Plain English, Gender and compromise

[MouseyTheVampireSlayer]

Starting this thread because the Maya one is getting bogged down with linguistics.

There's an argument that we need to change our language to accommodate trans people. This would presumably result in things like:

Men and prostate Havers are invited to get their prostate checked by a doctor.

Menstruaters are encouraged to attend the seminar on the menopause.

There are obvious problems with this language that it's advocates are welcome to solve.

A) It ignores the plain English guidelines. Simple language is key for reaching target demographics
Semi literate
English as a foreign language
Learning difficulties
By adding endless gender identities it adds unnecessary complex language for people to wade through. This means that the most vulnerable are likely to miss key messages and so is discriminatory.

B) Language like menstruaters is dehumanising and many trans people as well as men and women don't support it.

C) Language like menstruaters doesn't apply to all people and all situations. For example it wouldn't call the right people to a menopause talk because they've stopped menstruations. This would lead to multiple words being used which would then obviously muddy the language. Leading to scenario a.

Those advocating for the use of this language need to come up with the solutions. Not the people advocating for simple language of men, women, boys and girls to be retained.

I wasn't being hostile.
If you have trouble understanding the meaning of comments in plain English, can you now see why less plain language is an issue?

@Thelnebriati

I wasn't being hostile. If you have trouble understanding the meaning of comments in plain English, can you now see why less plain language is an issue?

I can only repeat what I’ve already said - English isn’t my first language and I completely understand why plain language is important.

@lazylinguist you're right, I know you are. I think I'm just so tired of things still being so shit for women and girls that I start to lack patience with people having a problem with tampons being marketed at women or whatever. The nature of my work gives an awareness (sorry for being vague but don't want to be outing) on a regular basis about life for women and girls in developing countries and I guess it affects my responses to things like this, rightly or wrongly.

@DdraigGoch

"Women and people who menstruate" implies that women do not get periods which is obviously incorrect. Instead "women and other people who menstruate" is clear that it encompasses both classes.

See, I think "women and other people who menstruate" still isn't clear. This is because it leaves the reader uncertain about exactly which group the message is targeted at. Is it targeted at all biological females (with the "and people who menstruate" being used in an attempt to include transmen, non binary within the target audience etc), or is it targeted specifically at biological females who are currently menstruating? Depending on context, this might be a critically important distinction, which gets lost when you can't simply say "all women" or "women who are currently menstruating".

Following on from that, I am still having periods, but if I were post-menopausal I would have no idea how to interpret the statement "women and other people who menstruate". That isn't me being deliberately difficult, I would genuinely not know for sure if I was supposed to be including myself or not.

And yet, you continue to ask people their personal line in the sand. But you can't do that until you come up with a solution that addresses point a, b and c. Until you do, everyone's line is irrelevant as it's not inclusive.

The women+ is the only solution that tackles all three problems. If men+ was also adopted that could be a solution.

I don't think anyone care if coca cola or whoever want to include lots of letters. They'll just buy pepsi.

Far more women on any given day are grieving after a miscarriage, but we don't hide all evidence of babies from the baby aisle in the supermarket just so that those women don't have to see the reality of other women buying nappies or baby milk & feel 'triggered'.

On average 250,000 women a year. Add to that women who have a stillborn and women who abort a much wanted baby for medical reasons.

Contrary to my assumption that pregnancy loss was rare, at Christmas dinner in 2000 in my mother and toddler group (20+ women) the subject came up and it turned out that all but two women had experienced a pregnancy loss. 9 months later it was all of us. Navigating a world full of happy baby adverts, full of baby stuff, in August 2001, I cannot describe how painful that was at first. But it never occurred to me to see this as a slight to me, a non-acknowledgement of my suffering, a denial of my loss. Baby stuff, babies, pregnant women is part of the human condition. As is loss. I didn't think my neighbour who fell pregnant at the same time as me was continuing to be pregnant at ne, walking around with her huge belly just to spite me. Of course it was painful seeing her, but I kept that to myself and willed her to have a healthy baby.

And even though many, many more women have experienced pregnancy loss than identify as trans, there is little appetite to change our world to make life less painful afterwards. We certainly don't support a woman who has experienced a pregnancy loss by pretending babies don't exist. We support her by acknowledging her loss is real, and that her grief is normal. And then we grieve and learn to live with our loss as best we can.

