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.

Adoption UK has pointed out, on twitter, that Stonewall advising its diversity champion partners to replace the word "Mother" with "parent who has given birth" is really not very inclusive at all.....

twitter.com/adoptionuk/status/1400779142795337730?s=21

It is definitely happening, my work place maternity policy has been made 'gender neutral'.. except it really hasn't. They've simply swapped the words 'mother' or 'woman' for 'parent'. A parent which we all know, when capable of pregnancy, is a woman (whether they like it or not). Not allowing us to say so is not 'inclusive' and makes the policy nonsensical in places.

@AngeloMysterioso

But that’s my point. I don’t know any organisations or people who have changed the language they use. I read about it, but I don’t experience it. So how prevalent is it really?

Well, between having my son and becoming pregnant again, my local Trust has apparently taken the time to remove the word mother from every page of the maternity section on its website. It now refers to “pregnant people”.

I was also banned from my local Maternity Voices Facebook page for objecting to their use of “pregnant people”.

There is a very good online talk that was led by Stella Creasey MP about the covid vaccine and whether it is safe for pregnant women. She speaks to a lot of experts in their field about the evidence - I recommend watching it; it's very good.

However, one expert she speaks to (Victoria Male), uses the term 'pregnant people' every single time. It isn't a mistake. It isn't to mix up the language a bit to avoid repetition. And don't be fooled into thinking this language is used to highlight that pregnant women are still people.

It is part of a larger push to separate the act of childbearing from being a woman. And this isn't about women who choose not to be mothers or who are unable to be mothers either - this is very much connected to trans rights activism and the idea that not all people who give birth are women, and not all women give birth.

I think it is no coincidence that Victoria was the youngest expert on the panel. The others, including the representative from RCOG continued to use 'pregnant women'.

Watch the talk - especially if you want to find out more about the vaccine and its impact on pregnancy and fertility. All of the speakers were very good.

But please note that this language is beginning to creep into the discourse. Let's not close our eyes to this.

@Erikrie

No sure, you’ve convinced yourself it’s happening because Sarah Vine said so and that’s good enough for you. Never mind there’s no actual real-life evidence of every midwife being shot at dawn for saying the word ‘mother’.

No, I'm convinced it's happening because I've been campaigning for women's rights solidly for the last 5 years. Ever since I noticed that women's rights were being rolled back.

Anyway, I'm not engaging with you anymore. I'm not getting much out of the experience tbh. Even if you are. 🤷

Of course you have, that’s why you’ve so much evidence right at your fingertips.

Should have kept it in the feminism topic

Nobody seems overly bothered! 😆

Angelo, my point was directed more to the post you quoted than to you!

trans men are biologically female and as such need the same protections and provisions as women, but often choose not to access services where they would have to acknowledge their female body.

And yet they have no problem conceiving a child (assuming it was consensual) being pregnant, giving birth and breastfeeding? That doesn’t “acknowledge their female body”?

I’ve either worked closely with or worked for 31 of the organisations on Stonewall’s 100 Top Workplaces list - they all refer to maternity leave and paternity leave, they have “mothers’ rooms” for breastfeeding and storing breast milk, they have a mixture of men’s, women’s and unisex lavatories. So Stonewall’s requirement for LGBT-friendly workplaces doesn’t include removing particular words and concepts from terminology and replacing them with something else.

For avoidance of doubt, I don’t believe it’s possible to change sex and I think gender is a social construct. I just also don’t have any experience whatsoever, beyond people online saying it’s so, that we are all being told we need to use certain language.

@AngeloMysterioso

trans men are biologically female and as such need the same protections and provisions as women, but often choose not to access services where they would have to acknowledge their female body.

And yet they have no problem conceiving a child (assuming it was consensual) being pregnant, giving birth and breastfeeding? That doesn’t “acknowledge their female body”?

I’m not a trans man, you’d have to ask somebody who is that question.

So it doesn’t matter how much damage she causes to say, women suffering from mental health issues because she’s happy to slag off a group of people you don’t agree with?

This

Anyway, I'm not engaging with you anymore. I'm not getting much out of the experience tbh

Lol, #nodebate

@User27392

Seeking an echo chamber is exactly what you’re doing. You’re turning a blind eye to the absolute atrocities peddled by that excuse for a newspaper because on this particular issue, you share the same prejudice.

And what prejudice is that?

That women give birth and they are mothers?

@RedthroatedCaracara you still haven’t said what point she has over how low cut a woman’s dress is?

@ComtesseDeSpair - Ironically me thinking like your comment is what 'peaked' me! It's exactly because 99.9% of people (including a huge amount of the LGBTplus community) are not bothered about any of this nonsense, that it seems so mad to me that institutions are spending a huge huge amount of money and time changing policies for the tiny, TINY percentage it affects. I mean how many transmen actually give birth in the UK every year? While I personally agree with @Sparklybanana's reasoning, if you did want to be inclusive the most you needed to do was to update relevant policies with a one liner saying 'this policies includes gender specific language but the privileges it endorses apply equally to transmen and no discrimination will be accepted,' or something. Yet instead organisations are rewording entire policies, guidance, public information leaflets (not to mention reconfiguring bathrooms) just to avoid upsetting an absolutely tiny but very vocal and bizarrely influential minority, and not thinking that, as @fantastaballs said, they are actually causing confusion and distress to a much wider group (anyone who is younger, doesn't have english as a first language, has a lower vocabulary or mental understanding, etc.) Ask 100 teenagers or people with limited english what a 'cervix' is, or who they think a 'birthing person' might be and I bet you wouldn't get much consistency, but 'woman,' and 'mother' is universally recognised!

