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 ?

person with a cervix” is fat clearer

I’m sure someone has said it - it’s not clearer for women with learning disabilities or women for whom English is a second language. Both groups will be bigger than transmen and both groups are underrepresented in turning up for smears.

It’s fine to say women, transmen and non-binary individuals. No need to deny women’s agency over owning and naming their bodies (as has happened throughout history) to ensure inclusivity.

Lots of women are saying clearly we don’t find ‘people’ inclusive.

I don’t normally read the Feminist board, so I apologise if this is missing the point of the conversation here, but I thought some might be interested to know that there are cases of endometriosis in males and some more recent research directions suggest that the prevalence of this may be far higher than currently known.

Endometriosis is a complex disease, which may actually be a group of diseases with different pathogenesis, but at least some proportion of endometriosis cases appear to be linked to Mullerianosis and this can affect those with a Y chromosome. (You can read a bit about this here if interested extrapelvicnotrare.org/endometriosis-in-males/).

Ultimately, endometriosis affects a lot of people, and is still poorly understood. We need more good quality research into it. Some people dismiss endometriosis because they think it is “just menstrual problems” (as if that would make it ok to dismiss it!). It’s important that people know that this is an often very severe disease related to tissue growing in the wrong locations (not unlike cancer in that respect).

Why can’t they just say biological women. Happy compromise all round.

I don’t think it’s necessary to state biological facts when discussing women’s health. But it is a term that is scientifically true and can not be surely be seen as offensive?.

Although I don't see language being change to accommodate trans men so....

It’s actually ridiculous language barrier either way. We all know the definition of women from a health perspective.

If we are talking about clothes, shoes, hair styles etc. Then be gender ambiguous all you want.

Health conditions related to Sex are very real, and can be observed the same throughout the world. Gender identity is fluid and different all over the world, because it’s a social/cultural.

@TheGoogleMum I agree. Women and trans men and non-binary seems inclusive in a compromising way.

But it depends if you make a distinction between 'woman' and 'female' and that is a conceptual and legal rabbit hole I am currently going down for the umpteenth time in my mind!

I have no issues with this. Its the wholesale erasing of 'woman' that I find shitty tbh. Including transmen, ontop of women (though of course they are women anyway) is fine really, if it does help transmen somewhat then I don't see the problem. Aslong as we are not all lumped in as 'bleeders' or 'people with a cervix' etc.

I expect many others will disagree though, haven't actually read thread yet.

Throwaway
I clicked onto that article
it has fallen down the Chimeric rabbit hole
20 since 1971
compared with MILLIONS and millions of
women

We don't need to put biological in front of women, because women are biological women. To add biological in front of women seeks to 'other' women in their own sex class by suggesting there are other different types of women who are not biological women. Which there are not.

@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.

Erm. Woman has always been defined by 'biological terms'. Hence the kickoffs about people saying adult human female, which is the definition.

Its others who seek to redefine the word, into something that..means nothing and is simply another way to say 'human'.

Its quit sneaky to try and make out its women trying to change the meaning of words tbh. Similar to how its bloody annoying when people claim feminists are trying to 'roll back trans rights', when infact, feminists are asking for the current laws to be upheld, its not feminists wanting them changed. Nor has it anything to do with 'trans rights' either in reality. Its about sex. Not gender. Something both feminists and TRAs apparently agree on, that sex and gender are very different, and again, its not feminists who say they are different things, but then constantly try to conflate the two.

Most women on mumsnet would refuse and call him 'her' instead

I reckon thats not right at all

Who are most?

There are a lot of women on mumsnet

Implying that the meaning of the word woman has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with identity leaves me in a pickle, because I have therefore always been treated according to a gender with which I do not identify, and I strongly suspect that is because of my sex, which kind of make sex not gender identity the source of my discrimination,....

Please do not let the pronoun squirrel distract you

Sorry...will do

Rufus
Despite being the OP I am most definitely not the thread police

The key problem is that HEALTH messages are getting damaged
but the fluffy woo
of trying to be "inclusive"
rather than accurate

@Throwaway583727

I don’t normally read the Feminist board, so I apologise if this is missing the point of the conversation here, but I thought some might be interested to know that there are cases of endometriosis in males and some more recent research directions suggest that the prevalence of this may be far higher than currently known.

Endometriosis is a complex disease, which may actually be a group of diseases with different pathogenesis, but at least some proportion of endometriosis cases appear to be linked to Mullerianosis and this can affect those with a Y chromosome. (You can read a bit about this here if interested extrapelvicnotrare.org/endometriosis-in-males/).

Ultimately, endometriosis affects a lot of people, and is still poorly understood. We need more good quality research into it. Some people dismiss endometriosis because they think it is “just menstrual problems” (as if that would make it ok to dismiss it!). It’s important that people know that this is an often very severe disease related to tissue growing in the wrong locations (not unlike cancer in that respect).

