Inclusive Language - what on earth

[TopKnotch]

This was painful to read....

www.hana.co.uk/blog/inclusive-language-at-hana-the-journey-so-far/

They are so deep into this that in amongst the word salad they repeatedly contradict themselves and show their real thinking even when trying hard not to 'cisgender' 'terfism' URGH

Kirrin Medcalf giving contraception advice. A person so damaged that at 34 years old, needed their Mammy, their support person and their emotional support dog with them to attend a zoom meeting today. Jebus be good, I would rather take advice from that woman that has 16 kids. At least she would have something relevant to say.

What did I just read? I think someone, somewhere is still typing that article, they unplugged the keyboard but they can't stop.

Did you scroll down?

The nonsense they spout is unbelievable

Gotta love Jake tutting that the phrase “women and people with uteruses” will make trans men and non binary folx upset because it aligns them with women. Oh fuck off. Women aren’t lepers. There’s nothing wrong with being associated with women , unless you’re a raging sexist. And I’m rolling my eyes… yes , if you seek out the contraceptive pill to avoid pregnancy while you have penis in vagina sex that does rather associate you with “women”.

Welcome to the Orwellian world! I wonder what percentage of their customers don't want to be called women? One percent? Less?

Can you imagine any other market for a product where what the customers are called is not what 99% of them call themselves but some newly invented wishy-washy term so that the remaining one percent can determine the language used.

This is what's happening here. Because some trans men and nonbinary female people don't like being reminded that they, indeed, ARE female, nobody can call ANYBODY among their customers female! Just pause and think about what that tells us about how our sex is viewed.

You should keep in mind that testosterone treatment is not a contraceptive, so you could still get pregnant if you are taking testosterone and have unprotected sex.
In some situations this would not be possible, actually. Unless they think sex is only PIV? Bit exclusionary and heteronormative.

Anyway, I actually liked the 'The trouble with using the word ‘people’ in a medical setting" section! I think outlining (or attempting to...) the reasoning for what they are doing is a good thing, even if I don't agree with every sentiment.

They've basically concluded that whatever language they use, some people won't like it, which seems right enough...

Jake suggested ‘people who can get pregnant’ as an alternative.

This is the worst suggestion of the lot, imo. There is no way of accurately knowing who can get pregnant at any point in time. Women who have gotten pregnant at the drop of a hat can experience fertility problems. And vice-versa, as we've seen from many a thread on MN. It's extremely unhelpful language and helps perpetuate the myth that any woman can control whether and when they conceive. (Obviously you can have a good idea, and being on contraception should reduce the risk, but nothing is 100%).

IcakethereforeIam · 10/05/2022 23:51

What did I just read? I think someone, somewhere is still typing that article, they unplugged the keyboard but they can't stop

This made me LOL, so true

"Anyway, I actually liked the 'The trouble with using the word ‘people’ in a medical setting" section! I think outlining (or attempting to...) the reasoning for what they are doing is a good thing, even if I don't agree with every sentiment."

I agree @PrelateChuckles it started out well.

"They've basically concluded that whatever language they use, some people won't like it, which seems right enough..."

It shows how far in they are that they use 'terf' and 'cis' with no nod at all as to how they may be received

Actually that whole article could have been reduced to one sentenced.

Whatever words we use, someone will be upset.

I think it was a prostate charity who said something similar, but concluded that their main focus was on men and therefore they would refer to them that way.

No one ever says the same for products or services for biological women

Well they're fucked. They can't even say women and transmen because in gender land transwomen come under the term 'women'. And you can't say non-binary because that could be a man.

If you deny sex exists, you going struggle to market sex specific drugs.

Reading the recent discussions around the horrifying legal situation in the US ref abortions has reminded me of a good point re contraception too. Many contraceptives are prescribed/taken by women experiencing illnesses/disorders relating to their hormones and menstruation and not necessarily related to prevention of pregnancy. Referring to "people who can get pregnant" could exclude women who are abstinent, celibate, in same sex relationships etc who use hormonal contraception for other reasons

Very much this. The men's organizations say politely but firmly why they can't accept some requests. The women's organizations bend over backwards and offer their firstborns, too, just so that they aren't called TERFs.