I am confident that female transgender individuals have the ability to learn to manage their unwanted female biology without forcing this language change on all of us. And many of those I know and know of say that the language change doesn't help with their dysphoria, so I would honestly question who really benefits from uncoupling the word woman from female biology.

@MouseyTheVampireSlayer

And yet, you continue to ask people their personal line in the sand. But you can't do that until you come up with a solution that addresses point a, b and c. Until you do, everyone's line is irrelevant as it's not inclusive.

The women+ is the only solution that tackles all three problems. If men+ was also adopted that could be a solution.

I don't think anyone care if coca cola or whoever want to include lots of letters. They'll just buy pepsi.

Well, ‘woman +’ probably is your line in the sand then. I’m not disagreeing, and again, I’m struggling to see why I deserve these snippy responses. It’s a simple question, where is the compromise between women and a world that includes trans people? And for a lot of people, the answer seems to be ‘there isn’t one’.

It’s a simple question, where is the compromise between women and a world that includes trans people? And for a lot of people, the answer seems to be ‘there isn’t one’.

You are basically trying to suggest that unless we compromise and change the language that we find acceptable (and as already noted it will be impossible to find a solution that suits everyone as some trans people don't want to be referred to as menstruators etc), we don't want to include trans people in the world, which isn't true.

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

It’s a simple question, where is the compromise between women and a world that includes trans people? And for a lot of people, the answer seems to be ‘there isn’t one’.

You are basically trying to suggest that unless we compromise and change the language that we find acceptable (and as already noted it will be impossible to find a solution that suits everyone as some trans people don't want to be referred to as menstruators etc), we don't want to include trans people in the world, which isn't true.

So how do you include them?

but if I were post-menopausal I would have no idea how to interpret the statement "women and other people who menstruate". That isn't me being deliberately difficult, I would genuinely not know for sure if I was supposed to be including myself or not.

If you were post menopausal you would know it you needed to use tampons or not (presumably). So I think if you saw that phrase on san pro you would know exactly what it meant

What do women have to do to include them other than expect for trans people to have the same rights, freedom and respect as everyone else?

Was JKR incorrect when she said that women have periods? Why is biology so upsetting to some people? Yet for stating that women have periods, she suffered a barrage of vile abuse, threats, she's been falsely accused of being prejudiced against trans people.

Why is it always about women? What should men be doing to be inclusive? Should marketing for viagra be for 'men and those who struggle to maintain an erection'? As after all, transwomen may choose to take viagra. Funny how that's never mentioned much and it's always about tampons 🤨

Was JKR incorrect when she said that women have periods?

No she was absolutely correct. Most women do have periods.
Some trans men also have periods and they do not identify as nor wish to be referred to as women.

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

What do women have to do to include them other than expect for trans people to have the same rights, freedom and respect as everyone else?

Was JKR incorrect when she said that women have periods? Why is biology so upsetting to some people? Yet for stating that women have periods, she suffered a barrage of vile abuse, threats, she's been falsely accused of being prejudiced against trans people.

Why is it always about women? What should men be doing to be inclusive? Should marketing for viagra be for 'men and those who struggle to maintain an erection'? As after all, transwomen may choose to take viagra. Funny how that's never mentioned much and it's always about tampons 🤨

We’ve already discussed this - viagra is marketed to couples, and in the second person. So they tend to use ‘you’ and ‘improve your sex lode’ without specifically saying penis or man.

Sorry, that’s clumsy wording, they do say man. But not as often as you might think because it’s mainly couples they speak at.

@Fieldofgreycorn

but if I were post-menopausal I would have no idea how to interpret the statement "women and other people who menstruate". That isn't me being deliberately difficult, I would genuinely not know for sure if I was supposed to be including myself or not.

If you were post menopausal you would know it you needed to use tampons or not (presumably). So I think if you saw that phrase on san pro you would know exactly what it meant

Well of course I would, in the context of sanitary products. I'm not an idiot

But what about in a medical context, such as an invitation for a screening exam relating to women's health? It may very well not be obvious from the context.

I like the terms women / woman, and girl / girls.

It's really clear.

I just don't think that there should be mass efforts to qualify or further-define these obvious, long-standing and well-understood terms to make a very very few people feel validated in their clear suffering.

