How language has changed in 6 years

[Plasmodesmata]

Compare and contrast these two news reports, one from today, and the other from 2016.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-61477168

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37606726

Why do you dislike the term?

Would you approve of any

Sorry, pressed post prematurely.

Would you approve of any term that means "person who isn't trans"?

Oh, well swerved, Seldom.

No made up, nonsense prefix which was co-opted by social science researchers in 1994 needed. If referring to a woman, then....woman.

Quite simple.

I generally use preferred pronouns as a courtesy so I would expect the same courtesy back.

All words are made up.

I'll ask you again, what word should I use to refer specifically to people who aren't trans, regardless of their sex.

It's not gonna be "woman", because that word does not specifically refer to people who aren't trans.

It does though. You might not like that. Doesn't make it less true.

How many have specifically asked not to be referred to as women in patient literature though?

In my experience such demands tend to come from people claiming to advocate for a group of people, not from representatives of the group.

Well if woman means "someone who isn't trans", thanks for agreeing that trans men aren't women.

Plenty. Lots of trans men on social media too, explicitly telling GCers to buzz off and stop calling them "women".

Not my fault you choose not to listen.

@seldomhere can you explain to my why its okay for transmen to be called men but its not okay for women to call ourselves women?

@TheWeeDonkey
No one ever said it's not okay for women to call themselves women. Non-trans women are still women.

You're not mad about "not being able to call yourselves women", you're mad about not getting to assert exclusivity.

At the very core, your argument is about you not getting to dictate and restrict the identities of others.

Too true. The trans movement think men make better women than women do. They have already managed to split the concept of woman in two by use of trans and cis, with cis implying some unearned undeserved advantage. Then came the four legs good two legs bad mantra, TWAW. I have lost track of the number of 'your just jealous because I'm prettier' comments or clowns like Dylan Mulvaney who claim to be more feminine than women. Male born individuals like Jenner or Levine whose born sex has enabled them to reach a position not available to natal women are lauded and hailed as 'Women of the year'. In a few years time if this goes unchecked, they will be the only classification of women and we will be resigned to what ever they choose to label us as be that as gestators or clown fish. This below sums up the whole thing.

By the end of the novel, as the propagandistic needs of the leadership change, the pigs alter the chant to the similar-sounding but completely antithetical “Four legs good, two legs better.”

Is this meant to be a clever 'gotcha' somehow?

I object to being called cis instead of woman because it reduces women to a sub set of their own sex. If transmen want to be refer to themselves as men or transwomen want to refer to themselves as women, then I don't particularly care unless they want to compell me into believing that they can literally change sex.

Calling women cis against their will in order to preclude them from using the word woman is what I object to. It's like how (recently seen on Twitter) women are told that they chest feed while they are simultanously told that transwomen breastfeed.

It's co-opting and erasing the words that women use to refer to themselves as a sex class while another group use those words.

I'm not a non trans woman I am a woman. I don't care how other people call themselves. Transmen can choose to exclude themselves from their femaleness as far as they wish, but they need to know when it comes to their health that can have consequences that they need to take seriously.

And trans women are also women, and by arguing with that, it is ultimately you policing what other people get to call themselves.

See how quickly you dropped the pretense of whether someone feels comfortable with certain terms?

Not rtft but if that were true language around men’s health would change too, to reflect not all men having prostates, but it doesn’t.
It’s just women’s language, rights and representation that’s being attacked.

Transwomen are a subset of men, transmen are a subset of women.

The word woman means adult human female. Chase Strangio is one, as is Freddie McConnell, Buck Angel and the pregnant person in the Calvin Klein ad.

You can identify however you like but you can't change your biology. Periods and endometriosis are things related to female biology.

@Waitwhat23
> “I object to being called cis instead of woman because it reduces women to a sub set of their own sex”

"Subset of their own sex" = complaining about being asked to include others and not centering yourself at all times.

Women are, by definition, a "subset of their own sex". Not all female humans are women. Some female humans are children

> “Calling women cis against their will in order to preclude them from using the word woman”

As opposed to you, again, calling trans women "men" against their will, enforcing a rigid gender binary in doing so.

And you do realize "cis" is a prefix, right? That cis women are still women? And that no one said cis women aren't women?

@LoonyLurcher
> Not rtft but if that were true language around men’s health would change too, to reflect not all men having prostates, but it doesn’t.

I think it should change to. Most trans people do.

A lot of projection going on there Seldom I respect your religion, but I don't prescribe to it.

Transwomen = Transwomen, they need to be aware they still have male biology.

Transmen = Transmen, they need to be awthey still have female biology.

Women =women, we don't need to define ourselves in relation to others woman is enough.

Men = men, they don't need to define themselves in relation to others, man is enough.

Why should any trans person accept your terms and definitions, when trans women and trans men (two separate words, an adjective and a noun) are already defined as women and men respectively in dictionaries?

You expect trans people to accept an inferior status to yourself. Why should they?

There's no status to it, woman is not a value term it's a name to describe adult human female nothing more. If you wish to add value to the terms woman and transwomen that is for you to work through.

Like I say. A lot of projection.

You don't accept terms for trans people but want to enforce the term cis on to women and men, and then imagine I feel there is some sort of hierarchy there when I don't.

Nope. If anything, the only "hierarchy" is just acknowledging that cis people are the dominant majority group.

Also, how do I "not accept the terms for trans people"? I've never denied that trans people are, you know, transgender.

Why should any trans person accept your terms and definitions, when trans women and trans men (two separate words, an adjective and a noun) are already defined as women and men respectively in dictionaries?

You expect trans people to accept an inferior status to yourself. Why should they?

So obviously you believe that it is possible to change your sex class. You might also believe that the earth is flat or that the works was created in 7 days. You are entitled to your own religious and philosophical beliefs. However, you can't force your beliefs on others.
You can also give the word woman 2 different definitions. However, a woman with all descriptors except trans is still defined as a female adult person but with trans the definition of woman changes to mean a male adult person, who identifies as a woman. Apples and oranges maybe but where is the change in status and in what way is it inferior?.