The strategy of relinquishing the word "woman"

[GratedExposure]

This is something I wonder about in a number of contexts (I'm not advocating it, just wondering): is anyone thinking that the best strategy here is to leave the word, and begin to label certain awards/events as "natal female" awards/events?

I know there are many arguments against this (first, why should we be having to start fighting anew for things which should never have been taken?). But at what point do we walk away and start again? The most obvious example is sport, because if there were "wom*n's" events (increasingly colonised by males) and "natal female" events, most of the strong female athletes would surely opt into the latter?

Are any organisations working towards this?

It's basically the same as the third space idea, but we'd be having to be the ones moving to a third space (wrong, but maybe better than the alternative...)...?

Is this crazy talk?

Is this crazy talk?

Yep.

That's a hard no from me.

Definitely not. Abusive men would just keep on trying to smash every boundary we try to put in place. It matters not how much we compromise, it will never be enough. It would also do enormous damage to our self respect, self worth and dignity as women. And for the vast majority of the rest of the world, woman is always going to mean adult human female. TRAs need to fall in line with the rest of us, not the other way around.

No.
A)because as has already been noted, that isn't enough. We've already seen TW claiming to be 'biological females'.
B) we need to retain the simple, clear, commonly understood word 'woman', meaning 'adult human female' (along with 'girl' for juvenile females). It's needed for clear communication.

Transwomen can by all means call themselves 'transwomen' if they reject being men but they are not women.

C) if in sports we had the 3 groupings you propose, you can bet your bottom dollar that the (already inadequate) funding and promotion of actual women's sports wouldn't be retained, it would be split with the 'women's' class, with that group probably keeping most of the existing organisations, facilities and funding.

No. This enforced colonisation has to be resisted.

No. I'm afraid after years of seeing how this has evolved, that there will never be the faintest respect held by the political lobby pursuing this for female needs or biological reality or the impact of their actions on women, and that the end goal is wholesale colonisation with the goalposts constantly moving to ensure that females are never allowed anything, at all, ever, that male people cannot take from them (and I'm afraid this is the real truth, not hyperbole), my considered answer is no. Absolutely not.

It was trying to be nice and considerate that got women into this position where they are barely hanging on to anything left with their fingernails. Trying to play fair with a group that have no intention of playing fair or showing reciprocation isn't 'nice' or 'kind' or 'being the bigger person' or 'strategic' - it merely convinces them that you are a mug without boundaries who can be pushed even further. See the relationships board for details: you'll find many women there who know all about these dynamics.

The most important thing though is to not concede the word woman in the first place. Woman means something important and we need to fight for that.

Woman = adult human female. No additions are necessary.

@SaucyHorse

I don't see that 'natal woman' is any better than cis, to be honest. The adjective sets up the idea that there are women who are not 'natal women'. But there aren't.

Yes, that's the key issue for me.

C) if in sports we had the 3 groupings you propose, you can bet your bottom dollar that the (already inadequate) funding and promotion of actual women's sports wouldn't be retained, it would be split with the 'women's' class, with that group probably keeping most of the existing organisations, facilities and funding.

In evidence of this: a thread here somewhere (I don't have time to look but advanced search would find it) discussing a sexual health clinic where this has happened exactly.

The female clinic became so heavily used by TW and other males with gender identities within the brief that they had to change the female clinic to some days sessions being TW/male self identified patients only, since those needs are different to female biological sexual health needs and the patient load was so high. Result: female patients lost the number of available sessions when they could attend, and the female health clinic budget was hugely affected by the need to split its resources between male and female patients.

The male clinic has continued on its happy way wholly unbothered by any of this, male patients kept all their sessions, and none of their funding or resources were reallocated to support the impact of male users of female services and patients.

This has been tried by some who were willing to use "female" to refer to sex, and that was rapidly labeled as trying to push the idea that TW are not women in the same way other women are. Of course some people would have accepted that, but as a strategy is doesn't account for that fact that there is a different goal for many of the most vocal activists than just being able to use the word woman.

B) we need to retain the simple, clear, commonly understood word 'woman', meaning 'adult human female' (along with 'girl' for juvenile females). It's needed for clear communication.

Agreed.

Transwomen can by all means call themselves 'transwomen' if they reject being men but they are not women.

This undermines your earlier point. If men come up with a new word for themselves that contains 'woman', then it undermines women's ability to distinguish ourselves from them. The word 'transwoman' literally means someone who has moved across into womanhood. (The Latin word trans means: 'across, beyond, through, changing thoroughly'.) I genuinely don't understand how so many GC feminists can say, 'You can't have the word woman!' but in the same breath be like 'but '(prefix)woman' is fine'.

It's not fine. We're losing everything because of this neologism.

Yep, some very good arguments. A key one being that shifting to other terms means the activists just attack those words, too. And the splitting of resources for females with services for men identifying as women is another one. I didn't know about that example, @MichelleofzeResistance. Sobering.

@RozWatching, who do you mean by the women involved in the ridiculous debate over language?

@DonkeySkin

B) we need to retain the simple, clear, commonly understood word 'woman', meaning 'adult human female' (along with 'girl' for juvenile females). It's needed for clear communication.

Agreed.

Transwomen can by all means call themselves 'transwomen' if they reject being men but they are not women.

This undermines your earlier point. If men come up with a new word for themselves that contains 'woman', then it undermines women's ability to distinguish ourselves from them. The word 'transwoman' literally means someone who has moved across into womanhood. (The Latin word trans means: 'across, beyond, through, changing thoroughly'.) I genuinely don't understand how so many GC feminists can say, 'You can't have the word woman!' but in the same breath be like 'but '(prefix)woman' is fine'.

It's not fine. We're losing everything because of this neologism.

Yes. I won't use that term for that reason.

Unfortunately, it's a no-go.

I used to signed up to the declaration that there were male people and female people (the sexes) but that man and woman were genders. In retrospect, there were huge problems with this, but anyway...

What I have seen since then, though, is a push to then redefine female and male. It did not stop!

Do men have any problems with this with regards to the classification of male? Are transmen pushing for this? Is the word 'man' being eradicated?

Nope..

It's always women that have to capitulate...

There was an incident this week where an academic said it was transphobic to say transwomen were born male in a discussion of prison policies.

She deleted the posts but this actually happened.

I take your point re 'transwoman' also being problematic. My (reluctant) acceptance of it is basically because I don't think there's a hope in hell of it being replaced.

It won't make any difference.

Transwomen simply are women. Actual, as much as I am, women. They were born female, they are female. Any terminology for females is entirely appropriate when discussing transwomen. Because, without exception, with no hesitation, they are female.

That their physical bodies have some anomalies doesn't lessen that in any way whatsoever.

Be told!

I only use transwomen because I have to. I would prefer not to use the word woman in any context. My preferred alternative is banned on MN.

Aye! Sadly that is true! Using accurate language is heresy.

Oh, no, sorry. My error, I'm backsliding. Transwomen are women.....

No. My towel is already on this deckchair. I'm not moving.

I could live with vagina-person / penis-person, or even vagina-woman penis-woman. But I'd rather keep woman.