Bristol Council insists women be called ‘people with ovaries’

[IwantToRetire]

The comments were made in a 39-page response to a consultation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on updates to its guidance, following the ruling that sex in equality laws refers to biological sex.

It wrote that “not all pregnant individuals would use the pronouns ‘she/her’” so it could lead to “emotional and psychological distress” for “trans men, non-binary, gender diverse or intersex individuals”.

“We strongly advise the use of more inclusive language such as using ‘they/them’ to refer to all individuals, or include other identities to reflect the diversity of individuals who access maternity or paternity services,” officials said.

“This could include ‘people with ovaries’ or the term ‘people who use paternity services’. We also recognise that individuals may not identify with the word maternity and prefer paternity as it is gender neutral.

“Additionally, it is unclear what support will be available to trans people who chest-feed to ensure they are protected from discrimination.”
Protections based on biological sex are “too vague”, the response added, as: “It is unclear whether it refers to anyone capable of pregnancy, or only those who were assigned female at birth.”

Council officials complained that the new guidance implies that “trans women are not ‘really’ women” and risked “creating a hostile environment in public services”.

Full article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/22/council-says-women-called-people-with-ovaries/

And at https://archive.is/TOgKA

And lol how is the issue of trans people using the materniry service irrelevant to this thread about what language the healthcare service uses.

You wanted to pretend that it was about men giving birth and breastfeeding when it was always about women who dont identify as women but do give birth. It's just more attractive for many of you to fit this into your anti-man agenda.

No, that isn't how language or logic works.

Either 'woman' means sex and includes trans men, or it refers to gender and excludes trans men.

'And' links two separate things, so 'The British and the Scottish' would carry the implication that the Scottish are not British.

'The dogs and the poodles' only makes sense if poodles are not included in dogs.

'Woman and trans men' only makes sense if it refers to gender and not sex.

A hospital setting really needs to use clear language that doesn't have multiple meanings.

How you see the world isn't how everyone sees the world.

Fine if you are writing a song or a novel, but in law and science words need to be clearly understood and have the same meaning for everyone.

No that's not how language works for everyone. I will find the correct philosophical/linguistic terms but how we interact with language is very individualised to the person. I may use a label for very different reasons than you do.

How you view this speaks of your personality, but there isn't a right or wrong so to speak.

So true, and so well explained @Merrymouse, thank you.

Fucking hell, do you actually understand what the purpose of language is?

It is a TOOL to allow humans to COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER.

That means that we need to use the same words to mean the same things, otherwise no one will have any fucking clue what anyone else is talking about and we may as well go back to grunting and throwing rocks at each other.

Also, go and read Nineteen Eighty Four. It might help you understand what sort of people forcibly change the meanings of words to mean their exact opposite, and what sort of motives they generally have.

Glad you admit that they are women, at least.

That isn't how language works. Words only have meaning if they are generally understood. If you can explain what gender identity is without straying into sexist stereotypes, it will be a first.

"No that's not how language works for everyone."

Basic grammar rules need to be followed if you want to communicate clearly.

Are you really arguing about the meaning of 'and'?

"I will find the correct philosophical/linguistic terms but how we interact with language is very individualised to the person."

Great! Brilliant!

I have repeatedly said that on a one to one basis you should use whatever language benefits your patient.

I am talking about institutions communicating to the public, and that needs to be clear.

Women including trans men makes sense if you are talking about sex.

Women and trans men only makes sense if you are talking about gender, because the 'and' denotes two distinct groups.

I have no problem with gender neutral terms. When woman is used to mean simply 'adult human female' it is a gender neutral term. We need the word 'woman' to link together all the things that happen only to women, and the rights that they therefore need to participate equally in society - a world that acknowledges the uneven impact of reproductive roles and maintains a framework that supports women instead of exploiting them. None of this has anything to do with gender identity. There is no point that we will ever have to stop fighting for these protections and services, for the simple reason that half the population don't need them.

I do have a problem with sex neutral terms because they make it taboo to acknowledge the specific things that only impact women.

But you have the term woman. You also have the term pregnant people in addition to woman so the people who resonate with that term can experience the sense of belonging that you want from "woman". Why does them having that term obstruct you from resonating with woman in the same way?

The public include people who don't see the world that way. That includes women who identify as women but still see the world through that lens. That is why general information has to speak to everyone who it might apply to.

Oops - no ovaries! I will just go and ask the surgeon if I can have them back please!

Essential healthcare information needs to be clear and comprehensible to the vast majority who need to understand it, not twisted and bent out of shape for the benefit of a tiny number of people who claim to see themselves as something they are not.

Ah but general understanding is changing. The other day I read an article in a Caribbean online newspaper about a lesbian couple who had split up and one mother had illegally taken the child to her Caribbean country. I think it was Jamaica but can't quite remember. Anyway, the comments on the article were mostly from Caribbean people, many who assumed that there were typos in the article because it kept referring to two mothers.

The same article here wouldn't cause any confusion or doubt in its accuracy because a child having two mothers is part of our everyday world. Our understanding has expanded to include two mums or two dads in our definition of parents.

If the term "woman" is included, it won't confuse anyone.

What is clearer?

"Women over the age of 25 should have a cervical smear once every three years."

or

"People with cervixes including women, trans men and non binary people who were assigned female at birth should have a cervical smear once every three years."

A large part of my job involves communicating important information in a way that cannot possibly be misunderstood. The more words there are, the greater the potential for misunderstanding.

All women and people with a cervix between the ages of 25 and 64 should go for regular cervical screening.

https://www.nhs.uk/tests-and-treatments/cervical-screening/when-youll-be-invited/

I only have the term 'woman' if it can retain its meaning as a word that includes anyone whose sex is female, regardless of their identity, and if it is universally understood to have that meaning.

"Why does them having that term obstruct you from resonating with woman in the same way?"

It doesn't matter whether it resonates with me - the whole point is that words can only function if they have a meaning that is shared. Otherwise they are gibberish.

Here is a list of words that don't 'resonate' with me that I have used recently

axillary lymph node clearance
Vascular dementia
Corporation Tax
MOT
Gas meter reading
Boiler service

My need to use them has nothing to do with my identity or whether I feel any affinity or resonance with their meaning. I just need these words to be precise so that I can communicate and understand clearly

I suspect that council tax and business rates cause many people ongoing distress, but we don't suggest the words shouldn't be used because they don't resonate with people.

You also have the term pregnant people in addition to woman so the people who resonate with that term can experience the sense of belonging that you want from "woman".

I realise that you are replying to many posts, and maybe you aren't reading all of them, so missed everything I said about women's rights, but if there is one thing you take from this post, I hope it is that the need to use language to clearly defines sex has nothing whatsoever to to do with a sense of belonging.

Just catching up with this. OMG @LoftyRobin

That implies that men (regardless) of identity might have a cervix.

So you do want to make it so everyone has to be included in your term rather than being able to choose their own? That's problematic.

No it says that all women and people who have a cervix. Women without a cervix need not attend

And cervix is rather a confusing word if English is not your first language because it comes from the Latin word for neck.

How do you know if you have a cervix or what a cervix is?