I’m scared

[CindyLouWho1]

An American friend who is very pro-choice posted something on social media about the repeal of Roe vs Wade in the US.

In response, a male friend of hers posted berated her for transphobia because she’d mentioned the word woman and referred to female reproductive organs.

She posted a lengthy apology about how “grateful” and “humbled” she was to have been called out on this. She apologised for “neglecting to consider people with penises” and promised to be “careful” not to deny other people’s identities when expressing her opinions in case she unwittingly perpetuates “harmful attitudes”.

What. The. Fuck. Is. Going. On???

When did people start talking - and thinking - like this? OK, some trans men and NB people don’t identify with the word woman but that doesn’t change the fact that abortion is an issue that specifically and exclusively affects people with FEMALE bodies (commonly known as women) and I cannot imagine how or why it is considered transphobic to acknowledge that. And it certainly has fuck all to do with “people with penises”, however they identify.

I just don’t understand. The post reads like it was written by a member of a cult. Or like I’ve said elsewhere, like 1984. I find it incredibly sinister and disturbing.

To be kind and considerate towards minority groups who are suffering oppression is commendable but to put their feelings above everything else, even when the topic in question doesn’t even concern them, and to apologise for failing to do so - that’s just fucking insane.

@FannyCann yes, that was awful - for someone, a woman herself, to read about the suffering those women are going through and their immediate reaction was to scold the writer for not using the new religion's dehumanising language. And then the writer grovelling and changing the wording of her tweets. America is so fucked up right now.

Actually I've seen something similar this week on a friend's FB post about midwives where a woman got really aggressive saying that men can get pregnant too - and then calling anyone who objected transphobic.

Just mental!

I completely agree that 2+2=5, or 3 or whatever. War is peace. Freedom is slavery.

How old do you think you have to be to read 1984?

Lunatic fringe stuff best disregarded. Reminds me of the mindless marchers waving Mao's red book in the late 60s.

Once you realise left wing misogynists have a fair amount in common with right wing misogynists it is both terrifying but also strangely liberating. It frees you up to say "no" to a misogynist, even if you agree with them on, say, climate issues.

The other thing that helps me is to remember it is this current, mainstream trans ideology that is inherently misogynist. Not all trans people themselves. Trans people hold as diverse a range of opinions as any human. Many are opposed to this ideology and see that it harms women, homosexual and transsexual people.

If it was anybody else I would also think it was sarcasm/ satire but in the past she and I have fallen out and not spoken for months just because I said I agreed with JKR, so I know she is deeply pro-trans. I too can’t quite believe stuff like this is really happening, hence my OP.

I don’t have any issues with trans people, in fact I have a lot of sympathy for them, but that doesn’t mean we have to centre their feelings on every issue, or to change our language to make sure they feel included. I talk about women because that’s our word for people with female bodies, which is who this specific issue is about. They know who they are, however they identify. I don’t feel the need to tie myself in knots trying to cover everyone who doesn’t like that term.

If I say humans have two legs, it is understood that I mean in general. It doesn’t mean that there are no humans who don’t have two legs, and it doesn’t mean those with one leg or no legs aren’t human. But I don’t have to state those facts every time I talk about humans!

It's becoming increasingly important to loudly bluntly use and demand the use of mother and woman and to refuse to pretend otherwise. Really to just flatly refuse. The time to apologise and negotiate and be nice is long over, and you can only be reasonable with another party with the capacity to be reasonable and to care equally about your interests as well as theirs.

It's occurred to me that there may come a time when women who refuse to play this subjugation to male interests game are going to need to come up with a 'gender' (phenomenallypissedoffandfuckitall gender?) that opts out of being either a woman or a man (in terminology used by the fashionable leaders of society) and as part of expressing that gender is a biological female who will use whatever biological words required, and will need appropriate spaces and terminology. And 'woman' can be left to those who seem truly too stupid and too dozy to realise what they are busily enabling and who wish to embrace a dick pandering, subordinated role in society.

There was a protest in Amsterdam on Saturday supporting women in the US. Except many people didn't support women, they supported "people with a uterus".

A Dutch newspaper wrote about it and interviewed protesters. The one nurse interviewed was one of the "people with a uterus".

The spread of this rubbish is astounding.

All is subjective in the woo world of Descartes

I'm very blunt now about 'not doing this shit' and so is my son in his 20s.

I think this is one of the fundamental reasons we're TERF Island - many Americans are apparently able to utter recitations like this - or listen to them - with a straight face and without cracking up into helpless giggles, unlike we Brits.

I think we've for decades been rather cynical about American's sense of humour, and I think this stuff sort of targets the main bit they're missing - some failure to spot and enjoy absurdity.

