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

I am RAGING.

I have just come back from the vigil for Sabina Nessa. Sick at heart at the way women are tested as meat.

To find this from The Lancet.

Shane in them.

And how fucking stupid and ignorant do they show themselves up to be? What a fucking irrelevant comment if the subject is menstruation. Plenty of women have vaginas and never menstruate. Transwomen have vaginas and don’t menstruate.

I hope members of the medical profession disown this insulting nonsense.

Take your heads without brains elsewhere, The Lancet.

Oh yes. The men

@colouringindoors

People are becoming less afraid. I went to a talk last night with Ian Dunt and Julie Bindel. That would never have happened until recently.

I don't always report similar examples here because I get a load of "WHERE WERE THEY BEFORE????s shouted at me. But the trend is becoming noticeable.

I actually tweeted. I am in a sector where it's not sensible to come out as GC. But fucking hell, this is just too much.

We’re teaching our next generation of doctors, nurses, scientists that there’s no difference in men and women, there just happens to be a vagina in some people. Assigned by the midwife presumably.

This is embarrassing. It’s the fucking Lancet.

I’d love to survey the actual number of people offended by the word woman vs the actual number of people getting overexcited about being a ‘nice person and doing good’

Bodies with vaginas makes me think of dead bodies. How utterly dehumanising. And it's becoming increasingly apparent that "inclusive"language only applies to women and not to men. I have a trans rights activist friend who doesn't think there is any problem at all with using terms like 'menstruator' or 'cervix owner', and she told me should would be delighted if people started using inclusive words to refer to men like 'prostrate havers'. So, I began using such language - I called men 'ejaculators' , and in a discussion about trans women I called trans women 'scrotum havers.' Well, my friend didn't like this one bit. She actually complained to me that my language was rude and bigoted. It's fine and dandy to call me a menstruator, but the second trans women are called sperm producers suddenly the offensive nature of the term becomes clear.

@Itsnotdeep

I actually tweeted. I am in a sector where it's not sensible to come out as GC. But fucking hell, this is just too much.

Don't worry. This is enraging women who have never engaged before.

I think the contrast with the men and prostate cancer Tweet has meant that even the usual suspects are hiding. The hypocrisy is just too blatant.

I know he is not everyones cup of tea but Piers is never afraid to say what he thinks.
twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/1441495338934849537

One of the comments has linked contact details for the editor of the Lancet and the ombudsman. Feel free to send them an email...

This was too much.

@Itsnotdeep

I actually tweeted. I am in a sector where it's not sensible to come out as GC. But fucking hell, this is just too much.

Same. I could lose my job. But this is too far.

10 million bodies with cocks now living with prostrate cancer

There we go the lancet

''Bodies with vaginas'' and MEN.

They don't want to be inclusive and say ''bodies with dicks'', because they don't want to piss off a certain category of men by reminding them that they're men.

They don't want to call us WOMEN in anything to do with OUR health (periods, pregnancy, female cancers etc) because they don't want to piss off a certain category of men by reminded them that they're men.

This isn't about 'inclusion' at all, this is MRA, dehumanising, misogynistic bullshit. Just start calling us cunts or wanking holes and be fucking done with it

[quote HPFA]Interesting. Never known Rachel Clarke get involved with the issue at all:

twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/1441510167443554306[/quote]
Deleted I think?

Oh no! She def tweeted about it. I liked it.

REAL shame it's gone

What has own Jones said/ link?

That's very strange. Would be v interested to see.

I can still see Rachel Clarke's tweets on this. I hope she doesn't delete them!

Welcome to the new misogyny, same as the old misogyny…

I have just come back from the vigil for Sabina Nessa. Sick at heart at the way women are tested as meat.

To find this from The Lancet.

Shame on them.

Yes. Exactly this

@colouringindoors

Oh no! She def tweeted about it. I liked it.

REAL shame it's gone

I think it has gone. I noticed further down her page she’d been lauding the Good Law Project - wonder if she’s worried about upsetting Jolyon…?

@PronounssheRa

Remember that outrage when republicans were calling women bodies 'host' in relation to rolling back abortion rights, this is the same dehumanising shit, but from the lancet.

They still use the word men though.

This is so fvcking offensive I honestly can't believe they're allowed to print that.

So women are just described as their genitals now?
Seriously, although you wouldn't believe it from the amount of noise they make, trans people are supposed to be, what, 2% of the population?
Could be more now given how trendy it's suddenly become to be a straight 'queer', but WHY is the overwhelming majority of the female population forced to now be described as such to appease a tiny percentage of people on the chance it hurts their feelings?!

Why therefore, if we're not allowed to risk 'hurting anyone's feelings' anymore, is it apparently absolutely fine to hurt another, much larger oppressed group of people- namely, women's - feelings instead?!

We are completely being thrown under the bus, yet again because no one can bring themselves to tell the trans rights activists, that despite how you identify, if you have a vagina, you're a bloody woman.
Live with it.

End of rant.

Rachel Clarke has deleted the 3 tweets she posted. FFS.

Still there

FFS! I could rant, but you all know the points I’d make (I did just rant to my husband & he reminded me not to swear at him because he agrees with me 😳). I bet the researchers looking at menstruation didn’t write “people with vaginas”, it was likely changed by an editor to be political correct. That’s something else that pisses me off, I used to be a defender of political correctness in the days when it meant not disrespecting people. Now it’s all fine so long as we don’t offend the extremist trans community 🤬

O said to DH how would he feel about being called a body with a scrotum and he blanched.

Their language has exceeded the current language rules which are dehumanising enough.

Bodies.

Not people even. Let alone whole people, numbering billions, who have huge differences in experiences, beliefs, situations, interests etc etc. But who are all covered as a group by sharing the most fundamental differential between groups of humans. IE being female, previous further grouped as women or girls. Half the world population. The other half being male, men and boys. Words which I have no doubt exist in every language in the world and would have been some of the first concepts when we started developing language. Food. Shelter. Danger. Water. Woman. Baby. Mother. Man. Boy.