Women and girls' sex-based rights

[StephanieSuperpowers]

Well, here we are...

Just posted this on the FWR main page: grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/my-speech-at-the-battle-of-ideas

I was invited to deliver a few words at the Battle of Ideas party being held tonight. here is the full text of what I hope is a short speech.

The Labour Party piece, depressing but not surprising. There's an Orwellian sense of 'thoughtcrime' in the Labour Party these days. It's hard to say which is worse, the anti-women thrust of policy, or the unpleasant and undemocratic tactics used to silence dissent. Once again I feel like taking a pair of scissors to my membership card.

And Linehan: well said, young man!

Thanks for the link to Adult Human Female - have donated and will watch.

I study a life science and will be starting post-grad placements soon in a med setting. I haven’t had any specific discussions about it with other students but there was something that came up last year along the lines of ‘people who menstruate’, to which someone responded ‘Eh? Do they mean women?’ She was genuinely confused by the statement so I guess these issues aren’t on everyone’s radar, although she was annoyed at the idea when it was explained.

At the moment I work exclusively with women who have health conditions experienced only by women. However we are encouraged to use gender neutral language, e.g. ‘some people experience this, people with this condition take this treatment while other people take that treatment’ which I find painful, but we’re not at the stage of replacing woman with AFAB or PWM (which fucks me off because we don’t all menstruate) and I hope it doesn’t get to that point. I do feel conflicted as transmen can of course be affected, but I feel it would be more appropriate to adjust language accordingly rather than a policy of blanket gender neutrality. It’s more difficult with online services though, and for that I don’t know what the answers are.

I absolutely loathe terms like person with a cervix and person with a uterus because a significant proportion of women have neither of those things as a result of a total hysterectomy for example. Does this mean they’re not women? If we absolutely must define a woman by a part of their biology then it would make sense to me to refer to two X chromosomes. I know there are exceptions to this but it’s less variable than menstruation or random parts of anatomy. The whole thing incenses me.

My suggestion to people who want to use this ‘inclusive language’ is ok I will use, women, girls and people who menstruate/have a cerviix etc. Not erase women and a sop to those females who wish to deny their biology.

I’m actually surprised we haven’t got to the point of saying, for example, ovarian cancer affects both men and women. Because if TMAM and TWAW then surely this follows that logic. Or maybe we have already, I’m not sure. I’m very concerned about implications this will have on healthcare, provision and statistics.

The RCM guidance is here:

www.rcm.org.uk/news-views/rcm-opinion/2022/inclusive-language-in-maternity-care-to-address-inequalities/

They will always use "women" but may add inclusives for specific things. About 20 transmen a year give birth, I've been informed. Women over 500,000.

www.teenagecancertrust.org/information-about-cancer/ovarian-cancer

Have a good look for the word ‘woman’ here for example.

Crikey, it’s like a game of Taboo.

I think their stance on it sounds sensible. It’s heartening that they’re preserving the use of ‘women’. What a thing to say 😳

I try to stick to evidence-based arguments, but the erasure of the words we use to describe ourselves to placate a minority whose sensitivities apparently matter more than ours does anger me inside. The attempt to erase the word 'mother', for example, really hurts. It's very precious to me, and to most women who have children, I would think. Other women will also have words that are crucial to their sense of self and find the words are being erased or colonised, 'lesbian' for example.

Yes! What Merrylus said!

Meanwhile, it's good news week!
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7366dbdc-723e-11ed-8a5b-f385de7508fe?shareToken=cc3af2e9afe9136501eafde8af9768ac

I was just coming to post the same, lus:

www.gov.uk/government/news/regulator-announces-statutory-inquiry-into-mermaids

So that explains SG's sudden departure.

One of the things that so often seems to be overlooked in pursuit of inclusive language is that inclusive language may feel exclusive to a person of the sex the service is set up to provide for (if that make sense, feels like an awful sentence!). Like ‘mother’, as you say. I have endometriosis and find it upsetting when I read articles about it referring to AFABs or people with ovaries, the latter being particularly infuriating as many women with endometriosis have had oophorectomies. Some might say this is bigoted of me but why is my upset at language like this less valid than upset at words like ‘woman’?

It seems the adults may be slowly coming back in the room: the Charity Commission are going ahead with a proper investigation in to Mermaids (at last).

I predict that the reverse-ferreting from TRSOH will be a sight to behold.

I think we all knew that Susie Green's abrupt departure signalled that something was up, but it's good to know that there is going to be a proper investigation. It will be interesting to see how Mermaids' celebrity allies react.

I predict plenty of "well obviously we didn't support THAT sort of thing and it's frankly hateful of you to imply that we did" in response to anything and everything that ever goes on/ comes out.

I predict plenty of "well obviously we didn't support THAT sort of thing and it's frankly hateful of you to imply that we did" in response to anything and everything that ever goes on/ comes out.

It's funny, but for some inexplicable reason I read the bit in quotation marks in the "voice" of you-know-who from the Old Place.

They got lottery funding? WTAF?

"For me it is and has always about protecting vulnerable and marginalised LGBT+ children, young people and their families. It's not about individual organisations, and I condemn any wrongdoing unequivocally, it's about standing against the hostile climate created by anti-trans hate groups, who laughably and hypocritically call themselves feminists, putting our young LBGT+ siblings at risk. It is bitterly ironic that the heat and noise created by these bigots distracted the authorities from the important task of safeguarding young people"

...is my prediction. Or similar

They'll say we were right for the wrong reasons.

Ha!