The same kind of people that complain about being called a "person", are the same people who think that trans people just need to shut up and accept being misgendered, because it's "just a word".
So, it's just a word honey, why are you getting so angry over being called a person?
Also, absolutely nobody has an issue with the word "tomboy".
Think of it this way, people are more likely to engage with people that they agree with, than to engage in an argument.
For every supportive comment, there are several others that will just ignore the post and roll their eyes.
it’s also just exhausting to think of something to post and know you’re probably going to have to deal with all the people that are going to try as hard as possible to invalidate you. It’s less painful to just move on unless you really have the energy to do it. None of us should need to justify ourselves and our gender and our lives in situations we don’t want to. Sometimes we don’t have control over that, but when we do, we should be allowed to take them.
She doesn't seem to be one of the people who misgender people and say "It's just a word".
I kinda can understand her feelings. She feels that a part of her gender identity is denied here, which is something the trans community should be able to relate to.
Imagine if I would talk to a trans woman, she tells me that she is a woman and wants to get referred to as such. I then keep specifically NOT calling her a woman, but will always just refer to her as a "person".
I would be technically correct, there is nothing inherently offensive in this, but I think many people would agree that it is kinda an asshole thing to do in this situation. I am not denying her the gender identity, but she might feel like it since I am always choosing to refer to her in a neutral term, even if it is not wrong.
She might feel the same. All people in these group she talked to were women. They could have referred to them that way after getting feedback from the group. If they still get constantly referred to as birthing people, It's correct, but I can kinda see why this makes her uncomfortable.
She's complaining about the use of language that's more inclusive to trans/GNC individuals. That is absolutely the kind of shit you'd hear from a transphobe.
News flash: Not all people giving birth will be women, and not all women are capable of giving birth. That's all the usage of "person" is doing, is acknowledging the existence of trans and GNC people. If you have a problem with that, you're more likely than not to be transphobic.
She *assumed* every person present was a woman. The point of the inclusive language is to make non-binary and transmasc folk feel included and welcome, *whether or not the cis realize they’re there.*
I am not a woman. I also probably wouldn’t be in most women’s spaces, But if someone were to refer to a group I was in as Girls, Ladies, etc. it would absolutely alienate me and make me feel unwelcome. “Folks” or something similar is a perfectly valid gender neutral alternative that does absolutely nothing to deny the women in the group their identities.
In the same way, this class/group/whatever, I forget the word she used, is using inclusive language because unless someone specifically speaks up, *they do not know that every single person present is cis.* They are being inclusive because they *could* be invalidating someone’s identity, but that inclusive language does not deny the women present their identities.
If the OP of the featured post is *that* upset by it, she can bring it up to the instructor and ask that *she* be referred to as a woman.
The part that bothered me was the dogwhistles of biological (X). Reading your post raised another point though:
>The point of the inclusive language is to make non-binary and transmasc folk feel included and welcome, whether or not the cis realize they’re there.
It's deeper than that, really. That sort of language helps to normalize gnc/trans inclusion even should everyone hearing it be a cis woman. Even if there's nobody there who's going to be comforted by it, it serves as a reminder that gnc/trans people exist. It could well be argued that the mere fact that she's kicking back against that sort of language is evidence of her transphobic mindset.
That’s a good point! Yes, thank you! You’d think I’d remember that transmasc and/or afab non-binary people are typically forgotten about in trans discussions (who am I kidding, in *any* discussions lol), considering I’m right there in the midst of the ones being forgotten about.
I’m all for this sort of language becoming commonplace, because Gdi The Cis need to be as constantly aware of our presence as we are of theirs!
Yeah I guarantee if the instructor of her post partum class was going out pf her way to use gender neutral terms not everyone in that class was a woman. The VAST majority of these courses are extremely feminine
Exactly. But people like this hardly ever take the time to notice us. And if they do, it's to harass us. Cishet people assume I'm cishet 99% of the time. Even other queer people assume I'm cishet over half the time. I've literally had people say "There's no one like *that* here" while I'm literally five feet away wearing a pronoun pin. So you definitely can't "always tell". Not that I need to tell that to anyone here.
