You need a vagina to benefit from a vaginal microbiome intervention

[VaginalMicrobiome]

Namechanged as discussing my job and potentially outing product.
I work in a biotech company where we've been researching and developing a new probiotic treating various aspects of vaginal dysbiosis (thrush, BV, HPV risk and other conditions associated with a disturbed or sub-optimal vaginal microbiome). The formulation we've been working on is nearing market readiness, and this week I (as lead researcher on this project) have been briefing the non-technical members of the company as to the mechanisms of action and clinical applications of the product. In my presentation I addressed the need for a better understanding of the impact of vaginal microbiome disruption, and of women's genitourinary health in general. I used the word 'women' a lot, as one would expect when talking about vaginal health. Anyway, at the end of my presentation, some bright spark in marketing mentioned that we should probably say our product was for 'women and those identifying as women'. Afraid I just could not help myself and snapped back, in front of the whole company, 'well, I do think you would actually need to have a vagina in order to benefit from this product'. He did have the grace to nod and say 'well yes, I guess so'. I possibly should not have reacted so strongly, but was so furious as I felt that all the work I've been doing developing an intervention to help WOMEN was undermined in seconds by a 24 year old male asking for men to immediately be included.
After this, I spent some time searching the published literature on the 'neo-vaginal microbiome'. There hasn't been much research yet, but it seems that, surprise surprise, a neo-vagina is colonised by completely different bacterial species from an actual vagina, so taking a probiotic targeting vaginal health will do diddly-squat for a man with a 'neo-vagina'.
Not sure what I really want out of this thread except to share my despair that women's health issues are being co-opted everywhere, even in an area that could not be more pertinent to female health.

@KeaBee

Will agree that OPs initial comment wasn't particularly an overreaction, just a fair statement based on the man's dumb(ish) comment. But then to come onto MN just to rant about it does seem a bit excessive

Ah leave off trying to shame the OP for wanting to discuss a stressful event at work with other women who would get it.

I find your ‘side-note’ general accusation of transphobia excessive, personally. When we’re discussing that we consider the terms ‘woman’ and ‘man’ to be biological terms, it’s absolutely not transphobic, critical, derogatory, pejorative, discriminatory or harrassment to refer to transwomen by a term that denotes their sex class - it is simple observation. Crying transphobia is just trying to shut the conversation down, clearly, as you’ve just said think it’s “excessive” for us to be having this discussion at all.

[quote Onadifferentuniverse]@Datun in general I agree, bar health products. I don’t think health products should be aimed at genders.

The word women refers to gender, not a sex. The sex is female and genetically defined.
Women can have penises
Men can have vaginas.

When you’re discussing vaginal/ penile health there’s no need to stamp it with a gender and to be honest, you shouldn’t need to define the sex either because it’s pretty obvious what the product is for and anyone who doesn’t know if they have a penis or vagina wouldn’t be buying the product without support anyway.[/quote]
You also said that the word woman is a social construct.

So what word are you using for human beings who are of the female sex, and are considered adult?

And, what is the definition of women if it's socially constructed?

I'm not sure if you really believe what you're saying, but you must, presumably, see how none of this works in reality.

If the word woman applies to both women and men who identify as women, it must have a definition. And of course, it doesn't. Otherwise you would be able to give it to me.

You say health products shouldn't be aimed at genders. Because you are unclear on the meaning of words, I'm not sure what you mean here. Health products are not aimed at genders. Sex specific medication is not applied on the basis of gender stereotypes.

You mangle the language, and then your only recourse is to say, well it's perfectly obvious who these products are for. After making it impossible for anyone to describe who they are actually for.

You're relying on the fact that everyone knows the sex of people, whilst pretending that no one does.

You have suddenly lost the word to describe adult females of the human species. It's remarkable.

Who on earth do you think this is benefiting? Because it certainly isn't adult females of the human species.

if I insisted on referring to a woman as a man it would be sexist.
Lol, that wouldn’t be sexist, it would just be incorrect.

I think there might be a small niche market for a biotic product for neo-vaginas, as by all accounts these can quickly be colonised by microflora and fauna that can give off very unpleasant odours. As so many transwomen are not going the "bottom surgical" route, it would never be like the market for a vaginal product though.

I hope someone will tackle this though, as it must be miserable living with a bad smell you can't eliminate.

@Collidascope

Do some people really not understand how words work? Female is quite literally part of the definition of woman. And female is quite literally about biology. There is no need to qualify woman or female with "biological" or "biologically." How on earth else would you be a woman or female but biologically?

by being a trans woman who is biologically male...

Also, etymological meanings have always and will always continue to change (as is evidenced by this debate) so arguing "that's not how words work" doesn't really hold up.

KeaBee

What is your definition of the word woman when it is used by a biological male?

I mean, if we can quite literally just change the meanings of words, I now declare trans (in the context of humans) to mean "not actually."

@Collidascope

I mean, if we can quite literally just change the meanings of words, I now declare trans (in the context of humans) to mean "not actually."

Exactly. And it won't change any sexism, or misogyny. All it does is make you unable to label it.

@allCwenthryth

Maybe it was a bit harsh for me to say the reaction is excessive, but posts like these just seem to spark so much hate against trans people that the overall result does end up being a bit excessive.

