I just came out as GC at work, to the big boss and I feel a bit sick

[JustcameoutGC]

I have NCed for this. I have just outed myself as GC in work to the big boss (and some others cced in).

I was asked to sign off on something that I just couldn't and I said so, and explained why.

I literally feel sick. Like I have put a big fat GC target on my back. My org is totally woke. I wonder how many times my response has been forwarded already.

Someone with the name SweetPetrichor dismissing the impact of obscure technical language on people less well-educated than herself.

How surprising.

Darling, I went to a school, where I left with less than five GCSEs and I was, comparatively, an academic high-flyer. There were kids in my year who weren't even entered for GCSE Maths or English because there was no point.

Yeah, the vulnerable are paying the price and it’s not you lot, or me. It’s not women.

Bit revealing there.

Is a women any less of a woman after a double mastectomy? Or after a hysterectomy? No, of course not.

No one is saying that they are, so you can retire your tired old talking point.

@SweetPetrichor

You don’t ‘come out’ as GC. If I worked with you, I’d be reporting such behaviour for further education and disciplinary action. I reported similar behaviour relatively recently and it was handled very well. I don’t think you have anything to be proud of here and I hope any decent work place will remind you of company policy and/or professional behaviour.

"I'd be reporting such behaviour for further education and disciplinary action."

Chillingly Orwellian and a perfect example of the climate of fear created in many workplaces by this movement. I, too, hope the quoted post remains.

Bravo OP. The more people who point out the emperor has no clothes the better. The bullies wield power by silencing those who disagree.

Just in case anyone is just joining, I can't see any points in Petrochor's post that haven't been debunked upthread.

Good for you op

@SweetPetrichor

You don’t ‘come out’ as GC. If I worked with you, I’d be reporting such behaviour for further education and disciplinary action. I reported similar behaviour relatively recently and it was handled very well. I don’t think you have anything to be proud of here and I hope any decent work place will remind you of company policy and/or professional behaviour.

Oh, the Gestapo is out again.

No wonder @JustcameoutGC was so frightened to do so. This is why so many women are responding with !

It’s not women.

Yes it is.

I think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix,

Women who don't speak very good English? What do we do about them, send them off for re-education too?

Fist bump from me too, OP.

I hope the recent HoL amendment will encourage more to do as you did op and not sign off on language which erases women.

I think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix

Wow @SweetPetrichor, not only are you terrifying, you're not as clever as you think you are. Plenty of people in this country don't know what a cervix is, or whether they have one. People who don't know what petrichor is, for instance

You are so wrapped up in your echo-chamber, you don't even realise how exclusionary you are being.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix,

And you'd be wrong. But given that you don't seem to care much about the well-being of women either physically or mentally, that doesn't surprise me at all.

Many women have little idea.

www.google.com/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2020/11/09/almost-50-of-women-dont-know-where-their-cervix-is-finds-study-13561743/amp/

But it always interesting to me that proponents of 'birthing bodies' and 'uterus havers' never explain how it's blindingly obvious which sex has these organs.

If my child asks me if they have a uterus, how do I know? Do I have to take them for a scan?

SweetPetrichor what words do I use to ascertain which of my children have wombs and which have prostates?

I mean, you want me to call them by those organs, but how do I know which has what?

I think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix

You might be surprised at how few people (including women) know exactly what/where a cervix is. You might also want to consider how likely it is that someone with English as their second/third language would know, and how those with learning difficulties/SEN would respond to being asked if they're a "cervix haver".

Therefore the word woman, which dictionaries define as "adult human female", and is from Old English and has been in use for centuries, is useful. As has been noted, the NHS addresses cervical screening literature to "women and those with a cervix", which covers the 50% of the population who are female, plus the handful who are female but in denial of it.

Gender-neutral language is not helpful in medical contexts when distinct male/female biology is involved. Disease does not give a shit about our language.

'd be reporting such behaviour for further education and disciplinary action

They used to have camps in Siberia for just that very thing.

We are not defined by our body parts. Is a women any less of a woman after a double mastectomy? Or after a hysterectomy? No, of course not.

Aha! An excuse to throw in a bit of PeachYorgurt for the uninitiated.

