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

@NotTerfNorCis

Love your user name!!

Gets the message across!

Genderist language can be so incongruous it catches people's attention. This is one example, another was ACLU censoring Ruth Bader Ginsburg's abortion quote into meaninglessness. It's obvious - we need a word that means adult human female, and not 'anyone who identifies as an adult human female'.

Names are important aren’t they. It’s interesting that the terms ‘cis’ and ‘terf’ are all names which only make sense in reference to men or TW - they are ‘add ons’ - as if, like women were always thought to be, we are the moon around their sun. We only exist in reference to men

Even the original term women is in reference to men.

Rapists and male paedophiles are shown more respect than us. The media will call those monsters women, 'she' this, 'her' that, whilst showing us mugshots of the manliest looking men imaginable and not giving a fuck about the impact on the victims of those men.

Yet we get treated with utter contempt. "Bodies with vaginas", "ovary-havers", "black birthing bodies", "autistics with a cervix".

Men who violate women and children with their penis get to claim 'woman', and "progressives" rush to be kind and respectful to those creatures . Meanwhile, actual women and girls are referred to like we're nothing but breeding stock and threatened with rape and death if we object, and the "progressives" happily turn a blind eye to it.

We see what you fucking are

😡😡😡 this is psychological warfare against women.

Nothing less

Thanks for email address Dfhugdhvdnjrs. Complaint sent.

1st rule for oppressors - dehumanise your targeted group
2nd rule - deprive them of their own names.

I don't understand why mainstream media outlets are not shouting from the hilltops about all this.

All this flagrant misogynistic dehumanisation should be making the national news every week.

@Dfhugdhvdnjrs

Complain, complain, complain. Ask everyone you know.

The Lancet
Editor: Richard Horton
[email protected]

Thanks. I’ve emailed. We must all speak out about this, or us women will be erased and silenced by this misogyny.

@LigandBrigand

😡😡😡 this is psychological warfare against women.

Nothing less

I agree. It is exactly that.

Hideous.

@Pineapplepyjamas

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 know, right?

How on earth did we get here when it's almost too controversial to say for fear of uproar, that the biological males of the human species have prostrate glands

And why is this so controversial?

Because some human males believe they are females. In fact, as much female as a biological one

And the rest of polite society are too quaking in their boots terrified of telling them otherwise lest they threaten to either kill themselves or kill us.

The fact that imo bodies with vaginas is not just dehumanising. But sexualising as well.

I mean there are so many words men use that mean the same. Body with vagina. Reducing us to our cunts. A hole s man can fuck.

I mean the more I think about it, the worse it is.

@Dfhugdhvdnjrs

Complain, complain, complain. Ask everyone you know.

The Lancet
Editor: Richard Horton
[email protected]

Reposting. Vile. Just vile.

Enraging and depressing. I will be emailing.

The phrase is a pull quote from the article…written by a woman.

I note that the response to this quote ,despite being ‘literal violence’ , has not been to issue rape threats, death threats, invoke vile misogynistic insults etc, as it had been had the ‘literal violence’ here been aimed at trans women.

Bodies. Surely you're just a body when you're dead? How do bodies with vaginas menstruate if they are dead?
This is utterly enraging but encouraging that bodies is still trending on twitter this morning.

I'm so FUCKING ANGRY.

VAWAG is rising, Heath care for women is shit but we aren't respected enough to be given a name.

Shame on them

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

twitter.com/doctor_oxford/status/1441510167443554306[/quote]

Sadly that tweet was deleted. Was it good?

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

Not even that. Dead cows, mares or sheep would be bodies with vaginas.

I wouldn't call a female sheep a "body with a vagina".

I've messaged Dr Clarke on IG, as follows:

Dear Dr Clarke
Thank you for tweeting about the word ‘woman’ being erased. I don’t understand why you deleted your original tweet.
You were right!
Please, please do not bow down to this idiocy.
If respected female scientists like you daren’t tell the truth about the misogyny perpetrated by TRAs, what hope is there for the rest of us?
We are 50% of the population. Adult human females. We matter.
Thank you 🙏

E mailed the editor, or Mr Scrotum haver.

The lancet played a key role in creating doubts about the measles vaccine which is playing out today in hesitancy about the measles vaccine. I would have thought that clarity and accuracy would have been front of mind for them. But no.

The absolute fuckers

Why am I being determined by my vagina anyway. Can I not be defined by my ovaries/Fallopian tubes/ uterus/XX chromosomes. Is there a reason they've picked the bit where the cock goes?

I've written to the editor. Sadly I expect he's laughing at us silly women.

The quote in the cover is from an article by Sophia David which is woman-centric and does not obfuscate with ‘inclusive language’ . The phrase is used following examples of old misogyny and stupidity around women’s bodies, and comes across as tongue in cheek.

The mistake is the Lancet using it as a stand alone headline.

“Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected—for example, the paucity in understanding of endometriosis and the way women's pain has been seen as more likely to have an emotional or psychological cause, a hangover from centuries of theorising about hysteria. This exhibition and the Vagina Museum as a whole aim to redress this lack of attention”

@JustcameoutGC

E mailed the editor, or Mr Scrotum haver.

The lancet played a key role in creating doubts about the measles vaccine which is playing out today in hesitancy about the measles vaccine. I would have thought that clarity and accuracy would have been front of mind for them. But no.

The absolute fuckers

That is true - didn't they publish Wakefield's original study on the MMR?

Maybe that was something they were required to do, I don't know

P.S the article is about an exhibition about menstruation at The Vagina Museum. So in that context the article is about ‘the vagina’.

Again, the editorial decision to pull the quote out as a cover was the bug mistake, IMO.

‘Haha here’s a good old controversial eye catcher…..’ at the expense of women

They weren't required to publish the Wakefield paper. Authors submit papers, which the journal then send out for peer review. It is after this step that the decision to publish or not is usually taken.

They did not submit the paper to a rigorous enough review, published it and then took ages to retract it. In the mean time the damage was done, and we are still suffering the effects today.