Regarding the man/trans women comment. The plain fact is that if you refer to a trans woman as a man then you a both a) ignoring her chosen identity and b) reinforcing the concept that trans woman are men. Both of which are indisputably transphobic things to do. If you want to refer to people in biological terms then I think you'll find "female/male" have worked for the scientific community for centuries.

@Collidascope

I mean, if we can quite literally just change the meanings of words, I now declare trans (in the context of humans) to mean "not actually."

by being a trans woman who is biologically male...

"Biological" is not needed there, though, right? isn't that precisely what Colli was saying?

@Collidascope

I mean, if we can quite literally just change the meanings of words, I now declare trans (in the context of humans) to mean "not actually."

And boom, the transphobia shows itself in all its shining, horrible glory. Just be nice and respect others, that's all you need to do like damn.

Why does anyone need to be recognised or validated though?

If I'm not around I dont get to decide who talks about me in what way? No one does.

And again. We have eyes and ears. We can't change that. So this all comes down to some peole feeling they have to right to compell thoughts and speech .

Just no

posts like these just seem to spark so much hate against trans people
Really? I don’t see that at all - do you have anything to back up that assertion? Or perhaps you could just listen to the women here, and hopefully be reassured that just because we wish to be free to use accurate terminology does not mean we hate anyone.

he was just trying to help and put forward a useful consideration that might help you market your product (basically just doing his job).

Maybe this was a fabulous opportunity to allow him to show how clever he is -completely show him up and make him squirm in front of everyone- with some further questionning! You could have asked him to explain what he meant:

what do you mean by those 'identifying as women' - this is a sexed based product for women, not men
do they have vaginas then? oh no they don't because they have, in most cases, or did have penises
so just to clarify that YOU understand this is a product for women

I won't respect people who are gaslighting me, no.

Overreaction in my opinion

Saying someone needs a vagina for a vaginal product is an over reaction?

@Rainallnight

OP, I agree with all you’ve said, but I’m a bit worried for you that your post is so outing, and might have commercially sensitive info in it.

Agreed. If I were your employer OP, spotted this and recognised who you were I'd be asking you to see me in my virtual office.

Aside from any commercial sensitivity I would not be very happy about you airing purely internal company issues on here.

Regarding the man/trans women comment. The plain fact is that if you refer to a trans woman as a man then you a both a) ignoring her chosen identity and b) reinforcing the concept that trans woman are men. Both of which are indisputably transphobic things to do. If you want to refer to people in biological terms then I think you'll find "female/male" have worked for the scientific community for centuries.

Why is identity so very special that it must be respected at all times? An identity that requires everyone else around a person to lie is extremely fragile.

And transwomen are biological men. It's not transphobic to say so. I'm not going to be compelled to lie.

With regard to words, woman and man have worked for many centuries to describe two discrete groups of human beings.

Oops didnt refresh

Sorry keabee

Weird how people can see hatred everywhere until its directed at women and it becomes invisible.

[quote KeaBee]@allCwenthryth

Maybe it was a bit harsh for me to say the reaction is excessive, but posts like these just seem to spark so much hate against trans people that the overall result does end up being a bit excessive.

Regarding the man/trans women comment. The plain fact is that if you refer to a trans woman as a man then you a both a) ignoring her chosen identity and b) reinforcing the concept that trans woman are men. Both of which are indisputably transphobic things to do. If you want to refer to people in biological terms then I think you'll find "female/male" have worked for the scientific community for centuries.[/quote]
This isn't about individuals. It's not about going out of your way to upset somebody who has gender dysphoria, or is cross dressing.

This is about mangling language that ends up with a convicted rapist being given access to vulnerable, incarcerated women as part of their sentence.

Or men competing with women in sport.

Or expecting a woman to do your mammogram, and being unable to have the language to object when it's not a woman who is handling your breasts. Or doing your smear.

Or having to listen to a biological male masturbate in the bed next to you, in your women's shelter.

It's not personal, it's not individual. It's about erasing women as a sex class, entirely. And losing the language to describe it, and them.

But then to come onto MN just to rant about it does seem a bit excessive

People come on to MN to rant about toilet brushes and unexpected knocks at their door.

This isn't about individuals. It's not about going out of your way to upset somebody who has gender dysphoria, or is cross dressing.

This is about mangling language that ends up with a convicted rapist being given access to vulnerable, incarcerated women as part of their sentence.

Or men competing with women in sport.

Or expecting a woman to do your mammogram, and being unable to have the language to object when it's not a woman who is handling your breasts. Or doing your smear.

Or having to listen to a biological male masturbate in the bed next to you, in your women's shelter.

It's not personal, it's not individual. It's about erasing women as a sex class, entirely. And losing the language to describe it, and them.

Repeating Datun's post because it gets to the heart of the matter.

@Igneococcus

There are quite a few probiotics available for vaginal dysbiosis including from the company I work for, unless the OP tells us in detail which strains of microbes the new product contain, I don't think there is anything commercially sensitive about her post.

It's a new product under development. Unless her employer has cleared discussion of it on social media I don't think OP should be giving out the amount of information she has.