Anti trans for asking not to conflate sex with gender?

[OatALot]

On a menopause event at work and in the comments section they are being asked to use inclusive language such as 'people who menstrate'. These are being challenged and those who challenged are being called terf and accusssd of making others feel unsafe.

The people doing the presentation therefore have taken the stance anyone can go through the menopause.

I'd love to feedback that they should not conflate sex and gender. Surely if we just talk in term of sex and a biological function it can't be challenged? It takes the discussion away from a condition impacting females.

I would have no objection to that, but "people" is easier.

And who are you exactly to be giving us authority to use language 'you' approve of?

people is easier. For who? Exactly, WHO is using 'people' easier for?

@DadJoke so what do you do when the majority of those who experience menopause as are saying they want to be referee to as woman? Do you just disregard our views?

"Please use inclusive language" is not having a meltdown

And us saying 'no, we don't wish to use 'people' is not having a meltdown either. Yet..... here you are. Telling us we are having 'meltdowns'.....

You really hate women disagreeing with you, it seems.

Well it was all rather inclusive to start off with tbh and there was a call out to trans people however, they were then challenged to use inclusive language such as 'people who menstrate' . This was challenged and then terf and cis were used and it went from there.

@Helleofabore

So.. we are again back to being hysterical if we disagree with a male?

I am looking very hard through my test for the word "hysterical," which I never use, and I can't find it.

I'm not against your opinion because you are a women, but because I agree with this example of inclusive language and do not agree with the gender critical position, and the assigning to me of views about the menopause in the interest of diverting from a very straightforward issue.

You might want to look at the origins of the word...

Just a thought

@OatALot

Well it was all rather inclusive to start off with tbh and there was a call out to trans people however, they were then challenged to use inclusive language such as 'people who menstrate' . This was challenged and then terf and cis were used and it went from there.

So some people in favour of inclusive language got angry with people who didn't want to follow the rules of the event? I'd suggest following the rules of the event, but there was no need for people to throw insults around.

It's important when discussing siuch issues to use inclusive language and there is nothing whatsoever about the words "people who experience the menopause" which is hard to understand, or annoying, except for people whose attachment to the belief that trans men aren't men gives them brain fog.

Really.... just like people saying that using words like 'cervix' ignored the fact that 46% of women didn't even know they had a cervix.

Why is it that people who have bodies formed around the capacity to, or do still ejaculate think that they should have a say in what language women use to describe themselves?

@Helleofabore

I would have no objection to that, but "people" is easier.

And who are you exactly to be giving us authority to use language 'you' approve of?

people is easier. For who? Exactly, WHO is using 'people' easier for?

I could preface everything I say with "in my opinion," but you can just assume it.

It's easier than saying "some women and trans men" every single time.

It was inclusive, it noted transpeople, and also the impact on those not going through it, however, someone wasn't happy with the terms used and wanted an umbrella term to be used e.g. People who menstrate.

people whose attachment to the belief that trans men aren't men gives them brain fog

wow.

I am uncomfortable with usage of the word meltdown on this thread to describe posters who are disagreeing. It is a word normally used for how autistic people may react when in a state of being sensorily overwhelmed. Its usage here offends me as an autistic woman, and I gauge it is being used here to ridicule past posters.

This is a site that has always set out to welcome parents of children with additional needs, and parents themselves who have additional needs, and it's not in the spirit to appropriate such language to ridicule people you disagree with.

I am looking very hard through my test for the word "hysterical," which I never use, and I can't find it.

What do you think 'meltdowns' refer to?

I'm not against your opinion because you are a women, but because I agree with this example of inclusive language and do not agree with the gender critical position, and the assigning to me of views about the menopause in the interest of diverting from a very straightforward issue.

You are attempting to tell women how they should discuss issues that relate to only them. You are also telling us that you believe ALL women know what body functions and body parts are called so that instead of using the word 'Woman' it can be detached from our body parts and our body processes and functions to the generic people.

You are speaking from a male perspective and have absolutely no experience about the discrimination that female's have faced because of our body parts and functions and the shame attached to them, yet you advocate to continue it to accommodate a sub-group of females who have identified out of being women yet seek to continue to shame women who reject being referred to as 'people who'.

