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

We should all send in complaints to the lancet. They will take note as they have a reputation of objectivity to uphold.

Rachel Clarke decided her tweets might be "offensive" Bizaare.

twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/1441519934023114752

Yep she is appeasing someone - for shame, how bloody weak and pathetic.

This is what she posted now

“ Replying to
@thomjking

@barbarnana21
and
@TheLancet
Have deleted tweet as did not want to cause offence, but my issue was ‘bodies with vaginas’ - ie not even people - plus fact that Lancet refers to men as men, not bodies with prostates. This double standard feels misogynistic. Should terms men & women not be used, do you think”

What does this even mean?! Is so dehumanising that I can’t even understand what they’re getting at.

Do they really just mean that women’s physiology has been neglected?

I don’t want to make it about her because it’s the Lancet that is at fault, but it’s just another example of a woman being silenced and driven to appease the TRAs.

Complain, complain, complain. Ask everyone you know.

The Lancet
Editor: Richard Horton
[email protected]

Rachel Clarke referred to the tweet she deleted and the usual folx turned up to educate her on inclusivity. I didn’t trust myself to write a polite reply to the idiots:

twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/1441519934023114752?s=21

@HowamIalmost50

No such dehumanising descriptors for men though eh? Im beyond fuming tonight! Just as well I have alcohol here!

What about all the women with prostrate cancer?

You sent it odd how trans women are not shouting about how they're being excluded from suffering from Prostrate cancer too in this article.
Surely they would think that's discrimination?

But then i suppose publicly making a fuss about how trans women get prostrate cancer too would underline just how ridiculous this issue has become.

I emailed that Richard

Didn’t even call him dick to be try and be friendly

@Catabogus

I had a look at the actual article. It does mention women and girls briefly, but also contains a lot of “menstruators”.

The author, Sophia Davis (a senior editor at The Lancet ) is a pretty full-on trans rights activist, to judge from her Twitter feed. Over half her posts are about trans rights, which seems odd for someone who - in theory - should have a wide range of health-related interests.

She looks about 12 in her profile picture. Is she really a senior editor? Yikes

When I last looked The Lancet was trending at no.8 on Twitter and Bodies was trending at no. 10. This seems to have mountain topped rather a lot of people!

@littlbrowndog

I emailed that Richard

Didn’t even call him dick to be try and be friendly

I heartily sniggered at this

Trending at 43k

This has actually made me feel more angry than ever on this issue. It's just so fucking blatant.

Rachel Clarke clarified her deletion of the tweet. Screen shot for posterity.

twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/1441519934023114752?s=21

Transwomen with Prostate cancer is an interesting one. My immediate reaction was “hmm, it should be mentioned on the website but it would be unkind to mention this on a big poster as it groups them with men”.

But actually that’s mental and bad for people’s health isn’t it -we can’t be squeamish about these things. If someone’s at risk of cancer they need to know.

This squeamishness about validating identity is like how (I imagine) old fashioned taboos about mentioning anything to do with women’s health must have been in the past!

I also emailed Richard.

Incidentally don’t other adult female mammals have vaginas, and so isn’t the term “bodies with vaginas” inclusive of more than just humans?

Where best to complain to? Editors?

www.thelancet.com/contact-us

Oh I see someone has already tweeted about their dog

Cows are bodies with vaginas, mares are bodies with vaginas, sheep are bodies with vaginas.

It's not very specific about what kind of body with a vagina they're trying to be woke about.

It's amazing how we're not even human any more to them. Not even humans with vaginas.

It's absolutely disgusting.

Three dehumanising thing is really important.

Vaginas are I imagine to most people esp men associated with sex.

Having us described as people or bodies with vaginas all over the place must subconsciously firm up the link vagina > woman> sex.

Because no one reads the phrase bodies with vaginas and doesn't translate that in their head to women in order to understand what it's saying.

What is the more subtle impact of women and girls not being given names to encompass whole human people who are female. But increasingly described as bodies with certain reproductive organs. Ovaries wombs- the bodies that can grow and produce babies. Vaginas clitorises (clitori?) - the bodies that most men enjoy penetrating. Vagina even comes from Latin for sheath.. And is generally represented in diagrams inaccurately as a constantly open cavity.

What fucking fresh bullshit hell is this?

Rachel Clarke has deleted her tweets because she 'did not want to cause offence'?

Why is it always women who have to worry about 'causing offence'. What about things that are offensive to us? Why do we have to put up with being dehumanised, referred to as a series of holes, spoken about like we are nothing, just so we don't 'cause offence' to others?

Do the people who wrote this Lancet cover and the TRAs insisting that women are referred to as 'bodies with vaginas' worry for a single second that they would be 'causing offence' to women?

Do they fuck......

Ted Bundy had more respect for women than this...

Still, really happy now to say my pronouns. You can call me "body with vagina" if you insist on asking