Verso Books are breaking the ratio record

[achillestoes]

This independent publishing company thinks referring to Indian women as ‘womb carriers’ on Twitter is acceptable language to use when talking about women being forcibly sterilised. I think they’re about to break the internet. Piers Morgan and Andrew Doyle are on it.

It might be the straw that breaks this dehumanising trend’s back. Certainly worse than any other phrase I’ve come across.

Thanks for the screen shot. They did delete tweet eventually

So why was there no attribution? In this version of events, they were plagiarising for clout, and then hid behind a writer when it turned out badly.

Hmmm...

‘So why was there no attribution? In this version of events, they were plagiarising for clout, and then hid behind a writer when it turned out badly.’

It might have been for publicity? Disastrous in my opinion.

Either create an entirely fictitious Twitter account which you never use, other than to read Twitter; or if you're using a phone try downloading other Browser apps. There's one called Kiwi which seems to let you view Twitter without having an account.

I used to be amazed that writers using this kind of obscene phrase couldn't see their own misogyny. I now believe they do see it, and they mean it, they treasure it. Reducing women to a list of useable parts isn't clumsiness but their true intention.

The author of the article isn't happy at the criticism.

mobile.twitter.com/JenDeerinwater?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

www.versobooks.com/blogs/5369-sovereignty-lost

The author is female and, allegedly , Cherokee.

Is womb carrier a term generally used by females of Cherokee descent?

I have no idea. Link below to the whole article; have a read yourself. There's plenty of stuff about the author on the internet. She's not happy and has made it clear it was her choice of language- not Verso's.

www.versobooks.com/blogs/5369-sovereignty-lost

As someone pointed out, Verso used her words in Verso's voice. I can think of plenty of other types of language that no corporation should ever use without attribution and not in quotes. And I still think "womn-carriers" is misogyny personified.

I feel absolutely despairing reading this and honestly? I am extremely worried for my daughter’s (and other girls) future if this is what is considered an acceptable way to refer to women now.

Is it the choice of language of the women whose rights were violated?

Did they call themselves womb-carriers?

How is Verso hiding anything? All they were doing was giving a platform to their named author, with her photograph with a link to the piece. It's clearly attributed to Jan Deerinwater.

It's still awful but the author herself is now alleging she's a victim of white supremacy because Verso deleted it.

Assuming your question isn't rhetorical, why don't you ask the female Cherokee author? She's on Twitter.

It really wasn't. I had a look earlier. I like to double check things before I react, and as far as I could tell, I had the full thread open, from the first post in it.

Here it is. No attribution.

I have seen this happen on twitter before though. Always with women of a marginalised background. A publisher or magazine tweets an extract with a word for women that is particularly dehumanising, as part of promoting an article or book. They don't take care with quoting authorship, and they sit back and watch the fury. Then, when it looks bad for them, they say "but that's the words the author used, not us! And she's [insert group]." Then the twitter row turns into accusing white women of policing a marginalised group's language.

The original, infamous "black birthing bodies" tweet was one such example of that exact strategy.

Oh ye goddesses and little fishes. Had a look.

Her profile strongly suggests that the decision in nomenclature is led by her own philosophical beliefs. Yeah, I doubt there was a survey of survivors from all the tribes affected.

I do feel sorry for her though if Verso have done what I suspect they have.

I'm really not sure what point you're making. Is it less awful because it's the words of an indigenous woman?

I believe the point is that the audience on twitter is supposed to think it is, and to feel guilty for expressing dissent.

I do not make the social rules of the 21st century internet, but I do take notes of how they work, and how a business can manipulate them in its own favour.

The author uses the pronoun hir!

Carrying around my prolapsed womb has been a pain in the arse. If someone else could carry it in one of those bags for life that would be a weight off.

I usually carry one of these. I find it a great comfort.

From time to time my husband carries it for me. It's great to share the uterus-bearing between us.

Purgatory writes:
A publisher or magazine tweets an extract with a word for women that is particularly dehumanising, as part of promoting an article or book. They don't take care with quoting authorship, and they sit back and watch the fury. Then, when it looks bad for them, they say "but that's the words the author used, not us! And she's [insert group]."

Yes, wasn't there a science magazine recently where the whole cover was one such sentence using a body part, and eventually the magazine said this sentence was part of an authored contribution? They had a choice of 1000s of sentences and chose the one that would be controversial...

Was it the Lancet? It pulled a stunt of that ilk, but it could be that we are thinking of different periodicals with a similar taste for trolling women.

This is a quote from a newspaper at the time about the Lancet's lamentable behaviour.

The cover refers to an article, titled ‘Periods on Display’ and published on September 1, which reviews an exhibition on the history of menstruation at the Vagina Museum in London. In the piece, the writer says "women" four times, but also uses the phrase "bodies with vaginas" once.
It is a quote including this latter term that the Lancet's editors chose to use on the front page. “Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected,” it says.Interesting choice, wasn't it.

I think the author is 2-spirit. So not identifying as a woman.

And the word is the author's choice. I don't see how the general condemnation should be affected by this. No one person is allowed to rule over the language and create new terms for women, whatever the racial or ethnic group they belong to.

The language is misogynistic coming from anyone. I don’t think quoting without quoting the writer is fair, but if these are Jen Deerinwater’s words then Deerinwater is using words that dehumanise women.