Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The Naked Scientist podcast - menstruating people

55 replies

AllyCatTown · 03/08/2022 16:07

I really like this podcast but have noticed that whenever there’s a topic on women’s health the male host speaks normally and uses words like female, woman etc “women who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle etc etc”, but then it’s often a female interviewer who it cuts to for the in-depth story and she delivers a whole segment on menstruation without using such words as women. I wonder if there’s disagreement behind the scenes on this issue.

Also it’s interesting that it seems to be more women who are going along with this nonsense- or at least that’s my perception.

OP posts:
NoHateOnlyDebate · 03/08/2022 16:34

Context is key, as not all women menstruate, for whatever reason, obviously there is the menopause, on top of this, girls going through pubertiy aren't women yet, not until they are adults. Then there are more complex medical issues that play a factor.

So, it's more accurate to say "people who menstruate" or "menstruating people", especially when you are talking about study findings. If you say "women who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle", it's not accurate, for reasons mentioned above, it might apply to most women, but not all women.

borntobequiet · 03/08/2022 16:36

Well it would make even less sense to say “people who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle”.

NoHateOnlyDebate · 03/08/2022 16:39

borntobequiet · 03/08/2022 16:36

Well it would make even less sense to say “people who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle”.

I agree, but if you say: “people who menstruate who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle”, then it makes sense.

ErrolTheDragon · 03/08/2022 16:42

And if you say 'women and girls who menstruate' it makes more sense yet. Or 'females who menstruate'. Being female is the necessary precondition.

BernardBlacksWineIcelolly · 03/08/2022 16:45

Do me a favour

it’s implicit that only women (but not all women) menstruate. We all get that

no one asks men what effect medication has on their menstrual cycle

‘women noticed a change in their menstrual cycle’ is both accurate and easily understood

jhuizinga · 03/08/2022 16:47

Is this the same programme that was on after The World at One recently? I heard a bit of one episode in which the female presenter was talking about "people" having their first period. The only people ever who have had their first period are girls or young women so why could the presenter not acknowledge this fact? The problem is that I simply can't listen to something once it's lost my trust by importing ideological nonsense.

dementedpixie · 03/08/2022 16:47

It's not "people" as that could include men and boys and they certainly don't menstruate!

Women is more accurate than saying people

NitroNine · 03/08/2022 16:59

Oh for goodness sake.

The use of “people” in this context is not a reflection of some kind of linguistic enlightenment; nor is it a natural evolution of language. It is massively political; it is actively damaging to [women’s] health messaging (I add said caveat because this is overwhelmingly an attack on the language used for the female sex); & it makes a mockery of the attempts to move away from the medical model of male as default.

Pudmyboy · 03/08/2022 17:02

Also it’s interesting that it seems to be more women who are going along with this nonsense- or at least that’s my perception.
I have thought this too OP.

Nellodee · 03/08/2022 17:03

For decades, women coped with the ambiguities of girls, menopausal women, women born without a uterus. What could possibly have changed that we need such precision now, I wonder?

Helleofabore · 03/08/2022 17:05

Using 'people who menstruate' is dehumanising.

ZuttZeVootEeeVo · 03/08/2022 17:07

NitroNine · 03/08/2022 16:59

Oh for goodness sake.

The use of “people” in this context is not a reflection of some kind of linguistic enlightenment; nor is it a natural evolution of language. It is massively political; it is actively damaging to [women’s] health messaging (I add said caveat because this is overwhelmingly an attack on the language used for the female sex); & it makes a mockery of the attempts to move away from the medical model of male as default.

This.

334bu · 03/08/2022 17:08

The use of “people” in this context is not a reflection of some kind of linguistic enlightenment; nor is it a natural evolution of language. It is massively political; it is actively damaging to [women’s] health messaging (I add said caveat because this is overwhelmingly an attack on the language used for the female sex); & it makes a mockery of the attempts to move away from the medical model of male as default.

This👆!

And all to not exclude a small group of male people who don't want the word "woman" to have anything to do with female biology. Patriarchy in action.

Whatsnewpussyhat · 03/08/2022 17:08

women who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle

This would be the correct option.
Women who hadn't had the vaccine or didn't menstruate for any reason would know the information was not about or for them. Most female teens would also have enough intelligence to realise it may affect their periods if they had the vaccine.
So unless you think females who want to call themselves something other than women are too stupid to realise that this info does or doesn't apply to them if they have a menstral cycle (due to their female body) then that is their issue.

Because it's utter bollocks to claim they are 'triggered' by the word women being used to describe any female only biological function whilst apparently having no issue with those actual functions or being described as a set of female only parts (ie vulva owner, cervix haver etc)

The word women describes our sex class as a whole. There is no need to pretend otherwise or use different words because a tiny minority aren't happy with their own sexed reality.

pylonpal · 03/08/2022 17:12

NoHateOnlyDebate · 03/08/2022 16:34

Context is key, as not all women menstruate, for whatever reason, obviously there is the menopause, on top of this, girls going through pubertiy aren't women yet, not until they are adults. Then there are more complex medical issues that play a factor.