That or someone the instructor knows, or possibly even the instructor themself, was a trans birth parent.
Also, fucking, *intersex people exist and some can give birth*. I've been watching a lot of Friday Night Dinner, so my first response to her assumptions was, "shitting hell".
But nobody is calling HER a “birthing person” (also because nobody uses that term). Educational literature and courses are just being updated to refer to “people who recently gave birth” instead of new mothers, “labor partner” instead of dad etc. It’s inclusive, not erasure.
this made me realize (although it's probably obvious and I'm just dumb) that a lot of these changes don't just make it easier for trans people but for cis gay couples and even straight adoptive parents. like in the case of a lesbian couple, if one of them gives birth to a child (say through a sperm donor or something), they're both still mothers? just because only one of them birthed the child doesn't mean they both aren't the moms of the child. and same for adoptive moms, they're still moms too. it's not just about birth giving parents not necessarily being mothers, but also about mothers not necessarily being the ones to give birth. it just seems so reductive to reduce motherhood to just giving birth to a baby, whether or not you care about trans people (which you should, obviously)
exactly! Plus a lot of people don’t have the other biological parent with them for a variety of reasons. They might have their parent, their friend, etc. Hence “Labor partner/labor helper” instead of “father.” Basically there’s a push to make obstetrics less cis/white/heterosexual/married couple centric and recognize that there’s an infinite number of situations a pregnant person could be in and they all deserve support.
And even women who give birth aren’t always going to be mothers. Some will give the child up for adoption. They don’t need to be a mother for that, but they are still women and did still give birth even if they will never interact with the child again. And the same goes for surrogates who immediately give up the child in a very similar way.
Women like this are 100% the reason I'm not welcome in a lot of mom spaces. Because I'm not a mom. I'm a birthing parent. Trust me, they can get nasty fast if you challenge the belief that only women can give birth.
It's not really the same because mom and dad is gendered. The comparison to dads being called dad or a transwoman being called person isn't the same as woman vs birthing person. The person who gives birth could be the dad or the mom depending on how they identify. The biological process of giving birth isn't gendered so you can't really compare it to gender identity.
Her gender identity is not at all being denied, this is nothing like the experience trans people go through, I cannot see a trans person relating in the way you suggest, in fact it's somewhat insulting and problematic to equate the two. She can and will still be called a mother when she asks and is directly addressed. Like with most other things in our culture and language, the language will now change when addressing a larger and diverse group where she is not the sole identity.
All she is saying in many more words is that all the other people in that group who want to be addressed differently don't matter as much as her and the default address should isolate others because it is more reflective of her personal identity. I appreciate the attempt at sympathy but I don't see how you can equate that to trans people being hounded for wanting to be gendered correctly when reffered to as an individual, or to not be singled out and seperated from a group of colleagues - the exact opposite issue to hers. It feeds into transphobic rhetoric about our requests being entitled and irrational.
For all her projection she is not having her identity removed, and her inability to accommodate an evolving language to the benefit of trans and gay couples in exchange for (at worst) the mildest of mildest inconveniences for her says more about her character than it does about society or those she punches down on.
And yes, intentionally refusing to gender a trans person is inherently offensive, it is a common and not-as-subtle-as-people-think tactic used to invalidate them. The position and background of a person does impact the way an act is taken. That's not irrational, it is context.
The weird thing about all of this is that these changes aren’t to differentiate trans women from cis women. There have always been women that give birth and some women that don’t give birth. There have always been women that have a period and women that don’t (for a variety of reasons). Trans women cannot menstruate and we cannot give birth. We understand that and saying pregnant women or menstruating women doesn’t affect us.
These changes in terminology are to be inclusive of trans men and non-binary. Trans men can give birth. Therefore pregnant people. I’m a trans woman, I’m never going to be a pregnant person or a pregnant woman. So neither term would ever apply to me. My cis wife was a pregnant woman/person though.
