unlikely that I will see her again - on daily monitoring due to a very high risk and stressful stage of pregnancy.

So if the powers that be want to change public loos, changing rooms, sports competitions to be for either people with vaginas or people with penises I wouldn’t mind too much.

I've always said that the way to solve the loo problem is to put up signs: Penis and No Penis. Simple.

I'm a writer of fiction and I write about women and men. They haven't come after authors yet, forcing us to use different nouns and pronouns throughout our books. Not Yet.

I wonder, when that happens, they'll insist that all books of the past that use non-inclusive language are all transphobic and need to be banned.

I'm only half joking here. It could happen.

People called Romanes they go the house

I can hear Cleese saying it in that incredulous tone. That's cheered me up.