An Irish obstetrician speaks out: bring back "women".

[Malahaha]

This is encouraging:

www.newstalk.com/news/not-everyone-might-understand-cervix-peter-boylan-changing-cancer-screening-wording-1086331?fbclid=IwAR2DJuH73RwNuhjrX1q-h-ZE1Xr_5TwTyM0dMir-huZqmCJGq1BeE53xrwU

Full text:
A consultant obstetrician says the Health Service Executive (HSE) should reverse a 'confusing' decision to replace the word 'woman' with 'anyone with a cervix' on its national cervical screening advice.

The wording is seen as being inclusive for members of the transgender community.

However Dr Peter Boylan, who is also former chair of the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told Newstalk Breakfast the new wording is not clear for the general population.

"I just want to make sure that people understand that I'm fully supportive of the trans community, and I'm indeed one of the few gynecologists in Ireland who has performed gender reassignment surgery.

"So I fully understand the context of all of this.

"The important thing to understand is that a female transitioning to a male always has a cervix, unless they've had a hysterectomy.

"Similarly a male transitioning to a female always has a prostate, unless they've had a prostatectomy which is not part of gender reassignment surgery for male to female.

"And it's in connection with screening for cancer that it's important to understand what context of the whole wording is.

"And I fully support the National Women's Council of Ireland in their statement, where they said that basically they should replace the word 'person' with 'woman' in this particular context."

He said use of the word 'person' is "confusing": "There are a lot of people for example who might not understand what a cervix is, but they do understand what a woman is.

"And they do understand, for example, that if I have been a woman but have transed into a male, I still have cervix unless I've had a hysterectomy with removal of the cervix.

@NotTerfNorCis

This is all caused by people trying to slot an ideology into place that just doesn't fit. It's very nice trying to spare the feelings of female people who don't want to be called women, but .. there's a denial of reality going on here, and that has repercussions.

I suppose the only solution is to have one word that means the social role of men/women and one that conveys the physical reality. But 'females' and 'female people' sound cold, and I'm not sure it would be acceptable to everyone anyway.

Honestly, I don't think that's what this is about at all - sparing trans men's feelings - or the trans lobby would be screaming blue murder about the men's cancer charities being so specific on who gets prostate cancer. They aren't. It's solely the identifying of 'women' with our biology that causes rage. There's a reason JK Rowling commented in terms of menstruation affecting women, and Daniel Radcliffe's strident response was all about transwomen being women. This has nothing to do with considering transmen, and everything to do with erasing biological sex as correlated to women. It's the TWAW agenda driving this, using 'concern for transmen' as a Trojan horse. This OB has why that's bullshit down pat: TM all clearly know that they are biologically female, but many, many women have no idea what a cervix is.

'Women' has been rendered problematic now (unless referring to TW, of course) so female is the new battle front - see this very doctor talk about 'transitioning to a male' even in the context of retained female biology? If we don't push back against all co-option of language, as we are doing, we'll lose all capacity to define women.

A group who dreamed up 'cis' for us should be more than able to determine a new way to describe their own. Why the determination, from a group of male people, to co-opt a female group's descriptor - when that descriptor is the only way in which the female group can defend their sex-based rights, in law?

Answers on a postcard.

Big fan of Dr Boylan, he was my consultant for dc's birth. He has a stellar combo of massive clinical experience and zero fucks about anything other than good medicine.

'I suppose the only solution is to have one word that means the social role of men/women and one that conveys the physical reality. But 'females' and 'female people' sound cold, and I'm not sure it would be acceptable to everyone anyway.'

Feminine/ masculine used to work as descriptors of sex role stereotypes.

@wellbehavedwomen this is 100% what it is all about. However if you upset this lobby, even on this board, you risk censure as @Cailleach1 and I have

wellbehavedwoman: well said.

'Women' has been rendered problematic now (unless referring to TW, of course) so female is the new battle front - see this very doctor talk about 'transitioning to a male' even in the context of retained female biology? If we don't push back against all co-option of language, as we are doing, we'll lose all capacity to define women.