If you avoid the feminist section then at least read this article

[RedthroatedCaracara]

because all females need to be aware of this

And there's no need to have an attack of the vapours because it's a Daily Mail link. For all their multitude of shortcomings, the Mail at least have the guts to publish articles that stand up for women and girls.

@MarshaBradyo

Pumper ok I’ll leave you to it. Too hard to engage, not sure if you’re doing it on purpose to derail but I’ll leave you to the other posters.

Because of the ‘language matters’ thing? Why use it if you don’t know what it means in the context you use it in?

We’ll obviously I know Pumper. I just cba engaging with you as I think you are being difficult for some reason - that I don’t care enough about to continue.

You seem very invested on a topic you think isn’t happening so I’ll leave you to it.

@Ijustreallywantacat

Do you agree that it is good to push back against the changing language when we do see it? For instance, in work maternity policies?

Workplace policies should be as inclusive as possible. Whether you agree or not, there will be transmen who become pregnant, will need to use the policy, and do not call themselves mother. It doesn't take away your right to call yourself mother, or to insist that anyone else calls you that.

Transmen with a GRC are supposed to commit to living as a man. Making a false statement is punishable by law, I believe (though I don't think this has ever been tested).

I struggle to understand how getting pregnant and giving birth is 'living as a man' - can you help me understand this, please?

And if getting pregnant (deliberately, in many cases) isn't 'living as a man', why do we need to change the language?

@EdgeOfACoin

I absolutely agree they were right to change the language of the act. I don’t think it’s a massive scandal that it needed to be changed, that’s how law works.

But without people saying 'hey, this isn’t right', the gender-neutral language would have been retained and the word 'mother' would have been erased from that particular bit of legislation.

Without people saying 'hang on, Stonewall is misrepresenting the law' or 'Stonewall's going a bit far here', organisations would have been slowly, quietly, one-by-one implementing changes that gradually get rid of the words 'women' and 'mother', almost without anyone noticing.

Yes, maybe these things do seem like minor issues when viewed in isolation. I just take the view that that the more we think 'oh it's just this once' or 'it's not a big deal really', the more normalised the whole thing becomes.

And if in 10 years time, the words 'woman' and 'mother' have ceased to have any meaningful definition, I consider that to be detrimental to women. How can women's rights be protected if we cannot define ourselves?

So yes, I appreciate sometimes it looks as though we're overreacting or 'pearl clutching' or whatever, but I do perceive any instance of changing language, no matter how small, to be worth talking about and standing firm against.

How much meaningful definition have they ever had though? As I said, the trans debate is absolutely a conversation worth having. I just don’t -agree that this is a hill to die on.

@MarshaBradyo

We’ll obviously I know Pumper. I just cba engaging with you as I think you are being difficult for some reason - that I don’t care enough about to continue.

You seem very invested on a topic you think isn’t happening so I’ll leave you to it.

Sure, just like the evidence you couldn’t provide. Or the stuff you asked me to google then immediately stopped posting about when I posted the flaw in your logic.

Why are so many women desperate to deny this is taking place?

I’m really not denying there is some rubbish spouted out there
On both sides of the debate frankly .
I also don’t like the way stonewall is going , not at all

But hand on heart I don’t see this as a major risk in RL

As frankly speaking most of our racist and bigoted island won’t ever accept it. The land that voted for Brexit and Boris will never accept this becoming mainstream

Urgh can we not keep this transphobic crap to the FWR boards please.

It's not transphobic.

You have an option to hide the thread or simply scroll on by.

Yes that’s it Pumper

Or you’re just irritating as hell, take your pick. Couldn’t you google it? What’s wrong with you

@MarshaBradyo

Yes that’s it Pumper

Or you’re just irritating as hell, take your pick. Couldn’t you google it? What’s wrong with you

Google what? Could you be more specific?

Pumper
Oh my Lord. Why do you need so much help? Scroll back, cut and paste the words in the post and find what you are interested in.

Go!

Or you’re just irritating as hell, take your pick. Couldn’t you google it? What’s wrong with you

I wouldn't waste your time. It's a deliberate derailing approach.

@Erikrie

Or you’re just irritating as hell, take your pick. Couldn’t you google it? What’s wrong with you

I wouldn't waste your time. It's a deliberate derailing approach.

You’re right.

Ok I’ll leave you all to the joys of Pumper

To the poster who said this isn't a risk in real life, I think the women who have been sexually assaulted and raped by males in women's prisons may disagree with you. As would girls in women's toilets in Fife. And no, these are not isolated incidents.

@MarshaBradyo

Pumper Oh my Lord. Why do you need so much help? Scroll back, cut and paste the words in the post and find what you are interested in.

Go!

I can see why you struggle so much with the phrase ‘language matters’. It’s really not your strong point.

What is it you want me to google because you’ve none of your own evidence? I already googled the thing about stonewall putting companies off dealing with them, which you seem to deny is happening. Are they leaving stonewall or not? And if they are, what’s your issue?

@Erikrie

Or you’re just irritating as hell, take your pick. Couldn’t you google it? What’s wrong with you

I wouldn't waste your time. It's a deliberate derailing approach.

I’m hardly derailing, I’ve googled very specific phrases, I’ve looked into Marion Miller (no response) I’ve asked about the change of wording to the bill (inclusive) - the problem is there’s no argument here.

As I said, the trans debate is absolutely a conversation worth having. I just don’t -agree that this is a hill to die on.

The erasure of the language needed to fight sex based oppression is, thankfully, a hill many women are prepared to die on.