You said you didn't know any organisation that has actually amended their policies. Is this just because you haven't been aware of it though? @AngeloMysterioso has just given her example and there are multiple examples on the feminist threads where NHS maternity guidance does use 'chest feeding' 'birthing person,' etc. As it's an example mentioned in the article, here is the Welsh Govts revised maternity/adoption policy gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2021-03/atisn14848doc56.pdf. Try finding the word 'mother' 'woman', 'women,' 'female' or 'breast' (because it also covers nursing) anywhere in it.

[quote Pumperthepumper]@RedthroatedCaracara you still haven’t said what point she has over how low cut a woman’s dress is?[/quote]
Interesting how people want to derail the thread rather than discuss the issue at hand.

Quite obvious, really.

Seeking an echo chamber is exactly what you’re doing. You’re turning a blind eye to the absolute atrocities peddled by that excuse for a newspaper because on this particular issue, you share the same prejudice.

Yes
The DM peddles all kind of hateful shit, they're recently pushing a narrative about migrants coming over, they must be taking a slight breather with this columnist.
At least Meghan Markle is gettiing a rest from their garbage too, maybe even they got bored with the sheer volume of crap they were sending her way.
Comes across as "they're alright now as I agree with them on prejudice towards trans people"

Erikrie that piece in the Guardian/Observer is very good, and clearly sets out important issues.

Interesting how people want to derail the thread rather than discuss the issue at hand.

Isn't it just.

What is the issue at hand though? Some people want to say "people who give birth" instead of "mother" or "chest feed" instead of "breast feed"? So what?

The fashion will change soon. We'll all still be mothers and the world will not have ended because a few people used some silly terms for a while.

If inclusive language encourages them to access a service and keep themselves well, what’s unfeminist about that?

It may be inclusive towards transmen but it is extremely exclusive to for example, women with poor literacy, learning difficulties or those who do not speak English as a first language. For those the language "woman" and "mother" is much more transparent and clear than "menstruators" or "People with cervices" and Clarity matters when it comes to marginalised groups accessing healthcare.
I'm not sure why the rights of trans people not to be offended should trump this.

It also NEVER works the other way round.

So how prevalent is it really?

It’s embedded deep into universities and government institutions, including the NHS.

If you want to keep men (and I do mean men, not trans women, although obviously this also applies to them) out of hospital wards, prisons, rape crisis centres and women’s refuges you need to understand this is absolutely where we are at: any man who says he is a woman, no matter how he looks, not matter who he is sexually attracted to can now access what used to be women only spaces on nothing more than their say so.

If you think this doesn’t apply to you or is not something you’re worried about then you have been enormously privileged.

If you have been raped you can no longer ask for a biological woman to perform the exam.

If your sister is arrested by the police she can no longer ask for a biological woman to search her.

If your mother works for the police, she can be expected to perform an intimate search on someone with a penis.

If your grandmother requests her intimate care is performed by a biological woman, the NHS now advise in their training that she is a bigot and should be “re-educated”.

If your DD wants to go on a sports camp she can now be chaperoned by a biological male and excluded if you or her object.

If you’re not concerned about this, if you don’t recognise the safe guarding nightmare that lies ahead then you need to wake up.

Thanks, OP. A good, strong piece of writing from Sarah Vine.

If you don't think this is a big issue or something worth expending your energy, then fair enough, do feel free to move on with your day.

For those who are worried about the implications of, for example, Stonewall lobbying to remove the single-sex exemptions of the Equality Act, or the 4000% increase in teenage girls identifying as boys, or the upcoming court case of a woman accused of hate crime for tweeting a picture of a suffragette ribbon, or males now being accepted into women's sport at every level from small local clubs to Olympics, then there is loads more info on the Feminist Chat board.

Interesting how people want to derail the thread rather than discuss the issue at hand.

@EdgeOfACoin - the OP brought it up. I thought they might like to discuss this issue of policing what women wear a bit more.

But let’s talk about this erasure of women - any evidence it’s happening? Any midwives being struck off for using the word ‘mother’? Or can we agree it’s just a way of the DM squeezing more hate out of Sarah Vine?

@BiggerBoat1

What is the issue at hand though? Some people want to say "people who give birth" instead of "mother" or "chest feed" instead of "breast feed"? So what? The fashion will change soon. We'll all still be mothers and the world will not have ended because a few people used some silly terms for a while.

It will happen because women pushed back in that case.

@Erikrie

Interesting how people want to derail the thread rather than discuss the issue at hand.

Isn't it just.

It is! I think that’s why people can’t provide evidence, too busy and all that. Not to busy to make a snide comment or two, but definitely too busy to back up their opinion.