Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Hey Bodies with Vaginas.... how we doing today?

24 replies

fmac2987 · 29/09/2021 04:17

Just had the pleasure of reading the Lancet, so glad the bodies-with-penises-with-scalpels have figured out another way to erode women.

Can someone explain to me why men are not effected by the woke agenda? I wouldn't be bothered if it were bodies with penises or bodies without vaginas.

OP posts:
Darkchocolateandcoffee · 29/09/2021 05:14

Because men feel superior to us and always have done

Babdoc · 29/09/2021 09:31

The Lancet has been deservedly inundated with complaints, both on Twitter and by email to the Editor. I hope it gives the woke idiots pause for thought.

NannyR · 29/09/2021 09:40

I agree, I was listening to a podcast about the contraceptive pill, the history of it and what advances might be made in future. The whole episode was about people with wombs, people with cervixes - fair enough, a trans man might want to take the pill for lots of reasons. However when it came to discussing the possibility of a male pill in the future it was all about men, not people with penises (which excludes transwomen who might want to take a contraceptive).

Franca123 · 29/09/2021 09:43

Why are trans identifying females so keen on taking the word woman away from us? They clearly have issues with womanhood but why do they want us all to stop being woman? What is going through their heads? Yet they can still get pregnant, give birth and breastfeed. I find it all so bonkers.

quiteathome · 29/09/2021 09:44

I was trying to work out whether the hedgehogs that visit my garden are male or female. However I realised that this must be WRONG think. So I was trying to work out if they were bodies with penises or bodies with vaginas. Which means if I could catch a female hedgehog I could send it to my smear test in a couple of weeks.

SprayedWithDettol · 29/09/2021 09:46

Well if the default is people with vaginas (cervix, womb etc ..) so men(🤷‍♀️) have to be people without vaginas etc.

I don’t know much about computer programming, but I think this is how it works. We all have to enter data from time to time, so I guess this has to be the future.

IamAporcupine · 29/09/2021 10:08

@NannyR

I agree, I was listening to a podcast about the contraceptive pill, the history of it and what advances might be made in future. The whole episode was about people with wombs, people with cervixes - fair enough, a trans man might want to take the pill for lots of reasons. However when it came to discussing the possibility of a male pill in the future it was all about men, not people with penises (which excludes transwomen who might want to take a contraceptive).
But is the real reason behind being called a 'body with vagina' to include transmen? Is that how transmen would choose to be called?! Hmm
Helleofabore · 29/09/2021 10:35

IamAporcupine

It is said to be.

However, it is rather hard to square this circle because there are also many vocal trans people who don't want to be reminded that they have body parts that trigger their dysphoria.

Who is pushing this agenda? I am now unsure. I think it was started with good intentions but has morphed to be what many feminists predicted and I don't believe anyone will own up to starting it.

[Stonewall - we are looking at you with your faux outrage that changing the language and sex markers in the NHS is starting to cause trans people harm. Like people haven't been telling you this all along.]

fmac2987 · 29/09/2021 10:43

I have a 1 year old daughter and I honestly fear the world she'll grow up in with women actually being erased from medicine, and I just read the ACLU revised Ruth Bader-Ginsberg's Supreme court dissent on abortion rights, removing references to women and changing it to people. You can't just change history, thats revising history for the sake of woke agenda.

OP posts:
EmbarrassingAdmissions · 29/09/2021 11:21

But is the real reason behind being called a 'body with vagina' to include transmen? Is that how transmen would choose to be called?!

Admittedly, transmen are the ones to comment on this from their own perspective and I doubt there's a united view on the matter.

I am baffled by why a reference to being a woman in this context would be more distressing than being dehumanised into body parts using terms traditionally used by extreme misogynists and political ultra-extremists.

fmac2987 · 29/09/2021 11:23

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

But is the real reason behind being called a 'body with vagina' to include transmen? Is that how transmen would choose to be called?!

Admittedly, transmen are the ones to comment on this from their own perspective and I doubt there's a united view on the matter.

I am baffled by why a reference to being a woman in this context would be more distressing than being dehumanised into body parts using terms traditionally used by extreme misogynists and political ultra-extremists.

Its the language of serial killers! Ted Bundy had more respect for women. Shit, sorry, bodies with Vaginas.
OP posts:
QuentinBunbury · 29/09/2021 11:26

Which means if I could catch a female hedgehog I could send it to my smear test in a couple of weeks.
Just spat out my tea Grin

ChateauMargaux · 29/09/2021 11:27

If people with vaginas are not women... what is a woman?

I would like to see everyone who writes another description of the female sex, asked that question.

I would also like to see someone ask women what a woman is and then compare the answers..

X% of women say that a woman is an adult human female.

Y% of woke men could not answer the question without using the phrase 'whatever a person feels like being a woman is'.

jay55 · 29/09/2021 11:41

I very much doubt any transmen want attention drawn to their having vaginas.

