Pregnant people?

[Trustisamust]

So our local NHS Trust have finally updated their guidance re allowing partners to attend pregnancy scans etc.
They now refer to pregnant people, not pregnant women.
I don't know if I am being unreasonable here but this does not sit comfortably with me?

I’m sorry but I don’t believe that this is what she has been told.

No I don't either, but I was compelled to ask where she allegedly got that information from. Doubt there will be an answer though.

Even if you think trans women are predators and all that,

Just to point out that no one said this. They are simply male, and like all males are prone to male pattern violence, so pose a higher statistical risk to women then other women.

@Mugginyouleftrightandcentre

Then overall everything will have changed.

And everyone will finally understand that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

EXACTLY what came to my mind too!

I'm going to suggest Woman with a capital W for adult human females

How about Super women? Like superstraight.

Such nonsense!

From the huge amount of NHS updates/advice I read, the language hasn't changed for men - only for women.

So transwomen are women (because women is now apparently an entirely meaningless term).

But are transwomen female?

I feel like a know the answer to this (well, I do). But if I want to avoid being ‘transphobic’, what would the correct answer be:

Yes - transwomen are female

OR

No - transwomen are male?

I've seen trans people say

They have been the their desired gender (sex?) since birth
They are cis
They are female /male (according to preference)
Penis can be a female organ
Etc

Questioning this is seen by some as transphobic.

And so we have words which

No one knows what is meant by them except for guessing from context
Words that are used in different ways to mean different things by different people
People who use the same words to mean different things at different times
All that stuff

The other interesting point is that from a stats point of view,

There's massive inconsistency around when there's a push to count trans people separately.

So for some things TW for example should be counted as women. But for other things it's important for them to be separated.

The fact that the former (counted as women) is supposed to apply when it's to do with committing a crime, but the latter (counted as trans) is supposed to apply when it's to do with being a victim of crime

Really shows the logical inconsistency and what underlies it.

Stats - transwomen are women and the census should be filled in with sex as you identify

Also
No decent provision for trans healthcare.

Well maybe the first one obscuring the size of demand was an own goal.

Yes - transwomen are female

OR

No - transwomen are male?

'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'

ASugarr
I mentioned earlier that it will be happening. However it is an ongoing change. The NHS know the reaction isn't going to go very well, especially with men. So they've done it so changes for young people have been made for a while now. Now changes in the female side are being made, and finally the male side. Then overall everything will have changed

Respect is a 2 way thing. It isn't kind or inclusive to force language change on people who don't want it and have told you exp!icitly they won't accept it. It isn't kind or respectful to call women 'cisgender' when many have told you repeatedly they do not recognise the term and find it offensive. There are a tiny handful of transmen having babies each year compared to hundreds of thousands of women. Women who choose to identify themselves as men and then go on to undertake the most basic of female functions should understand that they need to show kindness and respect to the overwhelming majority and not demand language is changed to suit them, no matter how the majority feels about it.

And men wouldn't put up with this bullshit for 5 minutes, and there is no reason why they should find themselves reduced to 'non gestating partner' or 'sperm provider' either.

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

People" don't get pregnant, "women and trans men" do. That is fair and inclusive

Yes

Agree!

Fact. Literally fact. Sex terms are male and female. Gender terms are man and woman. That is a fact.

Not according to the Equality Act.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/11

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/212

@ASugarr

Well I don't like to think being pregnant as a womanly thing as (since you are all claiming being a woman is a sex term when it isn't) it is insulting to women who can't give birth or get pregnant. That's why we don't use gendered language because it isn't just to help transgender people. Trust me.

But anyway, I'm leaving it there for today. Have a lovely sunday all 🤍

And remember, gender and sex aren't the same thing. Woman is a gender term 🤍

You think women with fertility issues are going to be offended by the word "woman"? This is quite disingenuous tbh

Anyone with half a brain knows what pps meant. That only women can carry children. This has absolutely zero relation to infertility.

It is 'womanly' because it is exclusive to women!

If we accept that ‘woman’ is gender-based, it still needs a definition.

What does ‘woman’ mean?

What does ‘man’ mean?

So for some things TW for example should be counted as women. But for other things it's important for them to be separated.

The fact that the former (counted as women) is supposed to apply when it's to do with committing a crime, but the latter (counted as trans) is supposed to apply when it's to do with being a victim of crime

Yeah, funny that. Of course there is no possible indication here that the 'rules' are changed to suit as and when it suits, not at all.