What we should have is an awareness of trans issues for people who may come across them in their lives (e.g. teachers, healthcare professionals, service providers). They should know what they can do in terms of trans people as a class, and for them as individuals. Any adjustments should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis confidentially, and as agreed (like reasonable adjustments for disabilities). We don't get rid of stairs everywhere because wheelchair users can't use them. We make general accommodations, and specific ones too if needed. So should it be in terms of this trans issues.

Women and girls should not have to blow out their own fire to keep someone else warm.

I still think you're being disingenuous to suggest that viagra is not marketed mainly to men. It is not even similar to condoms tbh. For one, I'd imagine there are a fair number of men who might not even tell their partner they are using viagra.

Well, my son has suspected cerebral palsy.
No one changes language for us. Benign language like milestones is very painful. But I get on with it.

I'm more concerned that muddying the language to include people who understand perfectly well will confuse him later down the line if the neurological issues extend to learning. In some cp people they do.

So it's less a 'line in the sand' than acknowledging that your insistence we add complicated language or lots of letters to thing is not inclusive itself.

I suppose I'm pointing out it's hypocrisy.

And this stuff will affect my child if it continues. Whether that's because of the above or simply because it entrenched stereotypes remains to be seen.

But what about in a medical context, such as an invitation for a screening exam relating to women's health? It may very well not be obvious from the context.

Ok but then the letter would say Dear ... (you) I am inviting you for nhs cervical screening etc. As I’m sure you’ve seen on your smear in invite letters.

Apologies cheeseismydownfall that was an assumption on my part. Of course there may be several reasons why you haven’t/ don’t get screening letters. No offence intended.

@StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind

I still think you're being disingenuous to suggest that viagra is not marketed mainly to men. It is not even similar to condoms tbh. For one, I'd imagine there are a fair number of men who might not even tell their partner they are using viagra.

I’m not being disingenuous at all, and I’ve already explained why they’re not marketed specifically to men and men alone. I’ve attached some screenshots of their marketing through Instagram - they absolutely do say ‘men’ and I’m not disputing that, and I’ve attached evidence they say ‘man’. But they more often than not say ‘you’ or ‘your parter’.

@MouseyTheVampireSlayer

Well, my son has suspected cerebral palsy. No one changes language for us. Benign language like milestones is very painful. But I get on with it.

I'm more concerned that muddying the language to include people who understand perfectly well will confuse him later down the line if the neurological issues extend to learning. In some cp people they do.

So it's less a 'line in the sand' than acknowledging that your insistence we add complicated language or lots of letters to thing is not inclusive itself.

I suppose I'm pointing out it's hypocrisy.

And this stuff will affect my child if it continues. Whether that's because of the above or simply because it entrenched stereotypes remains to be seen.

I absolutely understand this, although I’m not insisting on anything. I was curious as to where people saw the end point in relation to trans overlap.

I can appreciate language must be hurtful around your son. My friend lost a baby and was really hurt every time she went to baby group with her second and had to answer a chirpy ‘first or second baby?’ with a really complex and sad answer. It’s awful.

@Pumperthepumper so now show me where viagra is being marketed to 'men and people who struggle to maintain an erection'. Or is it only women who need to 'compromise' on language for period products.

Viagra is marketed to men. The screenshot mentions 'being intimate with their partner'- basically explaining why viagra is needed and how it's going to help. That doesn't read as being marketed at couples- the purpose of the product is to enable a man to have sex with a partner but it's marketed to men. Like I said, I expect lots of men may not even tell a partner if they are using it.

[quote StrawberryLipstickStateOfMind]@Pumperthepumper so now show me where viagra is being marketed to 'men and people who struggle to maintain an erection'. Or is it only women who need to 'compromise' on language for period products.

Viagra is marketed to men. The screenshot mentions 'being intimate with their partner'- basically explaining why viagra is needed and how it's going to help. That doesn't read as being marketed at couples- the purpose of the product is to enable a man to have sex with a partner but it's marketed to men. Like I said, I expect lots of men may not even tell a partner if they are using it. [/quote]
I think you’re missing my point though - again, I’m not denying it’s more prevalent in women’s products. I’m saying it’s less prevalent that you might think in things like viagra or condoms because they tend to use ‘you’. So the wording would have to say ‘you (a man or person who struggles to maintain an erection) might want viagra’.

The NHS website says ‘people with a penis’ here:

www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/mens-health/why-can-i-not-get-and-keep-an-erection/