The actual numbers of nonbinary and trans men who are on the pill must pale in comparison to the rest of us. Which market share matters most to this company? I get that there are women who like the virtue signaling aspect of this until they peak, but every day they are a few less.

"If you deny sex exists, you going struggle to market sex specific drugs."

Absolutely @Datun and yet, they persist

I can't get over realising that language is changed even if only one or two trans men or nonbinary-identifying people don't like the ordinary words used for centuries. I wish I had that kind of power. Indeed, I wish women had that kind of power.

This is the second time this tyranny of the minority is explained as "some trans people don't like 'female' so we can't use it." The first time I saw this it was said about the question who might menstruate, and then it was a trans woman who objected...

"Alice Pelton, founder of The Lowdown, says: “ We don’t use womxn because we understand this to be associated with TERF’ism and potentially causes more harm to some than good!”"

I don't know who this is but the whole tone of this quote is seriously off. For some reason the exclamation mark is the straw so to speak

"Calling a transman ‘AFAB’ would erase his identity as a man and put him in a female sphere against his will."

I don't like the term AFAB for v different reasons to Jake from Mermaids but even so, surely it's the taking of the female contraceptive pill that ours toy in the female sphere isn't it?!

In any case, the term has nothing to do with TERFs but is entirely created by liberal inclusive feminists who thought the x made it inclusive to all who wanted to be in the group (no entry requirements). Also for nonbinaries who don't want to be called 'women' but are female and want the gains women's movement might produce.

It's not a gender critical term at all, and trans women hate it as they see themselves already members of 'women'.

"I can't get over realising that language is changed even if only one or two trans men or nonbinary-identifying people don't like the ordinary words used for centuries. I wish I had that kind of power. Indeed, I wish women had that kind of power."

I agree @nepeta it's maddening and frustrating when you realise how sidelined we are, like beetles on our backs.

I read in another thread how it was demonstrated when sanitary towel packs had any reference to women on them removed at the suggestion that they could upset a trans person, but women requested they remove the air freshener scenting has been ignored forever.

I agree @nepeta it's maddening and frustrating when you realise how sidelined we are, like beetles on our backs.

I read in another thread how it was demonstrated when sanitary towel packs had any reference to women on them removed at the suggestion that they could upset a trans person, but women requested they remove the air freshener scenting has been ignored forever.

Beetles on our backs, indeed @TopKnotch. I

t's interesting whose opinions count the most today. Male ones, obviously over female ones (race and class may change that but if we compare two otherwise identical people the male will usually be heard first). But now we have an intermediate category of trans and nonbinary individuals, and their opinions do count more than the opinions of women in places like the UK Labour and Green Parties or in the Guardian etc.

I know that trans people face harassment and even assaults, and I deplore those and want them halted. But the solution is not to take away women's rights as a compensation scheme. Yet that seems the plan.

"Some people say that 'AFAB’ (assigned female at birth) is the best term to use because it focuses on biological sex rather than gender identity."

Hilarious. Well yeah... a term to refer to people of the female biological sex would be useful, he?

WOMEN

We used to have a word for that. ^^

But you can get unscented sanitary products?

I think if they continue to sell them that way it must be because some people want them.

If the product is medically licenced for "women of childbearing age" then surely they are not licenced to have it distributed to anyone who is not a woman.

It doesn't need extra language to include everyone it's intended for.

The only reason for this need to separate the word " woman" from anythingvto do with human female biology has nothing to do with including females who do not identify as women , but everything to do with not excluding males who , if the word " woman" means someone with female biology , can't say they too are exactly the same as other women. This is why nobody in the trans activists' community is demanding changing the use of " man" in a medical context, because nobody cares about females who identify as men! All about the patriarchy, even when they say they are women.