Women are trying to weaponise cervical cancer for their own agenda

[WhereAreAllTheTeaspoons]

A headline from fucking PinkNews again because CNN used the phrase 'individuals with a cervix' and apparently women taking issue with this means we are trying weaponise cervical cancer for our own agenda.

Every single male cancer charity unashamedly (and rightly so) refers to men as men, no mention of penis haver or person with testicles or individual with a prostate. Where is the outrage at the lack of inclusive language there?

Not sure why I'm even posting this tbh, just needed to get it off my chest as I'm so angry at the blatant hatred aimed towards women and the so called 'woke' generation are oblivious.

Nasty women. Just like JK weaponising her abuse

Be nice.

I know it’s bloody frustrating but the more sunlight the better, there’s no hiding the double standard at all-

women - ‘weaponise abuse’

transwomen- ‘bravely share their lived experience’

What the FUCK? What the fuck is all this "weaponizing" bullshit?!
"You've made a good point about something bad you or the group you are speaking for has experienced. I feel bad about that bad thing. But I don't like the fact that I feel bad about that bad thing. So to avoid cognitive dissonance, you must be weaponizing the bad thing, which is in itself...BAD. And I win."

I thought I understood how much men hate women before all this happened, but I didn't. I really didn't.

You mustn't talk about things like that. You know how it upsets people. The people who matter, that is.

Remember, people who matter have it much worse than you. LOJ will be along in a moment to tell you it is your c*s privilege to claim victimhood about this sort of unmentionable thing without being questioned. When you examine your privilege do it quietly but in a non-exclusionary way.

Penis News really are vile raving misogynists. They don't even try to hide it these days.

You can buy a badge from Prostate cancer UK to show you are 'the man of men's and no one has taken offence to that. I'm tempted to comment under the article on facebook and ask them to clarify why they arn't attacking that charity, but I suspect I already know that answer.

Maybe we should start replying to this stuff saying is so inclusive. Sad to see that this lot are not and are excluding transwomen and link to men men men stuff.

@BaseDrops

Maybe we should start replying to this stuff saying is so inclusive. Sad to see that this lot are not and are excluding transwomen and link to men men men stuff.

Trouble is, 'this lot' (ie, that lot) might take it seriously.

(Need more )

If Pink News could use their time to come up with some real stories, they wouldn't need to follow women around getting angry at the perfectly reasonable points we make about things that affect us.

They could report useful news instead of scrabbling around for some ludicrous reason to show the world what unreasonable and angry people they are.

2 of my mates did the ultimate weaponisation & died of cervical cancer last year at the age of 49....bet their families lowell like winners.

I have learnt that replying to anything like this is usually pointless. I once innocently questioned (before I realised how illogical and unreasonable some TRA's can be) something to do with male bodies in women's spaces and the charming response I received was 'when I see you in the ladies toilets I am going to make you sniff my tampon'. Those exact words, I still have the screenshot. So I tend not to engage.

Plus as much as it does anger me women are being targeted, I dont want the same to happen to mens charities either, even though I know its pretty unlikely because you know, they dont hate men.

The double stabdard applied to cervical cancer and prostate cancer is shocking. Its just so clear theres something not right here. The excuses over prostate cancer is apparently trans women are less likely to get it (although as they don't all take hormones or have surgery surely some would be at just as much risk as any other male).
I can see some of the point about inclusivity but then I think it should say "women and trans men" if that's the real agenda here (it isnt). A lot of women don't know what a cervix is.

@ChristmasKitties

I know it’s bloody frustrating but the more sunlight the better, there’s no hiding the double standard at all-

women - ‘weaponise abuse’

transwomen- ‘bravely share their lived experience’

This this is the shit show we are having 'lived experience' of in a bloody nutshell!

Madam.

Grace Petrie being ultra classy about this:

twitter.com/gracepetrie/status/1290717268230516742

Every single male cancer charity unashamedly (and rightly so) refers to men as men, no mention of penis haver or person with testicles or individual with a prostate. Where is the outrage at the lack of inclusive language there?

Interestingly..I came across this the other day, while down a twitter rabbithole.

Wonder how far these people, will get..I suspect not far at all.

Would help if I linked

medium.com/@jben9581/trans-men-and-non-binary-people-are-valid-too-317ff14174c9

Felt quite sorry for this person, clearly expecting equal treatment and seeing none.

I agree with what is being said about prostate cancer vs cervical cancer but what about intersex people can they get cervical cancer? And would this be classed as a non ‘female’ or whatever the correct terminology is?
(Sorry for any offence/ignorance I just genuinely don’t know)

If it's "cis privilege" to be able to indicate one's victim status without being questioned, then I'll add that to the mountain of evidence that the prefix doesn't apply to me, or indeed to anyone born female.

'Weaponising' is the latest meaningless buzzword, isn't it?

"individuals with cervixes" is such an offensive and triggering phrase for me. Of the natal born women in my family I am the only cervix owner. The others had their's 'amputated'.

@SetYourselfOnFire

I thought I understood how much men hate women before all this happened, but I didn't. I really didn't.

Same.

This has been the figleaf many men needed. It means they can be as vile to us as they choose, and if they use this as the rationale, they feel they get away with it.

If they really cared about trans rights, they'd be noticing all the many ways this movement sidelines trans men. Titles of honour, primogeniture, political representation of men, the very language men may use - all unchallenged. Meanwhile, women are followed around the internet and abused, lectured, tone policed and harassed for being insufficently deferential to male demands.

It's so obvious. They just love the chance to assert dominance over women, and they don't really care what the excuse is. And sadly all too many women are loving the opportunity to be Cool Girls over it, too. Just as many used to jeer at suffragettes, bra burners, ballbreakers and career women. Now they can pearl-clutch over how horrid those terrible women are, prioritising women's rights of all things, and bask in the - exceedingly conditional - approval of the likes of LOJ.

It's not a civil rights movement, if it removes women's right to fair sporting competition to serve the interests of males. And it's not a human rights movement if it asserts the right of males to get their dicks out around unconsenting women - let alone when it demands that male rapists be housed alongside women prisoners, almost all of whom are survivors of sexual abuse, many from childhood. It defies belief that we even need to say that.

Any women pointing out the way men harm women is now accused of 'weaponising'. And now, pointing out that women have a right to expect clear and unambiguous language in our public health campaigns - something not under any sort of threat, for men - is accused of the same. Any woman asserting any rights that do not suit men meets with this twisting of reality, to convert a harm done to women into manipulation - that age-old accusation, for women reacting to male abuse.

It's straight up DARVO, and it's vile.

Our 'own agenda' being to help prevent women's deaths from cervical cancer through the use of clear and accessible information?

Can't see a problem with that.

Everyone should just ignore prick news. They have less credibility than the daily star.

@DianasLasso thank you. Both friends were told their symptoms were down to peri menopause until it was too late. you know wimmmins stuff, not important

BatShite I think that is the first time I've ever seen the term 'cis-men', which in its self is quite telling I think.

Its becoming so obvious none of this is actually about trans people and is every bit about allowing men to dominate every aspect of women's lives.