So, it's more accurate to say "people who menstruate" or "menstruating people", especially when you are talking about study findings. If you say "women who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle", it's not accurate, for reasons mentioned above, it might apply to most women, but not all women.

If this were the reason, they would say, 'women who menstruate'.

midgetastic · 03/08/2022 17:12

If we are seeking precision it's women who menstruate

Abra1d1 · 03/08/2022 17:14

NoHateOnlyDebate · 03/08/2022 16:34

Context is key, as not all women menstruate, for whatever reason, obviously there is the menopause, on top of this, girls going through pubertiy aren't women yet, not until they are adults. Then there are more complex medical issues that play a factor.

So, it's more accurate to say "people who menstruate" or "menstruating people", especially when you are talking about study findings. If you say "women who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle", it's not accurate, for reasons mentioned above, it might apply to most women, but not all women.

Proportionally far fewer ‘people’ than women menstruate.

Mums4all · 03/08/2022 17:14

I was speaking to my male neighbour about this same subject, father of 3 adult daughters, he said in that way he does, ‘well, it’s women doing it to themselves ain’t it. Don’t blame men’. He’s got a point there.

When and why did I loose my right to be called a women. No disrespect to ‘people’!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 03/08/2022 17:21

He's not wrong. Most (not all) of the men who go along with this language for "inclusion" are absolutely stone cold misogynists. Men know it sounds dehumanising for men to use it about women and unless they are completely cool with that (and there are many many misogynistic men, don't get me wrong) they don't use it. It's women falling over themselves to give our words away in misplaced, naive kindness.

mumda · 03/08/2022 17:38

Can men menstruate? No. In which case women or females is the right word to pick.

borntobequiet · 03/08/2022 18:26

NoHateOnlyDebate · 03/08/2022 16:39

I agree, but if you say: “people who menstruate who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle”, then it makes sense.

Show quote history

It never makes sense to talk nonsense for the sake of it.

BoredofthisCrap7 · 03/08/2022 18:39

No, it's NOT more accurate to say "people who menstruate".
PEOPLE don't menstruate.
Women and girls menstruate.

Never anyone else.

Not all women and girls menstruate, but all those who menstruate are ALWAYS women and girls.

If "people" menstruate there would be sanitary provision in all male toilets.
There isn't.

Bobby80 · 03/08/2022 18:47

I’m utterly confused. When would/could anybody other than a woman menstruate?

JellySaurus · 03/08/2022 18:53

NoHateOnlyDebate · 03/08/2022 16:34

Context is key, as not all women menstruate, for whatever reason, obviously there is the menopause, on top of this, girls going through pubertiy aren't women yet, not until they are adults. Then there are more complex medical issues that play a factor.

So, it's more accurate to say "people who menstruate" or "menstruating people", especially when you are talking about study findings. If you say "women who had the vaccine noticed a difference in their menstrual cycle", it's not accurate, for reasons mentioned above, it might apply to most women, but not all women.

Ideological nonsense.

The only people who censure are women and girls. The fact that not all women and girls menstruate does not change this. These non-menstruating women and girls, however, do not kick up a silly fuss and claim that saying "women and girls who menstruate" excludes/invalidates/literally harms them. They just recognise that the topic does not relate to them at this moment. OTOH males who are trying to colonise womanhood and claim the name 'woman' for themselves do tantrum about it, as do a very few females who wish to reject the word 'woman' and claim it does not apply to them.

Women are socialised to Be Kind and some value not distressing these reality-deniers over providing accurate information (especially to other women snd girls) so they go along with the ideology. Many are also aware that, should they take a step away from the ideologically pure language, they so be hideously vilified, doxed and receive threats of rape to remind them to follow the Rules. Men do not recieve such threats and are oblivious to the pressures put upon women to submit to the trans ideology.

LordLoveADuck · 03/08/2022 19:34

Ereshkigalangcleg · 03/08/2022 17:21

He's not wrong. Most (not all) of the men who go along with this language for "inclusion" are absolutely stone cold misogynists. Men know it sounds dehumanising for men to use it about women and unless they are completely cool with that (and there are many many misogynistic men, don't get me wrong) they don't use it. It's women falling over themselves to give our words away in misplaced, naive kindness.

When women are falling over themselves to give our words away is it really misplaced, naive kindness?

When women in other countries stone other women to death few, if anyone, would say its misplaced kindness. Most would point to the internalization and uncritical submission of rules created by those who want to control women by any means possible such as by intimidation and terror.