Women who have had traumatic or invasive surgery are of course women. The suggestion from transactivists that this somehow makes them the same as men who claim they are women is a clear example of using women’s traumatic and difficult experiences as a weapon.

Anyone who would weaponise women’s trauma in that way is no friend to women.

But PeachYogurt always puts a smile on my face.

@SweetPetrichor

Yeah, the vulnerable are paying the price and it’s not you lot, or me. It’s not women. I will proudly stand for gender neutral language, I will happily roll my eyes any woman I see wearing a daft slogan about what they think makes a woman. I am proud to stand against negativity towards transgender or non-binary colleagues, be that direct or through unprofessional word choices or opinions. They have no place in the workplace. I’m glad it is taken seriously and I’m glad the person was disciplined. I’d hope that was always the case. I think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix, and that choice of language protects men who still have a cervix. We are not defined by our body parts. Is a women any less of a woman after a double mastectomy? Or after a hysterectomy? No, of course not.

Why isn't anyone demanding that men and transwomen are named 'prostate havers' or 'penis owners' then, if this is all about being kind and using gender neutral language, rather than misogyny?

Just want to say well done OP. The only way we will ever manage to come up with laws and resources that protect both women and trans people is if everyone's needs and rights are considered. We can't do that if women are unable to speak up.

Well done op. So glad to see the tide turn.

But surely "cervix havers" is literally defining us by our body parts?! It literally states a shared body part as the defining feature of the people being discussed?! I'm always confused by the woke, but this argument where they claim WE are reducing women to nothing more than genitals whilst they label us as nothing but our genitals- well, it's baffling.

@SweetPetrichor

You don’t ‘come out’ as GC. If I worked with you, I’d be reporting such behaviour for further education and disciplinary action. I reported similar behaviour relatively recently and it was handled very well. I don’t think you have anything to be proud of here and I hope any decent work place will remind you of company policy and/or professional behaviour.

What a horrible little bully you are. "Reporting such behaviour" wow - "further education" - how exactly do you intend to make everyone agree with you?

It is sometimes thought, by those who are very well-educated, who spent their lives always in the top set of whatever school they went to, went to university, and onto a graduate-only job, that what they consider basic information is known by everyone.

For various reasons, I have not spent my life insulated from illiterate people, people with learning disabilities, people who speak English as an additional language and so on. I went to school with children who had been in and out of care, were carers to family members, and children with specific learning disabilities.

After that, I lived in a single-sex homelessness hostel for women aged between 16-25. And the idea that these women were less vulnerable than someone like Caitlyn Jenner is laughable. I've helped women who could hardly read, complete forms before now. There was one girl in the homelessness hostel who visibly had fetal alcohol syndrome, and there is no way she knew what a cervix was.

Research from Jo’s Trust, the cervical cancer charity shows that less than 50% of women in the UK know what the cervix is.

bit worrying if their health relies on that, isn’t it?

If my child asks me if they have a uterus, how do I know? Do I have to take them for a scan?

Excellent point. Especially if they get called "uterus haver" or person with a vagina" in their sex education class as per the recent trending thread. How would anyone know?

I recall many were in favour of re educating JK Rowling with a baseball bat. Disgusting people.

It's sometimes wrongly claimed that feminists stand against gender neutral language. This is, I think, a misunderstanding. I'm sure most feminists, for example, would support the use of 'children' as a collective noun in school when addressing the whole class, for example. Feminists would also have no problem with the word people being used in a context where sex was largely irrelevant, for example, attendees at a concert.
However, what feminists on the whole are standing against is using gender neutral language when this obfuscates the meaning when sex is important. For example, when reporting crimes, dealing with safeguarding and in legal matters, sex based words like women and men have clear definitions and are needed for clarity and safety. If these words are dropped in favour of body part naming language, the meaning is too often lost, confused or escapes the vulnerable or those of whom English is a second language.
By using the term menstruaters for example, you risk alienating those who don't have this bodily event due to age or medical conditions.

Can someone be sacked for saying this?

Yes. Maya Forstater was.

I think people are more than capable of working out whether they are a person with a cervix, and that choice of language protects men who still have a cervix. We are not defined by our body parts.

How is “person with a cervix” NOT defining people by their body parts? Pure nonsense.