Good ways of using inclusive language without excluding women etc

[Slythermum]

Anyone got examples?
So for things like periods, menopause, prostate cancer etc - what would be examples of easily understandable (for non English speakers) and that can make sure that trans people are also getting the healthcare access they need whilst keeping the words women, men, mother, father etc in the descriptions? Would be good to include some examples.

Women and...
Men and...
Mothers and...

It's easy enough to use easily understood language then add everyone else on the end.

So mothers and birthing parents

Women and others who menstruate
Men and others with a prostate

women and..
female and...
girls and...
mothers and....
fathers and...
men and...
male and...
boys and...

Nothing needs to be changed about sex accurate language - just add in as many additional identities that are relevant (not sure where genderfuck applies but I'm sure Stonewall can advise)

Snap HerRoyalWitchyness

If you are a health care provider talking about periods, menopause, cervical smears etc, then the only word you need is women.
Whatever gender transmen identify as, their sexcategory remains “woman”.
Illness and medical care are sexed, not gendered.
The person performing your cervical smear doesn’t give a shit what gender you are - their only concern is to get some cells off your (patently obviously female) cervix!

I don't think anything should be changed. It should just be made very clear to trans people that they can not actually change sex, only be made to look more like the opposite sex, so trans men should know that women's health issues apply to them and trans women should know that men's health issues apply to them.

I’m down with “women and..”

I know some here don’t like it, I’ve read their reasons and feel that’s up to them but I think it meets most needs without excluding anyone.

@Babdoc

If you are a health care provider talking about periods, menopause, cervical smears etc, then the only word you need is women. Whatever gender transmen identify as, their sexcategory remains “woman”. Illness and medical care are sexed, not gendered. The person performing your cervical smear doesn’t give a shit what gender you are - their only concern is to get some cells off your (patently obviously female) cervix!

This

And as a pedant, I object to the nonsensical term “women and people who menstruate”.
It is only women who menstruate.
Who are these other people?
Men don’t menstruate.
If you menstruate, you are a woman, whatever you identify as or wish you were instead. We need to stop confusing sex with “gender identity”.

Hoping you're from Scottish government and changing the appalling cervical cancer smear adverts "if you are a person who has a cervix its good to have this checked out"....

Pretty much what Baboc says. I think this is an area where people need to get a grip really.

@Babdoc

And as a pedant, I object to the nonsensical term “women and people who menstruate”. It is only women who menstruate. Who are these other people? Men don’t menstruate. If you menstruate, you are a woman, whatever you identify as or wish you were instead. We need to stop confusing sex with “gender identity”.

I don't think this is pendantic. 'Women and....' changes the meaning of 'woman' from a biological sex to an identity. I'm always surprised at how many posters seem to think it's ok.

I might concede 'women (which includes....)'

Pedantic. (And yes, there's an irony in correcting my own spelling of the word but here we are.)

@MichelleScarn

Hoping you're from Scottish government and changing the appalling cervical cancer smear adverts "if you are a person who has a cervix its good to have this checked out"....

No but trying to do my work in an unrelated field and want to find the best balance. But also on a personal level to see how I feel about language. I am a mother and I will not give that word up.

I'm happy to say Mothers and Birthparent for example but I get really upset when the word mother is excluded or railed at because I treasure my experience of being a mother. Only one point in my life is where I was lucky enough to be a mother and only one child gets to call me that special word.

But if someone doesn't identify as a woman, if they also biologically understand that they are biologically female, but still don't want to be referred to as mother, I would be fine calling them father or birthparent.

I read a discussion on this recently on a different website and a poster pointed out that using the "obvious" inclusive language like, 'women and transmen' or even 'women, transmen and afab non-binaries' would not suit the agenda. Because language like that, especially the latter, is noticeable in how fucking ridiculous it is. The average person who gets a letter inviting them for a smear along with the TMs and AFAB enbees, would really notice it and roll their eyes, probably laugh, maybe have more of a rant at it. The men would join in. It would be noticed and ridiculed. It just wouldn't have a hope of flying under the radar.

But switch it to 'people with a cervix' and your average person, they hope, will be less likely to notice. Only horrible old terfs will notice and complain and everyone hates us. And people do have cervixes so what's the problem. And are you implying women without cervixes aren't women. Well fuck you bigot. So the complainants are marginalised as out there rad fems that nobody likes. No-one else even noticed.

Women…
Girls…
Men…
Boys…

Provided these words are not used in a sexist way. They are factually accurate, and needed in many cases.

If we referenced everybody all the time we’d have to address everything to tall people, short people, fat people, thin people etc. Specsavers don’t advertise to spectacle-wearers and non-spectacle wearers who may want frames only. Anyone in the later category can work that one out for themselves.

Helen Lewis:

"When it comes to this battle, I believe in the right to choose."

There are good reasons to say "pregnant people" - but to me, the reasons to use "pregnant women" are better. So I'm sticking with that.
…
Being inclusive is important. But it's not everything.

www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/pregnant-women-people-feminism-language/620468/

twitter.com/helenlewis/status/1452949309612253188?s=20

@Floisme

Pedantic. (And yes, there's an irony in correcting my own spelling of the word but here we are.)

So in this ideally medically it could work to prefix with "People who are biologically" female regardless of gender identification. "People who are biologically male regardless of gender identification"

@trancepants

I read a discussion on this recently on a different website and a poster pointed out that using the "obvious" inclusive language like, 'women and transmen' or even 'women, transmen and afab non-binaries' would not suit the agenda. Because language like that, especially the latter, is noticeable in how fucking ridiculous it is. The average person who gets a letter inviting them for a smear along with the TMs and AFAB enbees, would really notice it and roll their eyes, probably laugh, maybe have more of a rant at it. The men would join in. It would be noticed and ridiculed. It just wouldn't have a hope of flying under the radar.

But switch it to 'people with a cervix' and your average person, they hope, will be less likely to notice. Only horrible old terfs will notice and complain and everyone hates us. And people do have cervixes so what's the problem. And are you implying women without cervixes aren't women. Well fuck you bigot. So the complainants are marginalised as out there rad fems that nobody likes. No-one else even noticed.

It's difficult and it's why we need to talk about it and not feel we can't ask questions or try things out and see what feels right. Women haven't been consulted about the changes happening to the language we use for ourselves and if we actually had been - if we had listened to we could have some sensible, ethical, respectful dialogue around it all by now. It's all so pointless and messy that I despair most days. I suppose we just keep trying to be listened to.

I personally feel huge relief and thankfulness when the word “women” is used. Which is pathetic, but here we are. When “and trans etc” is added, I always think it means “and please don’t hurt me”.

Nothing needs to be changed apart from some people's ability to face up to reality.

@StandUpStraight

I personally feel huge relief and thankfulness when the word “women” is used. Which is pathetic, but here we are. When “and trans etc” is added, I always think it means “and please don’t hurt me”.

But that's exactly where we are now isn't it? So that people end up with massive anxiety after having simple conversations.

Especially if the ground keeps shifting.
I've suffered so much BECAUSE of being a woman that I will not give up the word.
I've loved so strongly BECAUSE of being a mother that I will not give up the word.

if we had been listened to I meant to say up there.

The words 'women' and 'mothers' include women and exclude men. That's all we need. Nobody else (men) needs to be included in womanhood.

I’ve never understood why a transman who is doing the most womanly thing possible - ie giving birth - is happy to become a mother, but is apparently unbearably traumatised by the mere use of the appropriate word!

This seems a cognitive disconnect of massive proportions. And smacks of narcissistic manipulation of language.