(Yes, not all Americans, I'm sure, but come on, they're not right, are they?)

If I ever had to capitulate on specific words, I would only go as far as saying something like ‘oh, yes, apologies… of course, I meant women, transmen and Enbies!’. 😅They (the morally superior thought police) can F right off if they think I’m going to not use the word women to speak about biological females.

Who benefits from (purposeful) confusion of language and shared understanding?

It should be clear if it's a group:
—with power for whom this consolidates their power base.
—that is playing linguistic abstract games because this doesn't affect their lives.
—that is so inexperienced with life that they don't understand the consequences of what they're doing and the harms that they are facilitating (kindest interpretation).

Or females in all their diverse forms. Not 'people', females.

If anyone wants to then shout at me about a female person isn't female if they say so then life is honestly too short and there really are more important issues facing females right now.

Seems to be part of a trend whereby rich people who can buy a baby are very keen to erase the humanity of the woman carrying and birthing their child. This is a quote form an Irish 'celebrity' and I use that term very loosley, bemoaning the fact that he and his husband aren't allowed buy a child the minute the thought enters their head

"This isn't just about gay guys and husbands trying to have families - everyone struggles. But I think in Ireland, the rules around surrogacy are absolutely ridiculous. The fact that the female egg is put into the surrogate, and then the surrogate is named as the biological mother just isn't right - it's not even related to the child."

The fact that the female egg is put into the surrogate, and then the surrogate is named as the biological mother just isn't right - it's not even related to the child."

'It's'

Yeah, all this fuckery needs banning now. People are not commodities to be bought, dehumanised and manipulated to meet the needs of the exceptionally spoiled.

“There is a bun in someone’s oven, and we own that bun,” said Brian [Dowling] cheerily.

Has any mother ever thought of her children as something she “owns”?

“There is a bun in someone’s oven, and we own that bun,” said Brian [Dowling] cheerily.“

Not just anyone’s “oven” - it’s his sister’s. The sister who will legally be his (or possibly his husband’s) child’s Mother.

It's no longer a fringe belief on the left in the US. Pretty much all US organisations which used to be for women's rights are now erasing as many references to 'women' as possible or adding 'pregnant people' or 'all genders' qualifications or something even worse.

The logical problem, of course, is that the point of some organisations existing will be lost when they do that.

Women's mistreatment has always been based on biological sex. When all references to biological sex are erased, organizations fighting said mistreatment are like blindfolded children playing the game of pinning the tail on the donkey.

If 'women' is now nothing but a shared 'feminine' (flutters eyelashes, looks up coyly) abstract gender identity, then very few ordinary women would even qualify as women, because for most of us being a woman is based on biological sex, not some subjective inner feelings unrelated to that sex (which I suspect only transgender people actually feel).

Where I wonder are the TW rushing to join with their sisters and protest the erasure of the class and word they value so much? Where is the care and investment in such a massive women's issue?

When all references to biological sex are erased, organizations fighting said mistreatment are like blindfolded children playing the game of pinning the tail on the donkey.

When all references to biological sex are erased women simply become non-entities.

@CindyLouWho1 it is chilling, I agree. What's also unnerving is that we are all very gradually getting used to expressions like 'people with uteruses', using this sort of language is an identifier of belonging to the 'good' team.

All these reductive, mechanical labels, without exception, derive from gender dystopia that is successfully being pushed using social media and marketing stratagems.

Gender ideology is incredibly subversive and unfortunately, I believe it will change things for a long time to come. We don't have the luxury to be complacent and think it will all be fine, I personally don't believe we will ever go back to how things were. The reality is that women are facing tough times, it's incredibly dystopian. But it's real.

What's also unnerving is that we are all very gradually getting used to expressions like 'people with uteruses', using this sort of language is an identifier of belonging to the 'good' team.

Time to make an effort to do the same to men and boys whenever possible so that others see the usage in a context where they are not accustomed to seeing it. So people with prostates, sperm-producers, ejaculators, impregnators, penis-owners and so on should be used whenever inclusiveness is desired.

Do we need women's groups to write to journals and newspapers that use this dehumanising language and firmly resist?

Ugh. In addition to the language around females, I just hate the grovelling apologies that are expected these days.

Drew Barrymore (who I generally like) apparently said something recently about the Johnny/Amber case and some people complained about it. What she said was very mild and didn't take either side - something like Why are they airing their dirty washing. Some people said she shouldn't be talking about a current case (though everyone else is!). Fair enough. But she clearly felt obliged to issue the most grovelling apology, all stuff about learning and becoming a better person. Not blaming her personally as she probably thought she'd be cancelled otherwise. But ugh