This is dehumanising all round, and I imagine triggering for those with dysphoria.

Handsoffstrikesagain · 29/09/2021 11:43

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

niceberg · 29/09/2021 11:48

The Lancet's editor has written an apology but....feels half baked, and goes on to talk about inclusivity. It does not read as a clear and unequivocal message that they understand the damage this does.

www.thelancet.com/25sept-cover-statement

SuperLoudPoppingAction · 29/09/2021 11:49

My body with a vagina is having an existential crisis because it appears to have consciousness and is confused about why it can't be referred to as a fully human actual person who is female aka a woman.

But then it remembered the long tradition of the medical profession treating women as bodies with vaginas and it all made sense

Acting as though women can't feel pain so they could be experimented on

Giving women medicine to make them quiet during birth instead of medicine to address pain

Giving women numbing cream so their husbands can still access the vaginas even though the bodies with vaginas are in extreme discomfort.

Etc

Lockdownbear · 29/09/2021 11:55

What would be wrong with using the sex terms male and female?
And keep medical care divided on those terms ♂️male (got a penis) and female ♀️(got a vagina) ?

Cailleach1 · 29/09/2021 11:59

@SprayedWithDettol

Well if the default is people with vaginas (cervix, womb etc ..) so men(🤷‍♀️) have to be people without vaginas etc.

I don’t know much about computer programming, but I think this is how it works. We all have to enter data from time to time, so I guess this has to be the future.

The Lancet didn't even give the courtesy of acknowledging the humanity of women by referring to us as 'people' with vaginas. They wrote 'bodies' with vaginas. Therefore to be equitable, it should be 'bodies' without vaginas to indicate men.
EmbarrassingAdmissions · 29/09/2021 12:00

Acting as though women can't feel pain so they could be experimented on

Giving women medicine to make them quiet during birth instead of medicine to address pain

Giving women numbing cream so their husbands can still access the vaginas even though the bodies with vaginas are in extreme discomfort.

Sniggering and advising women to consider sodomy because the vaginal mesh made such an unholy mess but their husbands still need an orifice.

In the emails, doctors talk about alternatives to sex for women suffering painful intercourse. “It is no less true that sodomy could be a good alternative!” one doctor wrote. Another discussed the difficulty of raising sexual matters with his patients.

“I said to myself, there you go, for your next prolapse [patient], you talk to her about orgasms. OK! But also about fellatio, sodomy, the clitoris with or without G-spot etc,” he wrote. “I am sure of one thing: that I would very quickly be treated like some kind of sex maniac (which, perhaps, I am) or a pervert, or an unhealthily curious person.”*

women were advised to consider anal intercourse as a solution to the extreme pain caused by intercourse.

A third woman wrote that the “appalling” comments showed a complete lack of respect to the women involved. Another wrote that they suggested women were nothing more than a receptacle to satisfy men.

“The suggestion that women who are unable to have vaginal intercourse should practise anal instead completely devalues a woman’s right to a full and healthy sex life as an active, empowered and fulfilled participant,” she said.*

“It suggests that a woman is nothing more than a receptacle to satisfy men and that ‘any hole will do’. I’m appalled that anyone, particularly a woman’s treating medical practitioner, would be so thoughtless and arrogant as to suggest that anal sex is an adequate solution to sexual dysfunction.”

www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/28/pelvic-mesh-victims-disgusted-at-suggestion-of-sodomy-as-solution

StrongSunglasses · 29/09/2021 12:19

@jay55

I very much doubt any transmen want attention drawn to their having vaginas.

This is dehumanising all round, and I imagine triggering for those with dysphoria.

Agree - it’s just flat out degrading and dehumanising for all parties.

More generally it’s an extremely insidious and nonsensical state of affairs.
I feel like Alice at the Mad Hatters Tea Party when hearing the justifications/word salads espoused on this topic.

No wonder the invisibility clock of “no debate” was needed to enable it to permeate society so broadly without basic logical interrogation…

Helped along with overt and real threats of punishment for dissent or disagreement or labels of bigotry whipping, shaming and bullying compliance at every step. People losing their jobs and tarred with “hate crime” due to querying the Thought Police on this topic.

All by a group which are ultimately undermining/muddying the definition and thus legal protections of a protected class in the Equality Act.

Sounds reasonable 🤔

oneglassandpuzzled · 29/09/2021 12:23

I don't know why we don't just call ourselves c.nts. It saves words and says the same thing as people with vaginas.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 29/09/2021 12:29

@oneglassandpuzzled

I don't know why we don't just call ourselves c.nts. It saves words and says the same thing as people with vaginas.
tbf, Suzanne Moore did propose a variation on that a few months back:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4221826-Suzanne-Moore-on-Mumsnet-radicalisation

oneglassandpuzzled · 29/09/2021 12:34

Suzanne ahead of the game as usual!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page