If you think it is possible to fight sex based oppression if you can't define what a woman or what a girl is anymore or speak about material reality then I believe you come from a very privileged position.

Gender based language comes from a position of privilege. In the developing world everyone knows what a girl is, they are the ones that miss out on education, are treated as chattels subjected to horrific FGM and raped and murdered because of their sex not their gender identity.

The people you seek to protect with so called inclusive language know fully well that it is their sex not their gender ID that enables them to be pregnant. Despite not wanting to be 'women' they are using their bodies to do a thing that only women and mothers can do.

@astonafar

Mother is not an inclusive term. Mother and birthing parent is.

Birthing parent, birthing person and the even more revolting term birthing body which was touted a while ago are hideous terms straight out of dystopian fiction they are reductive to the mother and the child, they have no place in legislation or work policies.

If a transman is so uncomfortable and triggered by the word mother then I would surmise they have much bigger issues to worry about than being referred to, correctly, as a mother.

@lifeturnsonadime

As I said, the trans debate is absolutely a conversation worth having. I just don’t -agree that this is a hill to die on.

The erasure of the language needed to fight sex based oppression is, thankfully, a hill many women are prepared to die on.

If you think it is possible to fight sex based oppression if you can't define what a woman or what a girl is anymore or speak about material reality then I believe you come from a very privileged position.

Gender based language comes from a position of privilege. In the developing world everyone knows what a girl is, they are the ones that miss out on education, are treated as chattels subjected to horrific FGM and raped and murdered because of their sex not their gender identity.

The people you seek to protect with so called inclusive language know fully well that it is their sex not their gender ID that enables them to be pregnant. Despite not wanting to be 'women' they are using their bodies to do a thing that only women and mothers can do.

Well, why is it so important? You’re still working under this idea that people aren’t using words like ‘girl’ and ‘women’ but they are. So with that in mind, why is this particular issue (‘pregnant employees’ over ‘mothers’) such a big deal?

Pumper we all keep telling you why it is important.

You are not listening.

If you cannot define the words you need to described sex based oppression then you cannot fight sex based oppression.

Ignore this at your peril.

You may be comfortable with it but most women know that we need to have precise and clear language to fight sex based oppression.

How do YOU think we can fight sex based oppression in a world where the words Woman & Girls include people with penises? Do you not believe that sex based oppression exists? If a transwoman is a woman then please define the word Woman for me Pumper, see the problem now?

@lifeturnsonadime

Pumper we all keep telling you why it is important.

You are not listening.

If you cannot define the words you need to described sex based oppression then you cannot fight sex based oppression.

Ignore this at your peril.

You may be comfortable with it but most women know that we need to have precise and clear language to fight sex based oppression.

How do YOU think we can fight sex based oppression in a world where the words Woman & Girls include people with penises? Do you not believe that sex based oppression exists? If a transwoman is a woman then please define the word Woman for me Pumper, see the problem now?

You’re not telling me why it’s important - you’re telling me how it might become important if we reach a stage where, in some dystopian future, we might erase language relating to 51% of the population. And that’s not what’s happening.

I absolutely believe sex-based oppression exists. I believe transwomen are a ‘sub-section’ (or branch?) of women. I believe trans men are a branch of ‘men’. I don’t believe you can change biological sex. I don’t see why some transwomen existing stops us fighting sex-based oppression, because I haven’t seen any evidence that it does.

So there is the difference. I believe that transwomen are a subset of men. They are gender non conforming men.

It is not possible to change sex.

If you believe that the word woman includes men who identify as women then you are not concerned about the change in the meaning of the word woman and the implications it might have on the way we describe ourselves as a sex class.

You obviously also believe that transmen are a subset of men and think that their need to be validated is adequate to change the language we use around giving birth and motherhood. Despite the fact that it is their sexed bodies that give birth not their gender identity.

At least I now understand your beliefs Pumper. I don't agree with you but thank you for explaining the root of our differences in opinion.

Well, why is it so important? You’re still working under this idea that people aren’t using words like ‘girl’ and ‘women’ but they are. So with that in mind, why is this particular issue (‘pregnant employees’ over ‘mothers’) such a big deal?

The Welsh Policy on Maternity removed all references to the word mother or pregnant women, but the word father got a mention though, surprise, surprise no attempt to erase men and their role. The policy refers to chestfeeding not breastfeeding, but no it's not happening language is not being changed, nothing to see here move on.

Maternity - comes from the Latin root mater which means mother. Maternity Leave and Policies are for mothers the clue is in the title.

it's not very inclusive language for women with poor literary, EAL, learning difficulties etc who require transparent and clear terms like woman and mother.

I dont think 'pregnant people' is much more difficult to understand then women and mother. 'People' is on the list of 100 most common words in English. If anyone did need help to understand it then I'd hazard a guess that they'd have help to translate or explain all of the rest of the literature too, so there'd be ample opportunity to explain.

They are gender non conforming men.

Gender non conformity and transsexualism are not the same thing. I do agree though the vast majority apply the trans label to non conformity.

@BlueLipstickRocks

They are gender non conforming men.

Gender non conformity and transsexualism are not the same thing. I do agree though the vast majority apply the trans label to non conformity.

Blue I know they are not. However I don't think many transexuals claim to actually be the opposite sex.

This is why Stonewall is problematic. These discussions would not have been necessary but for the attempts of Stonewall to change language.

As I stated upthread. Stonewall has done nothing to help transexual people who have been thrown under the bus along with women and girls.