One in 10 women and other people with a uterus of reproductive age have the disease.

[ListeningQuietly]

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/aug/05/disgusting-study-rating-attractiveness-of-women-with-endometriosis-retracted-by-medical-journal

Should that sentence be in the article ?

@DialSquare

If another person born female decided to live their life as a man... how does that affect you? Would you stand infront of them telling them "no. You're a women. I'm not calling you why the name you want you're a woman. End of"

For areas where biological actually matters, like sport, rape crisis centres, intimidate medical care... I understand that problems and the arguments and there is work to be done. If everyone could just calm the hell down, and be understanding and respectful of each other then solutions could be found. That also means the trans activist need to actually listen when they're told that someone women born female do not want to be examined by obviously male bodied people.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.

[quote BobbieDraper]@DialSquare

If another person born female decided to live their life as a man... how does that affect you? Would you stand infront of them telling them "no. You're a women. I'm not calling you why the name you want you're a woman. End of"

For areas where biological actually matters, like sport, rape crisis centres, intimidate medical care... I understand that problems and the arguments and there is work to be done. If everyone could just calm the hell down, and be understanding and respectful of each other then solutions could be found. That also means the trans activist need to actually listen when they're told that someone women born female do not want to be examined by obviously male bodied people.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.[/quote]
How would they live as a man?

I don't need to listen to anyone.

It's really pretty obvious in our society what living like a man or women is.
Refusing to acknowledge that doesnt make you right. It makes you belligerent.

A lot of people dont conform to gender stereotypes, but really we know which clothes are male and which clothes are female. We know which names are male and which are female.

If someone has gender dysphoria, a real condition - not made up, a real condition. Then what harm do they do by living with the appearance of the gender they feel more at home in?
Again, there are issues needing more dialogue like sport and medical treatment, but we cant solve it all in one day.

There are many transpeople who you cannot tell what sex they were born into. You identify them as the gender they appear. Dont pretend appearance doesnt make a difference and isnt a real thing.

@MiladyRenata

Yes, I’m perfectly aware that you want to redefine the term “woman” in strictly biological terms. Others disagree. Where’s the term “person with a cervix” is fat clearer and less ambiguous.

This is almost...not quite as funny as Mr Harrop accusing Kellie Jay of appropriating the word woman. Milady I think you'll find that it's not Feminists that want to re-define the word woman.

Woman' is far clearer

Of course it is...no idea how anyone could argue to the contrary

Personally I’m fine with ‘and Trans men’ but can see why others May not be

So sexual stereotypes then. I believe people can wear and present how they like without abuse or discrimination. I don't believe humans can change sex. We should be doing all we can to make it acceptable for people to present how they like and still be classed as the sex they were born into. I don't appreciate being coerced into lying.

I would normally be happy with this, if the punctuation was clearer, so:
Women, and people born female who do not identify as women - so everyone knows it's an identity thing and not some birth defect men can get.

However, I am 100% sure that trans men would have been excluded from this study - there is no way that someone presenting as a man would have had their attractiveness and breast size etc gauged. The criteria would not allow something so tightly linked to the outcome (attractiveness, to men) to mess up their results or need sub group analysis, they would have just excluded them. Non binary as well, no doubt, probably even disabled people or any other category (pregnant) who would confuse things.

So in this case, there is a little but of unnecessary virtue signalling going on, as it is only about women, not anyone else with a uterus, but only women. However, women are not allowed to have anything to themselves - so they have added this in. Therefore, this addition is unnecessary and wrong in this context, IMO.

I've argued on other threads about people and organisations removing the words women and men, and replacing it with people with cervixes or people with prostrates.

Removing the word and defining us all by our biology isnt right, and makes it harder for people with poor english etc. But what is wrong with being inclusive and saying "women plus" or "men plus".

@DialSquare

So when you meet or see someone for the first time, do you think of them as "oh look at the nice jacket that neutral person is wearing" or do you think "oh, look at the nice jacket that man is wearing".

Do you use entirely neutral pronouns when you meet someone? Because you believe that appearance has nothing to do with calling them her/him?

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.

People are not "called by a pronoun".

If I like the jacket I just think look at that nice jacket.

@DialSquare

You know full well that was just a random example. I then went on to ask if you refuse to use pronouns when you just look at someone, because you believe that gender stereotypes appearances do not equal sex and therefore you cannot use her/him until you know their sex?

Do you use pronouns when describing strangers, based on their appearance or not?

If you had been calling someone John and him for a few years and then found out they were born female, would you start saying her?

