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

That about what I was expecting.
I don't buy that this choice of words had anything to do with 'inclusivity' on the part of the Lancet , except insofar as elsewhere the 'people with cervices' and 'mensturators' crap has already distorted the language away from simply referring to 'women' or even 'females'.

It's that endless superior order that women accept dehumanisation and subordination to benefit the trans political agenda and if they were good women they wouldn't make a fuss

Fuck off.

Just fuck off with this appalling sexist shit.

It seems that it is now impossible to talk about the female half of the human race without immediately shifting the subject to how very important trans people are

Sorry if you were offended by being described as bodies with vaginas but let’s talk about the most important thing which is, trans health care.

Yep, this is certainly convincing me that "trans people" are the most oppressedest of all oppressed peoples anywhere in space and time.

[quote AntiSocialDistancer]Statement has been released by The Lancet

twitter.com/TheLancet/status/1442535321007104001?s=19[/quote]
Oh honestly my overriding thought to that was ‘fuck you penis haver’.

Disgusting patronising misogynist

So angry about this - women’s objections to be called cadavers with fuckholes are not about trans. They’re about the sheer misogyny of it (and the unbelievable hypocrisy of pretending that you’re uncovering women’s hidden narratives of menstruation, at the same time as calling us fuckholes - not even uteruses fgs! - which have nothing to do with menstruation unless you’re a bona fide misogynist who is only interested in the hole where it comes out because men also want to put their dicks in it….)

How is that any different to he familiar misogyny of calling women cunts?

“Ah I’m sorry if you were offended that we called you cunts. But trans healthcare is much more important than your feelings, cunt-havers.”

@Lordamighty

It’s so depressing that this dehumanising language is coming from the medical profession.

This language is coming from a female author who is a trained somatic therpaist, whatever TF that is, and not a medical doctor, so this is not coming from the medical profession at all.

The lancet has been a pile of crap since and probably before it published Andrew Wakefield's MMR 'study' 13 years ago.

@OvaHere

They couldn't even do one whole paragraph of an apology to women and keep it about women.

So the message I’m getting is it’s justifiable to call women “bodies with vaginas” because trans people are the most marginalised. This makes no sense. It’s not necessary to call women “bodies with vaginas” in order to respect trans rights! That’s like saying “we are sorry that trans people are offended we called them the t slur , but they should keep in mind that women are highly marginalised.” It’s just a complete non sequitur.

It’s just fucking shite. That’s it

The Lancet who has never had a female editor-in-chief.

The Lancet, owned by Reed Elsevier, who organise arms fairs up until
very recently?

The Lancet who published Wakefield?

The Lancet whose sister company LexisNexis is used to track and deport illegal immigrants?

That Lancet? He expects me to take lessons in morality from that Lancet?

Fuck off.

That was a measley apology between layers of shite!

"Strength of feeling" (you're all so emotional!)
inclusivity of all people everyone!
Sorry you felt that way women
Trans trans trans trans, the most discriminated and excluded, the ones who matter the most here
For goodness sake women, we dehumanised you and your language so you could feel empowered! Why aren't you feeling empowered women, why?
Anyway, read our review and maybe you'll stop bitching yeah?

How is it ‘inclusive’ to refer to trans men as ‘bodies with vaginas’? Why should trans men want to be reduced to being described as a body with an orifice, anymore than women do

What an entirely non apologetic ‘apology’. Actually it isn’t an apology and doesn’t pretend to be.

Patronising ignorant dick.

So basically sorry we reduced women to body parts but it is really ok, because trans health is so poor. What has that to do with the fact that they have reduced women to a hole in a body , in an article which is supposed to be highlighting how badly women's issues are treated in the Health Service.

@MummBraTheEverLeaking

That was a measley apology between layers of shite!

"Strength of feeling" (you're all so emotional!)
inclusivity of all people everyone!
Sorry you felt that way women
Trans trans trans trans, the most discriminated and excluded, the ones who matter the most here
For goodness sake women, we dehumanised you and your language so you could feel empowered! Why aren't you feeling empowered women, why?
Anyway, read our review and maybe you'll stop bitching yeah?

^This!! Fantastic summing up!!

If it's all because they care about trans so much, why are they still using 'men'. They care so very very much about trans health, yet are happy to exclude transwomen and non binary ''bodies without vaginas''. Bit transphobic, no?

When all these orgs start talking about 'bodies with penises', I might believe they're trying to be inclusive. Until that happens I'll just continue to assume they're rank, misogynist pricks drooling because they've found the perfect excuse to degrade and dehumanise women and girls.

So not only are we 'bodies with vaginas', we're stupid bodies with vaginas???

And calling us 'bodies with vaginas' is a compelling call to empower us? These words do not mean what they think they mean.

I think the apology is worse than the original quote. Which is going some.

The comments on the apology on their FB post are entertaining though.

How many women like me are reading them, but feel silenced by their job / similar I wonder?

That 'apology'.... What a load of gaslighting BOLLOCKS.

@littlbrowndog

It’s just fucking shite. That’s it

Yes

The tweet is being ratioed to hell but it’s just so fucking depressing

All those heartfelt eloquent emails from women (plus quite a few down right furious ones) and all he does is issue a sorry not sorry apology and trot out the ‘most marginalised evah!!’ bullshit again

Dave Curtis has replied with this:

Completely inadequate response. My position remains the same. I want nothing more to do with the Lancet stable. The cover was not read just by your "readers" but by the world. It was inexcusable.

I like Dave Curtis.

Does anyone know who advertises in the Lancet? We should be contacting them, en masse.

Anyway, read our review

I read the review. My objection stands.

They are all so confused!

Richard, or Dick to his friends, must be baffled after he thought he was being so modern! With the libfems who have a vagina museum!

He thought everyone would say he was so cool with his vagina cover. Like the cool libfems are. He was going to put it on his wall behind his screen for a zoom background.

Then it's WTF people are furious I mentioned the vagina!

So he's gone back to the cool libfems who say vagina and it's. Ok, they don't get shit, and said what did I do wrong?

They have gone, "don't worry Dick, it's the evil t*s. They just don't get how enbies and transmen in the UK are t
THE most important, and so oppressed, and only get free healthcare and maternity pay, no special free manpons and non binary pads. IKR appalling."

"It'll be ok, just tell those evil t*s that."

Dick hasn't a clue what's happening. Most men over 50 haven't, unless.... well, you know