Inclusive terms for girls, women, and people who identify as female

[thelastgoldeneagle]

I'm reading a book on sex education for teens and some of the terminology in it is troubling me, specifically the use of wording such as 'people with vulvas' and 'menstruators' instead of 'women and girls'.

The author wishes to be inclusive, but I can't help feeling that if we can't even call ourselves 'girls and women', how can we then talk about e.g. sex-based violence?

Can anyone make any suggestions for terminology that includes girls and women, as well as people who identify as girls and women, that includes mentioning the words 'girls' and 'women'?

Many thanks.

Woman and girl are the words to describe human females because we are whole beings not just orifices and bodily functions as much as men have liked to describe us this way for milenia.

How is a child to know whether they will become a menstruator or not?

Milli has got a book coming out for girls 9-13 I think

About periods

Here it is

This habit is so depressing. There are a few people calling Macmillan Cancer out for it on twitter at the moment. Macmillan say they are being inclusive but they manage to use the word men for men's cancers so I rather think it is plain old misogyny.

twitter.com/volewriter/status/1418569276718526464

Aw crap. I haven’t the patience for this anymore. Not that I had much to start with to be honest.

No patience for using dehumanising terms for women and girls and reducing them to biology in attempts to soothe the feelings of people born male.

And please can we not use that 'cis' word here, it's well known that many women here find it offensive.

Od rather be a c* than c**. That could be on a T-shirt...

If the book subsequently uses ‘men and women’ to talk about violence against women isn’t that sufficiently inclusive, as it would capture male violence against transwomen regardless of genitalia?

Surely the common motives are different? Why capture male violence against transwomen but not male violence against ‘cis’ men?

This sounds like the girl's football thread the other day. How should the girls be referred to due to non- binary females.

@thelastgoldeneagle
The book also refers to 'people with penises', yes.

Later, when it talks about male violence to women, it talks about men and women. I wonder why it can't do this throughout.

Because it’s fxxxxxx ridiculous tripe.

@Tibtom

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

So that will be a 'no' then?

I note the rules state: The same is true of the expression ‘Trans-Identified Male’ or ‘TIM’. Likewise, many feminists are affronted by the term ‘cis’ and ‘terf’, so using these terms will make civil debate less likely. As we’ve said, context is everything – but our moderation team will most likely delete these expressions if we feel they're being used in a deliberately inflammatory way.

Yet is seems Mumsnet are only applying them in one direction. The context being whether it complies with Gender ideology?

Ah though I see I asked the question on the wtong thread. Is it ok if I ask again on the right thread?

Why do we have to feel pride in so many things these days? I'm only proud of stuff that I've made or things I've achieved through effort or application of a skill or talent.

If anyone had ever told me I should be proud of having a period, I'd have thought they were from another planet. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Proud of how I coped with it, perhaps.

@Redapplewreath

No patience for using dehumanising terms for women and girls and reducing them to biology in attempts to soothe the feelings of people born male.

And please can we not use that 'cis' word here, it's well known that many women here find it offensive.

I think most of us can agree on that. Women are adult human females & that’s the only definition we need - not the repulsive ‘cisgender’ with its links to misogynist & outdated sex-role stereotypes.

Women and girls is fine.

The average reading age in the U.K. is nine years old. Language like "cervix havers" and "vulva owners" has the potential to be misunderstood by a huge number of women whose education levels and reading abilities might be lower than average.

Women and girls covers all bases.

Ah @BaronMunchausen I suppose I was thinking that for what I thought would be a maybe 11-13 book the emphasis when discussing violence from men against women would be reasonably from men against people who look like women, without going down the horrible details of m/f or m/m(presenting as) assault.

As pp have said; women and girls. If you're not covered by that, you don't need to be included.

I'm not 'cis.' Why would I identify with an ideological structure which seeks to oppress me?

@YetAnotherSpartacus

Just girls and women will do.

^

@YetAnotherSpartacus

Just girls and women will do.

This

Women and girls.

For years men controlled women by keeping them.ignorebt and unable to access medical treatment on their own.

In many countries this still happens.

I see so called "inclusive " ( ie let's not mention who it happens to ) language as a modern day version of this.

It relies on other people being "mean" by being biologically factual so these woke idiots can come along and use this offensive language in the name of being "inclusive".

They get praise etc on twitter.

But they couldn't do it without the likes of the rest of us being " the bad guys"