Emailing a medical website re: "pregnant people"

[Bezalelle]

I'm TTC at the moment, and if there's anything that brings female biology into sharp, glittering focus, it's that.

I've been reading a lot online, and came across an article on a medical website about conception and pregnancy, which referred throughout to "people" instead of women. I decided to leave a comment:

Is there any reason why the author of this article has neglected to use the crucial word "woman", instead referring to "people" or "person"? As far as I'm aware, it is only women who can ovulate and become pregnant.

A few weeks later, I had a reply from the website's editor:

The reason we use people/person is because some people who are pregnant do not identify as a woman, they may identify as being gender-fluid, non-binary, or another label entirely, therefore we deem this to be more inclusive language.

To which I reply:

Thanks for getting back to me.

The problem with your explanation is that such terminology is not, in fact, inclusive. It negates biological reality. Only an individual of the female sex can become pregnant, no matter how they "identify".

Obfuscating language like this quite frankly makes a mockery of the medical profession. It may be seen as "woke" and politically correct, but the vast majority of women see it as offensive and unnecessary.

To which he replies:

Thanks for your reply, I will certainly pass on your feedback.

I really disagree that it "makes a mockery of the medical profession". Our content is geared toward humans of all walks of life, and this piece is a well-researched, well-sourced, and easily accessible read. We're writing on a forum that reaches all types of people from all walks of life, and as times change, language also evolves.

I would also dispute your claim that "the vast majority of women see it as offensive and unnecessary". While also anecdotal, our office is more than 70% female, including our Managing Editor and the Copy Edit & Production Manager who oversees our style guidelines regarding language, and not one person had any issue with this change when it was made.

My response:

Thanks again for your reply.

I'd just like to point out that elsewhere on your site you seem to have no issue with differentiating male and female. With just a brief glance, I can see articles about men's health and women's health. I therefore wonder why it is difficult for you to write about women when discussing possibly the most female-centric condition - pregnancy.

No reply.

It might not be ethical to reproduce his emails verbatim here, but I don't care anymore. I plan to challenge this sort of thing more and more when I see it.

[BazzleJet]

Oh well said TurboTeddy

[TurboTeddy]

The words man and woman are fully inclusive, they refer to male and female humans which make up 100% of the world's population. Gender identity may be yours to choose but it does not have a single clear definition and it does not alter the medical needs associated with biological sex.

[AnotherAdultHumanFemale]

Lol at him saying the women in the office didn't have a problem with it. Of course they didn't. Who is going to say they have a problem with it when they might lose their job or get sent for 'retraining in diversity'? They were probably terrified to say what they really thought.

Well done for challenging him. I agree, the more of us who complain and challenge the nonsense the better.

[sheshootssheimplores]

Well done OP 👏

[XenoBio]

But surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that an advanced society such as ours could find a way to protect the vulnerable while remaining inclusive?

Yes, but this has to happen by consensus and mutual agreement. Not by very obviously shouting down 50% of the population and accusing them of bigotry, but mysteriously not expecting the other 50% move over.

[whatwouldbigfatfannydo]

The fact that trans rights are overtaking women's only goes to prove that TRA organisations (looking at you stonewall, moving the goal posts to suit your agenda ) aren't interested in actually tackling the issues which affect people, such as the impact of reinforced gender norms, prejudice and stereotypes.

Without gender norms there would be no 'trans' anything/anyone.

And, frankly, we've lay down as doormats for men for far too long. They are NOT worth more than women no matter how they dress. They are appropriating womanhood and it is being sanctioned by the state and society. It is unacceptable.

[AncientLights]

failingatlife I am so glad to hear that only women can train in mammograms. My experience of them, as someone fairly large of bosom, is that there is a lot of handling of breast tissue. It would be completely unacceptable to me to have a man doing that and, in fact, I would rather go without the routine mammogram than tolerate that. So glad to hear you would make your views known if it comes to it.

As for that man who said none of the women minded the choice of woman-erasing language, it reminded me of the cycle path McKinnon who thinks women are fine with McK in the ladies loos because they don't say otherwise. We make it easy for them.

[Bezalelle]

Yes, I understand that it's not possible for everyone. That's why I'm prepared to take the risk because I'm in a relatively privileged position. I feel it's the least I can do.

[pennypineapple]

No. I would refuse to accept it. I would risk my job. I am prepared to take the risk and take a stand. When all this comes crashing down I want to be able to stand among the people who fought this.

@bezalelle I totally respect you for that but surely you can understand why some women wouldn't feel able to do that same? If I lost my job we wouldn't be able to afford the mortgage and could lose our house.

[Becles]

Thank you for tackling this @Bezalelle

[Bezalelle]

That's a very good idea, Prion. I will do so.

[AnyOldPrion]

Good for you Bezalelle. This ongoing erasure of the word women needs to be challenged.

Something struck me as I read. You spoke to a man who brushed you off and told you none of the women minded.

It crossed my mind that next time, you could ask if there’s a woman you can be put in contact with, either straight away, or at the very first sign of a poor response. I bet lots of women might take your comments more seriously, and if they hadn’t thought about it before, you might trigger interest in why you’re taking the time to object. Also... if you go back to this particular person, it would REALLY piss him off...

[failingatlife]

just heading out of the door for a mammogram. The appointment letter says, "The mammogram is taken by female staff and only takes a few minutes".

I'm a radiographer and (so far) only biological females can train in mammos. Hopefully this considerate policy will stay and I will voice my objections if (when) any change is considered.

I can't help but think about that female-identifying-male-nurse smear test story...

