NHS staff invitation to menopause workshop to people who menstruate!

[sunshineandhappy]

I received a generic email from the well being team at the nhs trust I am employed by inviting me to a managing menopause workshop which was open to 'people who menstruate or people who will go through the menopause'.
This was my reply I was disappointed to see the following phrase ‘those who menstruate or those who will go through the menopause ‘ in the below email. The correct phrase for the target audience should surely include the word women, even if the other phrasing needs to be used as well, as this clumsy phrasing, whilst appearing to be inclusive to a minority, is actually exclusive to the way the vast majority of the target audience for this seminar may feel. I do not want to be reduced to being a person who menstruates or a person who will go through the menopause, I am a woman, an adult human female. I hope my opinion will be considered in the spirit in which it is meant, as all groups matter, and all relevant individuals should be considered when generic emails are being sent to a large number of staff.'
We will wait to see whether I receive any response

Instance*

[quote ConfusedAdultFemale]@Asugar it’s shouldn’t be including “all types” of people. It’s specifically for those with female biology, in this instant “women and transmen” would be all that was needed. Everyone that is female knows they’re female, whether or not they’ve got a male gender. There’s no need to be inclusive of transwomen or men in the language used because neither of those go through menopause.[/quote]
And non binary people. People is a word that encompasses them all.

Okay and the other way round excludeds and insults people too, so what's the solution?

@MeltsAway

Would it really matter if a non-menstruator turned up at the menopause workshop anyway? Maybe they want to support the menstruators in their lives.

Well, you know, when I was peri-menopausal, I wouldn't have minded if a woman who'd experienced menopause* came to talk, and I could ask about stuff. But if a man (sex, not gender) of any sort were there, I just wouldn't talk; I wouldn't feel comfortable.

Why should men be tourists in women's lives?

• Note: a woman who'd been through a significant life experience, not a "non-menstruator"

Not every woman wishes to discuss vaginal atrophy and dyspareunia in front of males. Especially in the NHS, where there are a significant number of women of other ethnicities who might not be quite so relaxed about discussing such things.

It isn't really acceptable socially to discuss the condition of one's vaginal walls over the dinner table or with one's mother in law, after all - if you add into that other concerns, domestic abuse for example, particularly non consensual sex whilst experiencing atrophy, it really helps for the women there to not feel awkward or observed - or that they are speaking and acting inappropriately around males. Not that it would be discussed directly, but addressing the symptom, a possible treatment and clarifying that there is a medical cause and risk involved could be the information somebody needs to make a disclosure. You certainly don't want a man chipping in with their opinions on that.

Same way I don't think I should be present in a workshop for men (however they identify) with prostate issues; many in the age group concerned will not want to be talking about erectile dysfunction around women. Not my place and I could be preventing somebody with a genuine concern from being able to speak out.

Exactly NeverDrop. I think its rather telling that people who handwave the objections of boring old middle aged women tend not to be people anywhere near menopause and who for example arent having to deal with vaginal atrophy so severe that even the smallest dilator is painful to get in, or the shrinking and disapperance of their labia and clitoris.

odd how the kindness and inclusion calls only go one way....

The idea that woman should not be named in a workshop about periods because it hurts the feeling of men is just breathtaking. Where is the common sense.

As many others have said i think

‘Women, transmen and non binary people’ is a good compromise

Or ‘women and people with a cervix’

Anything else isn’t a compromise

@ASugarr

Okay and the other way round excludeds and insults people too, so what's the solution?

I actually think we might be about to get somewhere @ASugarr

You cannot exclude half the human population by erasing their name as a class from language. You are so keen not to make certain groups of people feel excluded. Women should also not be excluded. You're right- a conundrum.

And for a couple of weeks now since you joined this forum, woman after woman after woman have been saying that this sort of thing excludes us.

What do we do about it? What do you think would be a good way forward that doesn't exclude women, for whom these types of sessions/clinics etc are for?

Have a think about everything everyone has told you on here for the past couple of weeks. Genuinely listen. Maybe you have a good idea that could seriously bridge the divide.

For all my previous caustic responses, I am genuinely asking you know. What do you propose is done about this to make everyone feel included, safe, valued, and to allow those who need it the most to get the information pertinent to them.

🦡🌈🤍

But using the term 'people' includes all. It isn't excluding half.

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

As many others have said i think

‘Women, transmen and non binary people’ is a good compromise

Or ‘women and people with a cervix’

Anything else isn’t a compromise

But women are people with a cervix so.

@ASugarr

But using the term 'people' includes all. It isn't excluding half.

Exactly.

@ASugarr

But using the term 'people' includes all. It isn't excluding half.

Why can't women be referred to as women if that's what they prefer?

This has nothing to do with including trans men (and anyone NB) and everything to do with TWAW.

Given a recent thread about how trans women can have periods it just gets very confusing.

(I also agree that using people who menstrate is dehumanising)

And non binary people.

Non-binary people of the female sex are included in the word 'woman'. It's a word that encompasses half of the human race.

Women who’ve had total hysterectomies don’t have a cervix. They do, however go through menopause.

A workshop aimed at “people with cervices experiencing the menopause” specifically excludes women who have had total hysterectomies.

Let’s just be clear about who matters here and who, clearly, doesn’t.

But women are people with a cervix so

Don’t some women have penises?

@applesaucespoon

But women are people with a cervix so

Don’t some women have penises?

Badass Badger Award for you!

🏆

🦡🌈🤍

@ASugarr

But using the term 'people' includes all. It isn't excluding half.

You want trans women to have the right to be called women.

But you want to call women "people".

Help me out here @ASugarr !!

🦡🌈🤍

Considering the trans activist side accuses gender critical feminists of “reducing women to their body parts” I’m astonished that they support this objectifying, dehumanising language like “people with a cervix” which LITERALLY describes women by their body parts! As women have said countless times there is a very easy compromise here : you can say “women, and anyone female at birth.” Done.

I’d just like to point something else in the NHS guidelines so helpfully posted for us, posted under

1. Make sure everyone can use the service

Make sure people with different physical, mental health, social, cultural or learning needs can use your service, whether it's for the public or staff.

Also people who do not have access to the internet or lack the skills or confidence to use it.

Why it's important

NHS services are for everyone. We have a duty to consider everyone’s needs when we’re designing and delivering services.

“Inclusive, accessible services are better for everyone. For example, using simple words helps people who are sick or stressed as well as people who have a learning disability. ”

service-manual.nhs.uk/service-standard/5-make-sure-everyone-can-use-the-service

I think words such as “woman” and “man” fit this description, as well as being more recognisable for those for whom English is not their first language. On the other hand, words such as (people with/who etc) “cervix” “menstruate” “menopause” are probably not so easily understood nor recognised.

@ASugarr

But using the term 'people' includes all. It isn't excluding half.

This is awfully like 'I don't see colour' and 'All Lives Matter', isn't it? Would you debate with a group of people from ethnic minorities and tell them that their specific issues don't need to be considered separately from white people's issues? Would you go into a group of people with a visual impairment and tell them that they can't describe themselves as blind because some other people have decided for them that it's offensive?

You see, ASugarr, there are many issues that affect women - adult human females - and we need that word left as it is, clearly understood by every English speaker, so that we have a name for our group.

You want trans women to have the right to be called women.

But you want to call women "people".

Oh, only trans women are allowed to be called women.

Yes, off to walk the dog now. Sorry, I mean penis-owning canine, of course.