Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Am I missing something?

14 replies

musicalfrog · 07/06/2021 19:44

It's entirely possible.

If transwomen identify as women, why is the word woman so under threat?

Surely they can read the word woman and think - ah, that would be me! And we don't have to worry about all this menstruator/people with a cervix business? Which let's face it, is more harmful to a wider group of people.

Confused
OP posts:
Grellbunt · 07/06/2021 19:46

Well, I thought the cervix/menstruator stuff was to be inclusive to transmen.

Cabinfever10 · 07/06/2021 19:50

Also if we talked about women having periods or needing smear tests then we are purposely hurting trans womens feelings as they won't ever have them it's a "cis privilege " to need a smear don't you know ShockConfused

LibertyMole · 07/06/2021 19:51

Because they don’t want the word woman to refer to women. They want it to refer to them.

HollowTalk · 07/06/2021 19:53

I can understand transmen needing to be included in anything to do with smear tests etc, but why is it the transwomen who are doing all the kicking off about this? It doesn't make any sense at all - it just means it's all 'let's pretend and be nice'.

lazylinguist · 07/06/2021 19:53

Yes, the menstruater/cervix-haver stuff is designed to be inclusive of people who need female services/products but don't identity as women - i.e. transmen. Strangely enough, men's products and services seem to mostly still be allowed to refer to 'men', rather than prostate-havers ir penis-owners. Funny that.

musicalfrog · 07/06/2021 19:58

Oh gosh, yes I've got it the wrong way around sorry. I usually credit myself with some sensibility but obviously this has me flummoxed!

OP posts:
musicalfrog · 07/06/2021 19:59

@HollowTalk

I can understand transmen needing to be included in anything to do with smear tests etc, but why is it the transwomen who are doing all the kicking off about this? It doesn't make any sense at all - it just means it's all 'let's pretend and be nice'.
I think this is maybe why I'm so confused.
OP posts:
GNCQ · 07/06/2021 20:01

It's not the word "woman" itself that is the problem for TRA. The word woman does not need to be erased in all contexts. In fact it needs to remain in existence so transwomen can claim to be one

It's linking the word "woman" to anything specifically related to women's physical or biological reality eg reproductive or sexual health that is the problem (unless it's in porn).

Transwomen can only be "women" if the word has nothing to do with biological reality. Being a woman needs to mean being some vague elusive ever-changing spectrum of feelz in the minds eye of all types of human with or without a penis in order for gender ideology to work at all.

Helleofabore · 07/06/2021 20:13

It suits the purpose of those who identify as the opposite sex to detach any biological reference from the word woman. That is why the word woman has been described as being a ‘social construct’ (yeah, well everything is a social construct in some respect because we ascribed a meaning to a word that referenced that concept/thing/whatever.)

If it is only a ‘social construct’ the meaning can be tweaked to mean whatever someone wants it to mean. Then anyone can be a woman or a man. And biology needs to also be destabilised so the needs of those who no longer identify as a woman or a man can be legitimised.

Of course, we know that many trans people have accepted their bodies, accepted their reality. So it is also not all trans people by any means.

GNCQ · 07/06/2021 20:17

The claim made by TRA that erasing the word "woman" in relation to biological reality to do with women (outside of porn) is done in order to be more inclusive of transmen is... Quite frankly... A load of codswallop.

donquixotedelamancha · 07/06/2021 20:21

It's not the word "woman" itself that is the problem for TRA. The word woman does not need to be erased in all contexts. In fact it needs to remain in existence so transwomen can claim to be one It's linking the word "woman" to anything specifically related to women's physical or biological reality eg reproductive or sexual health that is the problem

This.

It's also so few of the people pushing Genderism are actually transsexual. Transsexuals who've spent years in treatment thinking about their relationship with sex and gender and finally gone through a lot to socially transition tend to know quite well what sex they are and only want to be socially accepted.

The people who are agressive about removing single sex provisions seem to be either speaking over for transsexuals, or themselves the particular version of 'trans' which seems to involve calling those who try to pass 'truscum' and doing odd things in a bunny costume while not looking anything like an actual woman.

AdHominemNonSequitur · 07/06/2021 20:26

@GNCQ

It's not the word "woman" itself that is the problem for TRA. The word woman does not need to be erased in all contexts. In fact it needs to remain in existence so transwomen can claim to be one

It's linking the word "woman" to anything specifically related to women's physical or biological reality eg reproductive or sexual health that is the problem (unless it's in porn).

Transwomen can only be "women" if the word has nothing to do with biological reality. Being a woman needs to mean being some vague elusive ever-changing spectrum of feelz in the minds eye of all types of human with or without a penis in order for gender ideology to work at all.

Yup. This.
AdHominemNonSequitur · 07/06/2021 20:39

It comes back to Blanchards transexual typography. We lump all trans people together. Trans women are not all feminine from an early age. Autogynephilia is real. Many autogynephiliacs are self aware and recognise the description. People will tell you it's been widely discredited, but really it is just clinical observation. It is only rejected by people with a vested interest in AGP who don't want it to be recognised as a thing. If you need to be seen as a woman, you don't want attention drawing to the aspects you can't emulate.

Toseland · 07/06/2021 23:30

I was horrified to read about “birthing parent” - so chilling and terribly sad - is this what it has come to now? It’s a quadruple hit of:
a) Gaining control of a word’s definition and setting a precedent that it is a changeable thing and ‘they’ can change it.
b) Misunderstanding (wilful or otherwise) of Mothers; it’s a verb and a noun and it’s part of many many other words and meanings - it’s not just the birthing part that is important! Why TF focus on that?
c) It’s a bloody insult - they reduce Mother to just giving birth?!
d) I think these people are giddy with power - fancy having the power or thinking you have the power to demand the stopping of using words and people and massive corporations obey them!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread