The lancet on periods “bodies with vaginas”

[Theeyeballsinthesky]

twitter.com/thelancet/status/1441372277786951681?s=21

For fucks fucking sake!!! Incidentally heard the prostate cancer ad about half an hour ago “what a creature is a man” funny how men are not bodies with penises innit

Great email @Motorina. It’s hard to get the word “cunt” into a professional email, but you’ve carried it off! And it needed to be said. Bloody well done.

One thing I’m not clear on this morning….Kier Starmer informed us that “only women have cervices” is “something that should not be said”. But on the other hand, the Lancet is modelling for us that the correctly inclusive term is “bodies with vaginas”.

What I’m getting from that is that it’s Ok to reference women’s body parts as long as it’s a passive usage with no ownership implied, and refers to the category of bits that men generally find useful.

Well, excuse me, but FUCK NO.

Kier Starmer informed us that “only women have cervices” is “something that should not be said”. But on the other hand, the Lancet is modelling for us that the correctly inclusive term is “bodies with vaginas”.

[bitter] Maybe Starmer was objecting to the use of the word women and he was fine with the body part. [/bitter]

This is a good thread

twitter.com/historywoman/status/1441714855178907651

The taboo is linking the word "woman" to the condition of being female, to any of our biological functions or the physical reality of living in a female body.

[quote OvaHere]This is a good thread

twitter.com/historywoman/status/1441714855178907651[/quote]
Web archive version for readability: <a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210926105240/twitter.com/historywoman/status/1441714855178907651" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20210926105240/twitter.com/historywoman/status/1441714855178907651

Very fine thread and I wish it weren't quite so accurate.

That Spectator article was interesting, thank you.

This part especially,
"For American killer Wayne Adam Ford, w-words really were just 'bodies with breasts', which he enjoyed cutting off to sew into his clothing. Suddenly, Steerpike is spooked by the implications of the Lancet’s name."

The killer in 'American Psycho' also called women 'hard bodies' etc.

This is what we are now. Bodies. The objectification and commodification of women is complete.

@MiladyBerserko

That Spectator article was interesting, thank you.

This part especially,
"For American killer Wayne Adam Ford, w-words really were just 'bodies with breasts', which he enjoyed cutting off to sew into his clothing. Suddenly, Steerpike is spooked by the implications of the Lancet’s name."

The killer in 'American Psycho' also called women 'hard bodies' etc.

This is what we are now. Bodies. The objectification and commodification of women is complete.

This is so true. About a year ago I watched an old episode of one of those American CSI type shows. The baddy of the week was your usual psycho serial killer of women who had a whole manifesto which declared women as 'bleeders' and featured other dehumanising references to disembodied female body parts.

This absolutely is where we are at now and it appears to be the policy of at least 2 major British political parties. The word horrific doesn't really do it justice.

More healthcare craziness.

lesbianandgaynews.com/2021/09/public-health-england-ditches-biological-sex-from-official-surveys-on-hiv-and-other-sexually-transmitted-infections/

Two questionnaires administered by Public Health England previously sought to determine how patterns of STDs differ between men and women and between heterosexual and homosexual groups. But following consultation with transgender groups, respondents are no longer asked about the sex they were born but instead whether they ‘identify’ as male or female.

Lesbian and Gay News editor David Bridle, who has lived with HIV since 1996, said it ‘will skew the data as well as putting people at risk’ and predicted ‘a rise in the numbers of those registered as women with HIV, when in fact they are male-bodied’. Public Health England administers two national surveys aimed at capturing data on sexual health.

PS. LGNews needs some digging if anyone is in a position to.

When are the government going to get to grips with this? This is all so outrageous (and I rarely use that word). It really is time the NHS and all related health bodies were brought to account for their actions. Bloody fuming I am

So no response from the Lancet yet on Twitter about their hugely offensive and upsetting cover?

That silence speaks volumes.

Gemma Correl also made the horrendous mistake of writing "women and girls" she writing about hygiene and hygiene poverty around the world. She was jumped on almost immediately by a couple of trans aggressors, demanding she change the wording from women and girls to "people who menstruate", because "it was offensive". She did so almost as immediately, blaming "a typing error in uploading", but she was just afraid these aggressors would start a campaign against her if she didn't (she's an illustrator and doesn't exactly earn millions, so it seems she needed to placate these people or have her life shattered by claims of "transphobia"). It was so, so infuriating, and rage inducing. And the aggressors were women, as well. Disgusting.

I’ve seen lots of replies, many women, on Twitter, stating that perhaps ‘people with vaginas’ would be better.

I’m sorry but what planet am I now living on?!!!

Just say women. Honestly it’s important that women’s issues, that are to do with being born a woman, ie menstruation, are given the air and space to be discussed without having to ‘not offend’ trans women. This is not about trans women. Trans women do not menstruate. This is about women. Who do. Give us a bit of bloody space!!!

Have complained in the strongest terms to the Lancet.

Absolutely no reply or acknowledgement.

I’m not a particularly ‘fervent’ active person about TW but this has really offended me. I’m also have a medical background and read the Lancet many times, looking to it for objective, fair and scientific truths.

I just can’t tell you all how mad I am about this and the fact that hundreds have complained on Twitter and they haven’t changed a thing. I’m disgusted!

I’ve seen lots of replies, many women, on Twitter, stating that perhaps ‘people with vaginas’ would be better.

The Overton Window in action. And a clear illustration of the harms of compromise.

Sent an email on Friday: no reply or acknowledgment yet. I also noticed that this is the subject of a threat on AIBU and last time I checked 98% of voters thought it was not unreasonable to be angry at the Lancet calling women 'bodies with vaginas'.

Thanks @EmbarrassingAdmissions and @WeeBisom I just can’t believe this is the new normal. And to be fair I haven’t seen hardly any TWs defending it - so I don’t think (hope) the majority of TWs really want an article about menstruation titled ‘bodies with vaginas’ either. No one wants this! Apart from the Lancet…

Prof David Curtis, honorary professor of genetics at University College London, said: 'Just wrote the Lancet to tell them to take me off their list of statistical reviewers and cancel my subscription and never contact me about anything ever again

'Absolutely inexcusable language to refer to women and girls.'

Thank you Prof Curtis.

I've had my cervix removed as part of repairing birth trauma and significant uterine prolapse.

No one made me a fucking neo cervix, and having had one - no one would ever miss it.

@YouJustDoYou

Gemma Correl also made the horrendous mistake of writing "women and girls" she writing about hygiene and hygiene poverty around the world. She was jumped on almost immediately by a couple of trans aggressors, demanding she change the wording from women and girls to "people who menstruate", because "it was offensive". She did so almost as immediately, blaming "a typing error in uploading", but she was just afraid these aggressors would start a campaign against her if she didn't (she's an illustrator and doesn't exactly earn millions, so it seems she needed to placate these people or have her life shattered by claims of "transphobia"). It was so, so infuriating, and rage inducing. And the aggressors were women, as well. Disgusting.

How don’t these people get that there is nothing discriminatory about referring to women when discussing menstruation since transwomen don’t menstruate FFS! 🤷‍♀️

@Fauxgina

I've had my cervix removed as part of repairing birth trauma and significant uterine prolapse.

No one made me a fucking neo cervix, and having had one - no one would ever miss it.

from one former cervix owner to another.

How don’t these people get that there is nothing discriminatory about referring to women when discussing menstruation since transwomen don’t menstruate FFS! 🤷‍♀️ *

I suppose they are trying to make the case than some transmen do (if they're not on hormones), and therefore referring to women would be discriminatory - not because they care about transmen being discriminated against, but because that strengthens the case for not using the word 'women' to mean 'female', which then means more rights for transwomen in other situations. So much wrong with that, of course. I wonder how many women who identify as men don't take hormones - I'm sure there are some, especially at the beginning of their treatment, or those who identify as non-binary, but I don't get the feeling that there are nearly as many women who just randomly self-identify as men with no further changes, as the opposite way. There seem to be a lot more benefits (to the men) for men just self ID-ing as women. And the more they claim that the language is discriminatory to some group or other, the more everyone falls over themselves changing the language, even if the people who are complaining aren't in fact the ones being discriminated against. Transwomen shouldn't be objecting to the language of 'women' around menstruation, even in the world where TWAW, because nobody has ever claimed that all women menstruate, so they'd be on a hiding to nowhere claiming it was discrimination against themselves. The people that (according to their logic) would be discriminated against are non-binary and transmen, but I'm not sure (could be wrong) that they are the ones who are forcing through this language change.

How don’t these people get that there is nothing discriminatory about referring to women when discussing menstruation since transwomen don’t menstruate FFS!

Depending on the source of the complaint, discussing menstruation, miscarriage, abortion, IVF etc. is flaunting privilege and is distressing.

No one made me a fucking neo cervix, and having had one - no one would ever miss it.

Bizarrely, back in the day, when a hysterectomy was necessary, a surgeon sometimes had a discussion with the woman along the lines of:
– let me remove the cervix while I'm there, you'll never miss it and it will be one small cancer risk removed;
– do you want me to leave the cervix in 'for your husband' because some men are freaked by: the lack of an end to the vagina; like the sensation of touching it during PVI.

tbh, the latter makes me clench to this day.

@StrangeLookingParasite

Prof David Curtis, honorary professor of genetics at University College London, said: 'Just wrote the Lancet to tell them to take me off their list of statistical reviewers and cancel my subscription and never contact me about anything ever again

'Absolutely inexcusable language to refer to women and girls.'

Thank you Prof Curtis.

Another thank you to Prof. Curtis. Absolute star.

@YouJustDoYou

Gemma Correl also made the horrendous mistake of writing "women and girls" she writing about hygiene and hygiene poverty around the world. She was jumped on almost immediately by a couple of trans aggressors, demanding she change the wording from women and girls to "people who menstruate", because "it was offensive". She did so almost as immediately, blaming "a typing error in uploading", but she was just afraid these aggressors would start a campaign against her if she didn't (she's an illustrator and doesn't exactly earn millions, so it seems she needed to placate these people or have her life shattered by claims of "transphobia"). It was so, so infuriating, and rage inducing. And the aggressors were women, as well. Disgusting.

I saw that as well.

I understand why she made the immediate changes, these bullies don't give small artists or any woman a chance. It's back down and learn your place, or face a relentless onslaught of abuse and accusations.

That said, I have stopped following her on social media now and I won't be buying her card range as a result of this. I'm unfollowing anyone who is using pronouns in their bio's (which Gemma Correll also does) and anyone who uses the word Terf as a slur, or cries transphobe at other authors and artists. This includes big names like Stephen King down to small names like Gemma Correll, and even friends, colleagues, and acquaintances.

I'm doing my best to support those artists such as Jess de Walh's or Birdy Rose who are on the front line of defending women and girls right now.

@PeppermintMocha

*

How don’t these people get that there is nothing discriminatory about referring to women when discussing menstruation since transwomen don’t menstruate FFS! 🤷‍♀️ *

I suppose they are trying to make the case than some transmen do (if they're not on hormones), and therefore referring to women would be discriminatory - not because they care about transmen being discriminated against, but because that strengthens the case for not using the word 'women' to mean 'female', which then means more rights for transwomen in other situations. So much wrong with that, of course. I wonder how many women who identify as men don't take hormones - I'm sure there are some, especially at the beginning of their treatment, or those who identify as non-binary, but I don't get the feeling that there are nearly as many women who just randomly self-identify as men with no further changes, as the opposite way. There seem to be a lot more benefits (to the men) for men just self ID-ing as women. And the more they claim that the language is discriminatory to some group or other, the more everyone falls over themselves changing the language, even if the people who are complaining aren't in fact the ones being discriminated against. Transwomen shouldn't be objecting to the language of 'women' around menstruation, even in the world where TWAW, because nobody has ever claimed that all women menstruate, so they'd be on a hiding to nowhere claiming it was discrimination against themselves. The people that (according to their logic) would be discriminated against are non-binary and transmen, but I'm not sure (could be wrong) that they are the ones who are forcing through this language change.

Thanks for your thought provoking post. My impression is that the OTT trans activists are usually trans women and those who support them as women, whilst calling us cis women (🤬). Trans men seem to just get on with their own lives.

Please tell me anyone who knows otherwise.