[Bezalelle]

In reality I'm not comfortable with it at all but I wouldn't dare risk losing my job over it. I wonder how many of the women in that office secretly feel the same.

No. I would refuse to accept it. I would risk my job. I am prepared to take the risk and take a stand. When all this comes crashing down I want to be able to stand among the people who fought this.

[MIdgebabe]

TRANs people fully welcome in society, it’s just that sometimes we would like them to feel fully welcome in accordance with their sex. So they can use the toilet. They can use medical facilities. They can be housed in jail.no exclusion . Or they can ask for third spaces. Again great. No exclusion and options !

[pennypineapple]

My employer is more on the "woke" side of things. If they were to ask if I had a problem with them using the term "pregnant people" as opposed to "pregnant women" I have to be honest and say I don't think I would raise any objections.

In reality I'm not comfortable with it at all but I wouldn't dare risk losing my job over it. I wonder how many of the women in that office secretly feel the same.

[Prawnofthepatriarchy]

Medical information is one of my areas of expertise. Ensuring that such information is accessible to people without any medical vocabulary is absolutely fundamental. When preparing such information you put a lot of thought into how you word things. A pregnant woman with little English needs to be sure that the information refers to her.

Another area where it's particularly important is cervical cancer screening. I have no idea how many women who, for a range of reasons, aren't familiar with the words cervix or cervical but I'm sure there are a hell of a lot more of them then there are women with non binary or trans identities. If women don't immediately understand that information about cancer screening refers to them then whoever commissioned that writing has wasted their money and may in fact have made matters worse.

It's extremely offensive - even dangerous - to see information supposedly directed at women made less effective by the woke when they have no problems using plain English for equivalent information for men.

[Moonsick]

I come across women all the time who don't know that they have a cervix, didn't know that menstruation was the proper word for the biological event or uterus for the organ. Sometimes it is age, sometimes capacity to understand and retain information, sometimes its because it's a foreign language or lack of proper education.

https://www.jostrust.org.uk/node/666780 - why are we changing the terms used when up to 44% of women don't know the language being used. You write a poster that says "women need to have smear tests" you get damn near 100% of your target market. You say "people need to have smear tests" - not only are you missing a substantial proportion of your target audience, but you have to deal with a number of male respondents who don't know their bodies either. Same but reversed with prostates.

And why, if this is a great step forward, are we not tackling the language of men at the same time? Where are all the references to ejaculators, fertilisers, prostate-havers? Why the women first?

[Ali1cedowntherabbithole]

Trans people don't need integrating into society because they are already part of it.

But yeah, feminists are the bigots

[Wurzelsnewhead]

Advanced society??
A society that is advanced would not pigeonhole people into narrow gender stereotypes.
An advanced society would celebrate people presenting however they like whilst at the same time working to eradicate sex based inequalities.
The current trend serves only to strengthen women’s oppression. When women are excluded and put at risk, inclusivity can ‘go where the sun don’t shine’.

[RedDogsBeg]

And the “I don't have a problem with trans people per se...” argument doesn’t wash. If you have a problem with their integration into society, their use of basic medical facilities, their use of the fucking toilet, then you have a problem with them, don’t you?

Integrate into society by excluding swathes of that society?

Integrate into society by reducing a section of that society to descriptions of functions performed by dint of their biology?

I am a woman, an adult human female. Descriptors of me as a cervix haver, vagina owner, menstruator, bleeder and other such delightful terms are descriptions of biological make-up or functions that are solely due to the fact I am a woman. This is erasure and dehumanisation to salve and pander to the feelings of the biological class of humans who have spent thousands of years oppressing the biological class I belong to on the basis of that very biology.

There are toilets a plenty available to TW that cater for their biological sex.

No-one is denying them access to basic medical facilities, however, they are not women and do not require medical services specifically set aside for women.

If trans people have an issue with the available facilities they should campaign for facilities that meet their particular needs, not remove those set aside for others who do not share their biology.

[MockerstheFeManist]

Surely FGM is PWIAFGM.

And what would they make of this 'pregnant man' stuff at med school?

[merrymouse]

If you have a problem with their integration into society, their use of basic medical facilities, their use of the fucking toilet, then you have a problem with them, don’t you?

All these facilities are currently available to all, regardless of whether they identify as trans. Nobody is being stopped from using any medical facility. Women want single sex facilities to be available because they are concerned about men, not because they are concerned about trans people.

[53rdWay]

When they refer to 'pregnant people' and not 'women', they create language that excludes women whose lives have been affected by the biological potential of their sex to become pregnant, but who have never actually been pregnant or are not currently pregnant.

Indeed.

Divorcing 'women' from female biology makes it much harder to identify and combat the oppression that women as a group face due to that biology.

We all know what the 'pregnant people', the 'menstruators' and the 'vagina-havers' have in common. It's the same thing they have in common with the people more likely to be disadvantaged by having children, more likely to be disadvantaged by the thought that they might have children (eg, not hiring someone in her late 20s because 'what if she gets pregnant?'), more likely to be in lower-paid jobs, more likely to be abused in the home, more likely to face FGM, more likely to be encouraged from childhood to be docile and accommodating.

If we treat all those groups as totally separate groups who have nothing in common and pretend we don't know what female biology has to do with any of this, we're not only kidding ourselves but sabotaging feminism as a tool of analysis.

[ArnoldWhatshisknickers]

But surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that an advanced society such as ours could find a way to protect the vulnerable while remaining inclusive?

They could try saying 'pregnant women, and other pregnant individuals' or some such.

This has been suggested to numerous companies, healthcare providers etc, and rarely gets a positive response. They seemingly prefer to exclude women rather than upset ideologists.