Gender ideology in maternity research

[MrsBlob]

I participated in a study today (online) about postnatal mental health, having had a baby 2 months ago. One of the questions gave me cause to email the researchers; see the attached image.

On a serious note, a researcher will need to go through the responses to that question. The question is based on a mass delusion, and therefore any data from it is worthless.

This is unacceptable when maternal MH is a major cause of suffering and death for women who have become mothers.

I think this is relevant - here is KJK outside the GMC very recently

I don’t feel erased by ‘chest feeding’.

I do feel that it creates a harmful taboo around accurate language, and suggests that our relationship with our bodies has to be filtered through a gendered identity. This is particularly malign when associated with something like breast feeding, pregnancy and child birth, which are already difficult for many women, and which are already taboo subjects in many situations.

I can think of no other experiences that have been as important, but that have been so out of my control and have had so little connection to my identity.

I understand that people who have an existing problematic relationship with their body need tailored treatment. However, that should no more be generalised to all than any other belief or dysphoria.

I haven’t said anywhere that women should suck this up - that’s your perception of our current situation and I appreciate and understand it. But I feel there should be room for a more nuanced position, without letting transactavists dominate - I don’t like this any more than you - or without denying the experiences of less vocal trans people who just want to get on with their lives. I don’t know what the answer is. But I don’t think refusing to engage with it (which is what your position feels like to me) is the answer.

Surely the answer is reiterating basic scientific fact and returning to that as the basis for all arguments.

Humans can't change sex.

Only women give birth.

Surely that's all self evident and clear. It's important for us to hold the line and not give way to errant nonsense.

But that’s different from identifying, which is what I’m talking about.
anyway…I came back to the thread as there had been some nice supportive responses. I was feeling rather attacked and wanted to thank those people. I won’t post again.

But 'identifying' is different to biological facts and shouldn't take priority in a conversation about biological fact.

Is that not pretty self evident? I constantly feel like I've fallen through the looking glass on this topic.

You say I'm refusing to engage with this - on the contrary - I've repeatedly asked questions about what this could look like in the NHS but am only met with platitudes about the world having changed and trans people having their experiences denied.

Speaking the language of women in maternity (for want of a better phrase) isn't denying the experiences of less vocal trans people. It's reflecting the reality of the majority of the female population, many of who experience maternity care as a hostile and dangerous places to be treated. How can the NHS rectify the balance so that women are properly centred in maternity care with their mental health and physical safety being the priority while ensuring the small % of women believing they're men also get their needs met?

I'm not a medic - I can suggest possibilities but they do rest on discussions that don't revolve around the idea that focusing on women's rights and health needs denies the experiences of trans people. We've spent years with trans people & their allies insisting that the world changes to accommodate their beliefs - causing immeasurable harm to women and children. The Supreme Court judgment clarifies the legal issues.

So I ask again - what should maternity care (and research) in the NHS look like (setting aside the need to have safe and adequate care that keeps women and babies alive and unharmed)? What practical steps can the NHS take to centre women while acknowledging the needs of this other minority group, transmen?

I don’t think it has to be any different to providing tailored care for women who have a medical condition like gestational diabetes or women who have very strong religious beliefs or women who have a disability.

In every situation the priority is caring for the patient, and adapting that where it will lead to a better outcome.

What you don’t need to do is generalise their needs to everyone else in the name of inclusivity.

My trans child lives their life without harming or abusing anyone; he doesn’t threaten anyone in toilets, indeed I think it’s more likely to be the other way round. Many trans people, like any of us, just want to live their truth quietly without forcing it on anyone else.

I am perplexed at this comment. If marthasmum has been here for a while she will know that no one on here ever accuses trans men of being threatening or causing a problem for women. We all know that the problem comes from trans women, or trans-identifying men if you prefer. The consensus on here about trans men is largely that they are vulnerable young women being exploited in the service of a particularly pernicious ideology that seeks to provide validation for the behaviour of cross-dressing men.

Sometimes belief has to give way to reality. There have been children, one quite recent, who have been harmed by their parents beliefs around religion and diet. If a woman is on testosterone and becomes pregnant, somehow, the hormone may harm her child in uterus and even, I think, even after the child has been delivered. Especially if used as a topical cream. These things can't be danced around. I hope the NHS is fully informing its patients when dispensing these meds. and appropriately advising any pregnant 'man' or a 'man' parenting a child who may have obtained a private prescription for 'him'self.

Yes you made the point I meant to make. Trans men (ie biological women) are not the threat here.

Indeed.
So ensuring that there are additional adaptations / support for women struggling with their understanding of their sex - including screening for the impact of drugs taken - both prescribed and illegal off the internet.
Reversing all the "inclusive but in reality excluding women" language to ensure genuine inclusion of women. Having specific additional guidance about addressing transmen and clinical guidance if necessary about the impact of medication and any surgery on how the body functions when pregnant.
Ensuring that research isn't deemed irrelevant from the outset by ensuring accurate sex based data is collected.
Ensuring that breast feeding support excludes men with a fetish while allowing for support for women and when relevant, their partners.

I'm sure professional medics would have a far more appropriate and nuanced list.

MrsBlob, thanks for posting your excellent response, I actually laughed...

If so, this is a process I am not aware of...

That really put the ball back in their court, how can they possibly answer yes? At least, without asking "How can I actually write this crap?"

They have still not responded. You know, I could actually pursue this a bit further, I could email them to ask if they're going to respond; see if there's any sort of duty to respond to participants questions.

I had a survey from a perinatal mental health team that asked if I were a transwoman. I also wrote a cross email in reply but I think they misread me (a lesbian) as standing up for the alphabet soup and corrected the option to transman. At least then it recognised that the service users were female I suppose?

Please do persist until you receive a response @MrsBlob It’s little acts of quiet persistence that generate big change. Dripping water shapes rock 🤘

I know you’re in early post-natal so big thanks.

She's not doing great, she has rejected reality. That comes at a cost - to her eventually.
And I haven't missed the point. How you identify is irrelevant to this research which is about maternity - only biological women give birth, and anyone who gives birth is a biological woman even if they identify, as I sometimes do, as the duke* of a galactic empire 40k in the future. So how you identify is irrelevant.
(*but dukes can be female in that empire which is another thing entirely - the one I identify as is male, though)

MerryMouse, I'm just quoting you because I thought your post was so helpful, thank you.

"I don’t think it has to be any different to providing tailored care for women who have a medical condition like gestational diabetes or women who have very strong religious beliefs or women who have a disability.
In every situation the priority is caring for the patient, and adapting that where it will lead to a better outcome.
What you don’t need to do is generalise their needs to everyone else in the name of inclusivity."

I got asked if I identified as male or female while I was heavily pregnant and presenting very much as female, well a very sweaty, very uncomfortable, baggy clothed female 😅 I was furious at the time.

The deliberate obfuscation of once crystal clear language boils my piss. They took the words “woman” and “man” to the point that they demand we add c1s in order to differentiate ourselves from trans. Now they want to misuse female and male. Words matter and they need to be clear in law and medicine.

Well done @MrsBlob but I suspect you will just be ignored as a hateful bigot.