Persons of child bearing potential

[whatnow41]

Or they could have said Women and girls, given that they have also covered off transgender and non-binary people who were born female further down.

@NecessaryScene

No-one is ever going to convince me that the total amount of "harm" caused by using "woman" inflicted upon a few rainbow hairs is less than the total amount of harm inflicted by not using it on the other 99% of the female population.

In a nutshell

"If your gender was female at birth,"...

Well, how would anyone know? How would they remember?

You'd think the NHS would know enough to use the word sex when they mean sex. 🤷🏼‍♀️

I asked my Mum what my gender was at birth (seeing as I don't remember that part of my life)
She said "how would I know. I was asleep. I think you wore a lemon coloured baby grow of that helps"

It’s making me think of those property programmes where the attic has potential to be a third bedroom. Maybe it’s the same for my womb, currently empty but if I gave it a spruce up it would have childbearing potential?

Jesus fucking Christ…..

Could be worth raising with the hospital trust board

@ARoombaOfOnesOwn

It’s making me think of those property programmes where the attic has potential to be a third bedroom. Maybe it’s the same for my womb, currently empty but if I gave it a spruce up it would have childbearing potential?

Maybe a spruce up was all I needed? All that IVF was for nothing, I just needed a tin of paint and some scatter cushions.

As a newborn, my details were filled out on the blue side of a card that had one blue side and one pink side. I was noted as being a daughter there. Do you think this makes me a rare infant of the female sex assigned a male gender at birth?

I'm surprised they've given an age range. Given that the youngest "person" to give birth was 5 years, 7 months old, & the oldest was 66. That poster doesn't seem very inclusive to me.

What warped language we twist around

Use plain English

@NecessaryScene

No-one is ever going to convince me that the total amount of "harm" caused by using "woman" inflicted upon a few rainbow hairs is less than the total amount of harm inflicted by not using it on the other 99% of the female population.

Agree.

This is not written in accessible language for the many women for whom English won't be their first language or for those with learning disabilities. Would it even make sense to a 12yo who speaks fluent English? It's not inclusive when you exclude a huge proportion of your audience because they don't understand it.

I've been on the below website and sent them an email asking them to include guidance for NHS Trusts on when to use woman, women and girls. Came here to moan, but actually I really need to do something to make a change.

service-manual.nhs.uk/content/inclusive-language

I'm infertile and have no potential....

In a round about way they are saying it’s not for you.
I find it more strange that they have given an age range than the wording of everything else.
Why not just say - if you think you might be pregnant….

This drives me bloody crackers, what could we rename men?

@Borderterrierpuppy

This drives me bloody crackers, what could we rename men?

Ejaculators?

Is that a leaflet or a poster?

If it was a poster I'd be correcting that with my sharpie while I was waiting.

Good grief, the whole thing reads as if it's been through Google translate - possibly twice - and had some adventures along the way.

It's a perfect example of why these linguistic gymnastics are potentially harmful to women who don't have English as a first language, or have learning disabilities.

Appalling.

Does the campaign for plain English still exist? I'd love to see their take on this.

@AfternoonToffee

It doesn't even make sense, as in it is just so clumsy. Average reading age is 11, stop with the over complication.

This is a very important point.

Language should be clear and simple for ease of access for all, including people with low levels of literacy snd English as a second language.

Health messages should be clear for everyone

The bit they put below should have been enough for anyone being a transman

[quote whatnow41]I've been on the below website and sent them an email asking them to include guidance for NHS Trusts on when to use woman, women and girls. Came here to moan, but actually I really need to do something to make a change.

service-manual.nhs.uk/content/inclusive-language[/quote]
Their own bloody inclusive language guidance even says that sex and gender are different! How did this sign get through?

@toocold54

I'm infertile and have no potential....

In a round about way they are saying it’s not for you.
I find it more strange that they have given an age range than the wording of everything else.
Why not just say - if you think you might be pregnant….

yes - just say 'if there is a chance you may be pregnant'. Everyone know what the hell that means.

I wonder when it will occur to the NHS management that their campaign for inclusion is one of the most exclusive things on the planet. A pile of rabid intellectuals, so removed from ordinary life and so sure of their moral righteousness that they probably will never look down and see the contempt with which many of us view them.

I hope the above was rude enough, it was meant to be

Why are we pandering to such a minority? Why do they have such a big voice? I'm sick of this shit.

I hope the above was rude enough, it was meant to be

Perfectly.