[quote BobbieDraper]@Floisme

Because these exclusion.

Women and girls menstruate.

Transmen and non-binary women also menstruate.

Now, I dont want to be defined as a menstruator. I am a woman who happens to menstruate.

As long as they said "women, transmen and others who menstruate" then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But if they remove women and just say "menstruators" then I would be annoyed.

Removing or silencing a group to include another isnt OK. But listing all the groups.. what is wrong with that?[/quote]
Suppose someone were to say, 'Women and Catholic women' or 'Women and Jewish women' - there would be a lot wrong with that, wouldn't there?

In the context of a medical condition, then transmen and non binary women are already included in the word 'woman'. They may not want to be included and, as I have said, in a different context, I would respect that. But this is in the context of a medical condition where gender identify is not the issue. Biology takes precedence and the harm of adding extra words in this context is that those words imply that 'women' is not enough.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun
I will use anyone's preferred name when speaking to them and about them it might sound a bit odd and clunky but I will not lie.
Pronouns don't belong to the person, they are in the power of the speaker, not the person being spoken about.
No fucker tells this fucker that I need to listen

Removing or silencing a group to include another isnt OK. But listing all the groups.. what is wrong with that?

Because sometimes it isn't going to be possible to write a long list of extras. What do you think they will then default to? We need to get away from this idea that not mentioning every edge case personally is "exclusionary". Men's charities don't do this, generally.

@Floisme

That argument doesnt really work so well though. In a medical context, women isnt correct. Not all biological women menstruate. Some have had their uterus removed.
So, if you want it rooted purely in biology then saying "women" doesnt work if you only want people who still have a uterus or still have periods.

Also, catholic women and Jewish women are not a different category from women. It's all one category. Women.

Transmen and non-binary are another category entirely, so they require being listed.

Not all biological women menstruate. Some have had their uterus removed.
So, if you want it rooted purely in biology then saying "women" doesnt work if you only want people who still have a uterus or still have periods.

This was never an issue before this kind of transactivism was a thing. No one has ever been concerned about how women might feel about how people describe them, just like they aren't now.

I would use pronouns to be polite but It doesn't sit comfortably with me. I've done it in the past as I wouldn't want to cause someone distress although it seems that no one cares about the distress going against my own beliefs causes.
If I met someone born female called John, I would probably realise they had been born female as they very rarely pass. I would still call them John though as that's how they been introduced to me.
I also think that we gave an inch in this for other people's feelings and we're now so far past the mile stage that women are being arrested and losing their jobs or threatened with rape or violence so my sympathy is waning.

And you need to listen when biological females or males tell you they want to be called by a different pronoun.

Need to? Says who? People can ask to be called by a different pronoun. They can't force other people to use it though. The more I see comments telling women what they need to do, how they need to behave, whilst removing the language used to describe women, the more I say no. I'm done with being polite now. People can identify however they want. However that doesn't change the truth, and I am not going along with the delusional beliefs of other people any more. Not happening.

@KarenKarendson

So trans people only tell women to use their preferred pronoun? Do they not tell men to as well then? Just the women?

And how do you know which pronoun to use then? When you're talking about someone and only have their appearance to go from? There are a lot of transpeople who really do pass for the gender they present as. Do you use the pronoun yoice guessed at from their appearance and then switch if you find out they were born a different sex?

Bobbie Not all women menstruate but the only sex that menstruates are women and girls.

Also, catholic women and Jewish women are not a different category from women. It's all one category. Women.
Yes.

Transmen and non-binary are another category entirely, so they require being listed.
No. Transmen - in the context of a gynaecological condition - are not a different category. Listing them is therefore not only superfluous, it is misleading because it implies that 'women' is insufficient.

@Floisme

Then use female bodied. In medicine, you use male and female. Make male and female the sex based describer.

Women and transmen may be biologically the same, but they dont see themselves as the same group. There is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with including both groups when discussing biology that affects them both.

Why should we use female bodied?

I know transmen don't see themselves as the same as women. But when it comes to our biology, then that is what they are, and I no longer believe it helps anyone to pretend otherwise.

Using a different descriptor, in this case transmen, doesnt harm anyone.

It's you who is trying to force a name onto someone who doeant want it. They arent taking anything away from you. You're trying to take their identify away from them.

They dont want to be called women. Medical or otherwise. We all know transmen have female biology so it doesnt harm or confuse anyone by using "women and trans men". It just allows people to be described by the term they chose.

"Non binary" is a meaningless identity label that has no scientific legitimacy or relevance to medical issues. Like "Goth".