I seem to have cross-posted with this. I fear I have wasted my time in explaining why "meltdown" is inappropriate language to use.

It's easier than saying "some women and trans men" every single time.

So you use exclusionary language because you find it more convenient, and it's fine when you do it because it's you, eh?

I could preface everything I say with "in my opinion," but you can just assume it.

It's easier than saying "some women and trans men" every single time.

Yeah. We get it. YOU find it easier and therefore we, the women who disagree with you, should simply just accept YOUR preferences.

You really have no self awareness, do you?

the assigning to me of views about the menopause

like the view that it's useful to weaponise "brain fog" against women you disagree with politically?

@allmywhat

the assigning to me of views about the menopause

like the view that it's useful to weaponise "brain fog" against women you disagree with politically?

It's a very unpleasant attitude toward human frailties, of a piece with the derogatory use of "meltdown".

I initially thought that that had been accidental, but now I fear not.

No Purgatory. It is as derisive as you should expect it is .

Women who disagree with being dehumanised, yet again, after decades of being told that our health issues don't count and that every other woman deals with it, why can't you, are being told we are having 'meltdowns' about being dehumanised.

Why should we accept being dehumanised and called 'people with' body parts and functions? Because some females and males have disassociated from their sex and therefore, their needs have been judged to be more important.

So instead of saying 'women, and', because SOME males feel it is too clumsy, women should be dehumanised and the words 'people who x body part or function' which is actually just as much as a mouthful. Because THEY think it is more inclusive.

The complete lack of awareness of the shame and the degree of discrimination that has meant that these events even have to take place in the first instance is very apparent.

Oh Purgatory, I am so sorry that DadJoke has made you feel unsafe. I cannot believe that anyone who claims to be inclusive would use such outdated and ableist language.

DadJoke, I think you need to apologise to purgatory, this really isn’t on. I also am a bit confused. I thought you also might be going through menopause and were trying to help us to make these sessions more suitable for the target audience.

It appears that you may be talking about a topic where you have no lived experience and I find that deeply insensitive. You talk about inclusion but without the lived experience of this issue you are actually coming across as quite offensive.

I think you should try to educate yourself and listed to us who are telling you our feelings around this.

but because I agree with this example of inclusive language and do not agree with the gender critical position

Frankly, DadJoke, I don't care whether you agree or not, this is not about you or anything to do with you, your opinion is irrelevant.

The opinion dadjoke is expressing isn’t just irrelevant, it’s actively harmful.

I bet these workshops are run by volunteers off the side of their desks, eg not their core duties.

I bet there are a number of women here who will volunteer or be asked at their jobs to do similar.

What do you suppose those women will do if they perceive that anything targeted towards women, such as a menopause workshop will inevitably turn into an identity politics shitshow?

They just won’t run them.

Nobody will get a workshop. And trying to get the language right from the start is doomed to failure, because it’s never enough. The physical fact is, this workshop is only for issues related to female biology, which is under great pressure to be unspeakable again.

Slow fucking handclap. Menopause gets shoved back into the shadows. Achievement unlocked.

People who experience menopause is exclusionary for my daughter with learning difficulties. She would understand that menopause is something she will experience if it's described as something women do, as she knows she is a woman. She wouldn't understand it includes her if you said people. It would confuse her and she doesn't have the language skills to question it.

Yet again, for what seems like the millionth time, why is it ok to exclude her?

Doubletoilandtrouble

Thank you for your kind words. I very much appreciate it. MN was the first forum on which I ever dared admit I was autistic, after years of using the internet, because it had such a suppoetive culture. I hope we're not going to lose that.

The opinion dadjoke is expressing isn’t just irrelevant, it’s actively harmful. I agree, Sophoclesthe fox.

A workshop for men regarding prostate cancer would never experience this, never in a million fucking years. No way would men who have prostate cancer be referred to as people who have prostate cancer, or be harangued that women get prostate cancer too. No way would information and literature around prostate cancer tie itself up in knots resulting in the exclusion of the very people who require that information.

Menopause only happens to women. Women are the only humans on the planet who have the biology for menopause.

I see dad joke hasn’t been off to pistonheads to lecture them about being kind & inclusive then - colour me shocked