[quote LockdownLard]@ASugarr You are advocating for young Muslim women in France, that is admirable. What do you think about young Muslim women not wanting to share their sex based spaces with male bodied people due to their religious beliefs? Such as not being able to participate in female only swimming sessions as there are male bodied people using the changing rooms and in the swimming pool? What would advice would you give a young Muslim woman who had this dilemma?[/quote]
@ASugarr

I would also like to hear your views on this.

Let children wear hijab but restrict their access to public spaces and physical activities (by eradicating single sex spaces). that is an odd kind of feminism...

When I was at school, it was far, far less common for Muslim girls to wear the hijab than it is now. Most of the Muslim girls I knew didn't wear one.

However, we did have a couple of girls who had emigrated from somewhere else (not sure I can remember where - Somalia, maybe, if memory serves), who did wear the hijab.

On hot days they would remove their hijabs in the girls' toilets to cool down a bit, and we'd have a chat in there when they didn't have their headscarves on. They would never remove their headscarves in the presence of boys, ever.

So I am curious as to what rights ASugarr thinks these girls would have if they didn't want to remove their headscarf in the presence of a male-bodied person.

@Eyewhisker

Weird. Just bloody weird. Why are societal stereotypes considered more important than biological fact??? Women have done so much to reduce gender stereotypes so that women can work, have jobs, get educated, wear trousers and not be obliged to dress to make themselves sexually attractive.

Men have not had the same transformation. Men are stuck in a gender stereotype which means that they can’t wear dresses or make-up or act in ways that are ‘unmanly’.

So rather than change the stereotype, those males are non gender-conforming insist that they are actually the opposite gender in the most regressive of ways.

And then, in the ultimate act of male entitlement, insist that women redefine themselves around them.

You could not make it up.

This. 100% this.

A Muslim friend and I attended the same breastfeeding support group. She covered completely including the veil. Our group was woman only, so like the girls in EdgeOfACoin’s school she was able to relax and uncover.

I don’t want to get deeply into the proposed law in France, which personally I would never support, but it doesn’t surprise me since French policy has long been if you want to live in France then make efforts to assimilate into the French way of life coupled with strong values of secularism in public life.

Anyway back to the UK without explicitly single sex spaces such as toilets (in school and elsewhere), sports sessions, breastfeeding and other groups there is a very strong risk of cutting women of diverse backgrounds off from each other. Women of particular religious backgrounds who need single sex spaces will likely be able to form them for themselves by privately hiring sports facilities etc which will meet some of their needs but they wouldn’t any longer have the opportunity to meet women from other cultural or religious or non religious backgrounds, then there will be many women who don’t have such connections who just rely on a small social group of friends meeting at each other’s houses. This agenda of removing single sex spaces is likely to prove divisive and isolating for a very large number of women.

To return to the OP I believe that the use of gender neutral language in women’s services is not actually driven by the needs of service users at all but rather by an entirely different group who want woman to have a new meaning which is divorced from the meaning most of us have attributed to it from childhood-adult human female. This agenda rejects biology and concrete definitions and instead proposes that the meaning of the word woman is in the mind of the speaker alone, it cannot be pinned down at all and to try and pin it to biology is bigotry or perhaps blasphemy.

The message of gender neutral language in women’s services is - women you do not deserve words to describe yourselves, you must know your place, others come before you, you are not worthy of a name of your own, your existence is offensive so lower your eyes and your voices, your bodies and bodily functions are disturbing and distressing so do not discuss them.

This thread is equal parts bonkers, frustrating and sinister.

Start with the children, then move on to the women, and finish up with the men!

Do you hear yourself? I’m assuming that along with biology, history is a similar mess of urgh, outdated wrongthink colonialist blah doesn’t matter any more? I’d suggest starting with McCarthy and the red menace, then move on to Mao and the cultural revolution, or if you’d rather stick to the UK, then spirit yourself back to the Reformation and ponder on how that all went down.

Happy reading.

I mentioned earlier that it will be happening. However it is an ongoing change. The NHS know the reaction isn't going to go very well, especially with men. So they've done it so changes for young people have been made for a while now. Now changes in the female side are being made, and finally the male side. Then overall everything will have changed.

Hmm... creepy. Sinister. Get those changes in by stealth and then, when anyone complains, it's wide-eyed innocence and "what? It's been this way for years. Keep up with the times."

As always the trans lobby working backwards from their pre-determined conclusions.

Having followed your shenanigans on this board for the past couple of weeks now @ASugarr I don't believe a word you say anyway.

🦡🌈🤍

There’s a rather lovely poem that’s been going about, voices my opinion on things like this perfectly.