'women exist, and we should be allowed to say so' - Scotsman column

[ArabellaScott]

by Gina Davidson.

Good, short, and clear.

'Gender and sex are very different things, yet have become so conflated that there is now confusion in the minds of many about whether women's sex-based rights should even be allowed in law any longer. '

www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/women-exist-and-we-should-be-allowed-say-so-gina-davidson-3108860

That is really good - thanks for the link

Perfect and concise!

Wow “ certain words are to be banned in the Senate.... they are “he and she”, “himself and herself” and even "mother and father” and many other everyday descriptive family roles. Such words, say the Democrats, should be done away with through some skewed idea of inclusiveness.
Instead people can refer to “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin...”
Is this in general conversation too or just in laws etc?

I'm sure some people will read it and go "what, SURELY no one is saying this"

So it's gone from TWAW to no one is any sex or gender? Who is benefiting from this malarkey?

I haven't followed the thing about words being banned, tbh, there's only so much US politics I can take. I'll see if I can find something on it.

Hmm. This seems a bit like non-news, to be honest. They've changed the terms in one document from 'mother or father' to parent, for example. It is 'gender neutral', but not really something I could get exercised about.

eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/01/16/fact-check-house-rules-only-changed-gendered-language-one-document/4175388001/

the use of 'amen and awomen' is fucking risible, though, as 'amen' is Hebrew for 'truth' and nothing at all to do with 'men'.

www.etymonline.com/word/amen

Longer, on a similar topic in the Times covered in this thread.

A war of words is beginning to wipe women out of existence, Janice Turner in the Times www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4143795-A-war-of-words-is-beginning-to-wipe-women-out-of-existence-Janice-Turner-in-the-Times

Good that the articles are appearing, but I'm confused by this view that permission to be allowed to name women has to be requested.

From whom? Who is this superior authority that permission is apparently in the gift of?

And why have they formed that misconception that women will just meekly go along with this?

the use of 'amen and awomen' is fucking risible, though, as 'amen' is Hebrew for 'truth' and nothing at all to do with 'men'

Amen means ‘so be it’. It has nothing to do with sex or gender!

As someone on Twitter said, saying amen and awomen means you’re amoron!!

And yes, I know, but it concerns me that "but I'd like to and need to because of x, so can we keep our language/spaces/sports/dignity please" is still being tried, when actually what should be being said is "No."

Thank you OP for sharing this.

And why have they formed that misconception that women will just meekly go along with this?

Sadly there are plenty of women who seem to be joyfully handing over their words, rights and dignity to anyone who says they ought to. Not only that, they're fighting those of us who protest. Jameela Jamil, Margaret Atwood, Engender, and most of the women in Labour cabinet, for example. I mean, bloody hell, wasn't it Judith Butler who came up with the whole idea of sex not existing in the first place!

Here she is, positing things of that ilk, if your Friday night is lacking a bit of je ne sais quoi:

www.cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/genderandsex/modules/butlergendersex.html

This article was retweeted by the actor Joe McGann, I see. A trans woman in Hollyoaks then went arguing with and blocking anyone in agreement with him.

What was interesting was when asked ‘what human rights don’t trans people have’, she had to admit none, before doing a reverse ferret and saying ‘we just don’t want them eroded’.

Well, who would? Seemed quite revealing.