That article you link to estimates that there are 176 million women suffering from endometriosis in the world right now and states there have been a total of 20 cases reported in males in the literature. Since 1971.

It is therefore entirely justified to treat endometriosis as a gynaecological condition, especially since the term is shorthand for endometriosis of the lining of the womb whose Latin name is the endometrium.

Researchers studying cases of cells growing where they shouldn't in males borrowed the term endometriosis because medical professionals and researchers at first assumed (mostly wrongly) that these male patients had vestigial wombs left over from foetal development which then grew out of place. As explained in the article you linked to, the researchers later rejected that theory but kept using the name, even though the errant tissue in one case was of the bladder and in another testicular.

Thus, in somewhat ungrammatical construction, the article rightfully questions in conclusion:

Review of factors, urinary and reproductive system development and case reports, does it appear that endometriosis among males is a different disease than that among women?

So, just to recap for those who are too time poor to read the article:

The article does not show males suffer from endo. They do not have a womb whose lining may grow elsewhere in the body. It's a gynaecological condition only suffered by females.

And given that it is so badly understood, inadequately researched and that research barely funded it is entirely inappropriate to recast endo as a condition that "many people" suffer.

No.

It's a condition that many women suffer. And only women.

@BobbieDraper

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.

I wear jeans and t shirts, I have short hair I have a name that is more commonly used for males, I work in technology in a field with almost no other women in it I do the heavy physical work at home Some of my hobbies are male dominated

I'm a woman which means I'm living as a woman

@ListeningQuietly

Rufus Despite being the OP I am most definitely not the thread police

The key problem is that HEALTH messages are getting damaged
but the fluffy woo
of trying to be "inclusive"
rather than accurate

😀

@Throwaway583727 there’s only 17 cases recorded in scientific literature of men with endometriosis, and the vast majority had taken estrogen hormone treatment.

This is compared to around 180 MILLION affected women worldwide. Endometriosis is very much a disease affecting women due to its dependency. Let’s not confuse the issue.

*dependency on estrogen.

For me theres another issue. How do we know that ‘people with a uterus’ who have been on testosterone for example have the same incidence of endometriosis as people who haven’t? There’s been no research into this so it’s actually wrong to seek to include this group in the analysis. The group were not part of the original research.

It’s not just about language it’s about trying to extrapolate something from the research that simply isn’t there in order to fit with a political agenda.

Great point, Blackcurrant

Other people with a uterus?
Where did they get that from then??

I'm talking about transwomen who dont pass as women. Everyone on here is saying they would not call that person "her".

I wouldn't call any male "her". Because they're not female. But I don't "misgender". I simply avoid using pronouns. If I have to I'll use "they", we're all supposed to believe it's perfectly normal to use it as a singular pronoun, after all.

Nope. Tired of having my sex class redefined and obfuscated.

The compromise I'd reluctantly live with is women and transmen.

Enbies can shift for themselves. If they choose to take their 'not like other girls' sexist nonsense to the extent of repressing knowledge of having a female body, that's their look out. There is zero morally obligation to cater to fashion.

Transwomen, being male, have zero to do with this. They shout butt out. They don't matter when it comes to women's (and transmen's) business.

I wouldn't call any male "her". Because they're not female. But I don't "misgender". I simply avoid using pronouns. If I have to I'll use "they", we're all supposed to believe it's perfectly normal to use it as a singular pronoun, after all.

Same here. I just avoid using 'she' unless someone actually is a she.

Nope. I’m not interested in some spurious version of inclusion over material reality.

Not every woman has a cervix, but everyone who has ever had a cervix is a woman.

In a world full of lies and conspiracy theories and deliberate campaigns to promulgate false information, it is important that we not give away material reality.

If you have a female body, and the word woman triggers you, you have mental health issue which needs care, not a reason for the world to bend to your delusion. Your delusion has its roots in the brutality with which the world treats women and girls; we must fix the world, not pretend women out of existence.

It is not a kindness to adults, to pretend that the Tooth Fairy is real or that humans can change sex.

Women exist. We are half the world’s population of human mammals. We are the ones with the reproductive systems developed through millions of years of evolution, to birth children. Countless women through human history have suffered and died because of this capacity.

Attempting to redefine women as men, or someone who likes lame handbags, or some amorphous collection of feminine stereotypes, spits on the grave of every woman who died in childbirth. Every woman who has been raped or killed because she was a woman. Every girl baby abandoned to die. Every girl dying of exposure in a menstrual hut. Every girl child held down while her genitals are mutilated. Every girl forced into marriage or trafficked for sex.

Everyone denying the existence of women because “kindness” is doing harm to all of us.

So fuck right off with your “people with cervixes”, or “chest feeders”, or “birthing parents”. They’re women.

So fuck right off with your “people with cervixes”, or “chest feeders”, or “birthing parents”. They’re women.

Absolutely this 💯