Breastfeeding is now chestfeeding, Brighton’s trans-friendly midwives are told

[Mulletsaremisunderstood]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/breastfeeding-is-now-chestfeeding-brightons-trans-friendly-midwives-are-told-pwlvmcnc7

Hope this link works as I am a subscriber to the times and logged in.

More nonsense being peddled as 'progressive' . When will the madness end!!?

Indeed LondDistanceClaret it unnecessarily increases the cognitive load.

There should be specific leaflets and webpages for those needing the different language just as there are for other languages.

Making this new language standard for everyone is only about imposing gender ideology and queer theory on the whole population.

The place of the pregnant woman at the centre of maternity services rather than elevating the importance of her significant others or those who are intended to have a significant role in the baby’s life at a later date must be protected for the same reasons that we arguing for protecting the language used.

This new terminology is both confusing and incorrect. I really hope they re-think this.

Glad to have got that off my chest [sorry].

Yes I hope it all goes tits-up for them [you started it].

Thank you for the JHB clip.

Loved the way she wasn't taking any of that cis nonsense.

Frankly it's just a colostrum mistake and they just need to nip it in the bud.

I'll get me coat.

whilst we're waiting, anyone fancy a game of chests

I'll follow you out longdistance

Literally just had an email telling staff we need to use ‘ gender inclusive language’ when discussing breast feeding. Just fired off an email explaining I will not stop the word woman or breasts!

@Kit19

Freddy McConnell has indeed been advising Brighton on this

Freddy is very unhappy that they were not allowed to be registered as their child's father rather than the mother www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/16/trans-man-loses-uk-legal-battle-to-register-as-his-childs-father

Freddy has a GRC so despite promising to live in their acquired gender (gender is the word used by Government) for the rest of their life, Freddy decided to become pregnant which you'd think was oooh a pretty female thing to do....

Freddy seems to want the best of both worlds

Their ideology seems to centre around the notion that identities are just words and don't have to correspond to biological reality or function. In practical terms though, words like man and woman have meanings which are important so that we can communicate clearly and accommodate accordingly.

Gender identities seem to be largely a phenomenon of first-world navel-gazing.

@Middleagedmidwife

Literally just had an email telling staff we need to use ‘ gender inclusive language’ when discussing breast feeding.

So confusing.

'Breastfeeding' does not specify a gender so is already inclusive.

Do they mean that you should use gendered language when it is appropriate because you are talking to a specific patient with dysphoria, or do they mean that you should add gender language when you are e.g. generally advertising a breastfeeding support session?

JHB was brilliant in that video, so calm and polite. I doubt if I would have been so patient, particularly where Chay said they knew many males who have had babies - really?
Chay in that video is a primary school teacher.

attitude.co.uk/article/my-life-as-a-gay-trans-man/17185/

Middleagedmidwife

Would it be somehow possible to point out to the powers that be, that both females and males have breast tissue, and that the chest (Thorax) is a main internal structure which protects the heart, lungs and other internal organs. Maybe point out that nobody has ever "chestfed", apart from cannibals that is.

"Gay trans man"

So. A hetrosexual female then?

'Breastfeeding' does not specify a gender so is already inclusive.

This is a very good point.

What will midwives (aka with woman) be referred to going forward if this madness continues? Scarily saw a social media post shared by a student midwife saying this is great, people who identify as women will now be included in the language. I mean, no, that would mean biological men; the reverse is true. Hopefully their grasp on biology will improve before they qualify.

Worth a try andy.

I was confused by gay trans man also, I didn't think much point in bringing it up as it would be an illogical explanation.

Middleagedmidwife

[quote OhHolyJesus]Julia Hartley Brewer couldn't find out why breastfeeding was offensive either.

fb.watch/3C38KZCRk6/[/quote]
That exchange was quite extraordinary!

It was. I hate JHB with a passion but she was superb in that exchange.

'Breastfeeding' does not specify a gender so is already inclusive.

Is this an effort to make breasts sexual organs rather than what they are there for?

Sorry if this issue has already been raised. It just struck me when I saw the segment on Jeremy Vine the other day. The majrity of people on there were making the point that breast feeding is an anatomicaly correct definition also that both men and women have breasts, but the person who was arguing for language change seemed very bogged down in the sexual asthetic attitude to breasts.

So if breasts and vaginas are just for sex and sexual attraction then anyone (surgery allowing) can have them, but if they have an actual biological function they are exclusionary and unmentionable.

It does rather seem like looking for offense where there is none. Women and men both have breast tissue. A chest is not a breast. Chest is the area above your abdomen, and the breasts are specific parts located in that area of the body. A chest cannot feed a child, but a breast can with breast milk. There is no such thing as chest milk. This mangling of language is snowflake culture on hormones.

"but if they have an actual biological function they are exclusionary and unmentionable."

To "they who must not be named", biology is like the "cruciatus curse"
CRUCIO!

What's been fascinating about these threads is that every now and then someone points out the guidance specifically says this should only apply when someone requests it and at other times terms like woman should be used, and there'll sometimes be a couple of posts saying oh that's probably fair enough then, or even agreeing with it. But it doesn't matter. The outrage barely dims. It may go sideways slightly into whataboutery or slippery slope fallacies, but then it's back with full force. The facts don't seem to matter in the slightest - the rage feels too good to abandon whatever the truth may be. I think anyone studying moral panics and what psychological needs are met by them would do well to read some of these threads.

What a load of nonsense. If you're feeding your child from you own body then you're using your breasts obviously, ergo breastfeeding Hopefully the more people start standing up against this utter garbage the better, and NHS money will stop being wasted on such misguided and downright harmful bollocks

Ahhh I get it. So Freddy - a transman, wants to get rid of their breasts but still feed their baby from them and call it chestfeeding. And they want us all to follow. I mean you couldn’t make it up right? I am 100% happy for Freddy to say they are chest-feeding. But why do the rest of us with breasts have to follow? And it’s rather odd if so against women’s parts to then decide to have a baby with them.

jj1968 I completely disagree. You can't request an opt out of basic biology, and nor should taxes be spend funding such nonsense. It also feeds into a much higher, damaging narrative that validating this rubbish is okay. No. It's. Not.

The facts don't seem to matter in the slightest
What like facts that only females can be pregant, give birth and feed their babies using their breasts?!