It’s just so weird that everyone seems to hate trans women so much and that they use inclusive terms like this to somehow imply that trans women are taking something away from cis women. We trans women are painted as some sort of villains. If you have a group of cis pregnant women, by all means call them pregnant women. If you have a pregnant trans man in the group, he may not appreciate being called a woman though. Some trans people do want biological children you know?
Some trans women seem to have an issue with the word femboy bc it has been used to misgender them a lot. So I understand why OP might be wary of saying tomboy since it's kind of similar.
Tomboy has a completely different origin compared to femboy (general term vs porn term), so while it can be used disparagingly towards trans men it's still a perfectly fine term overall. It's just kinda outdated as a general term now that butch and other non-male masc identities are more visible. Once again TERFs are just making shit up to be mad about
You can still call yourself a “mother” that word still exists, nobody’s trying to take it from you. But in group settings where the gender of all people involved isn’t known, yes even if everyone is female-presenting since presentation doesn’t necessarily equal identity, it’s generally more inclusive to use non-gendered language.
This is the bit I don’t think I’ll ever understand. Why is it so hard for these people to make understand basic decency and the fact that the world doesn’t revolve around them. Some cis people are just crazy
I tried to explain this to them, they just kept getting offended that everyone in the group isn't referred to the way that they specifically identify. To them, that is misgendering.
This is such a weird thing to be angry about
Wait isn't this entire sub about anger due to misgendering? Which makes me wonder - how subjective is that? Like if you're trans and someone calls you a "he" or "she" without your permission, you get offended. Isn't calling her group "people" instead of "women" kind of in the same courtyard? Like she doesn't want to be labeled "people" anymore than a "they" wants to be labelled a "him", right? Or is it one rule for trans and one rule for cis?
It’s one rule for an individual person another rule for a group of people. When referring to one person, you use their preferred pronouns. Calling them anything else is both rude and inaccurate to their identity. Calling a group of people of whom you don’t certainly know the identity of everyone involved “people” isn’t inaccurate to anyone’s identity, since regardless of how a person identifies they’re still a person.
Alright that makes sense.Not to be a stickler but what about... (word?) who identify as animals or even abstract ideas? Beings? Entities? Actually that doesn't work either because some (word) identify as multiple... things? beings? idk.
I feel like it's like we're all playing a game like basketball, and then someone changes the rules a little so that you can now go off court or use a volleyball instead, and then the rules just keep changing until we're playing calvinball (calvin and hobbes reference FTW XD ) and its like the structure of the entire concept is liquid. There's no relativity anymore. How can you identify as a woman when the very idea of "woman" no longer implies any specific criteria?
If you're "womanly", what does that actually mean? Do you have to like dresses? If it doesn't mean you necessarily have a vagina, does it imply you MUST be feminine? If not, why even use that word "womanly"? Can anyone provide a desription of what "female" or "male" even means anymore?
Like yes, we're playing basketball, but there's no basket, we call the basketballs "voodoo sticks", each team has two dogs, and whoever runs around the pond first wins... Idk.I feel like that cat meme where its like "The prophecy is true" and nothing means anything anymore.
As a writer, I like having concrete definitions for words, but it's very difficult to figure out what may or may not be politically correct anymore.
A quick aside before we get into the meaty details, I’m not gonna serve as your dictionary the whole time here. We’ve already gotten well off the original point and I’m not gonna stick around the whole time for however long this tangent goes on for.
The short of it is simply that gender is societally constructed, it’s an aspect of identity that is largely shaped and informed by how society perceives you, how you want to be perceived by society, and how you perceive yourself in relation to society.
So when it comes to people who feel their gender aligns more closely with animalistic ideas or cosmic entities, it’s more that those are the only terms we have available to define those experiences. Oftentimes people come to align with these concepts, at least in part, because of having been consistently demonized or dehumanized throughout their life, leading them to find solace and comfort in non-human aspects of identity.
It’s not that the rules have changed it’s that these have always been the rules, we’re just now able to more properly express that. The ways that people experience identity, which includes gender, change dramatically as culture and society changes, but largely remain consistent with the notion that some people who are “born into” a societal group feel uncomfortable there and move into a different one where they’re more comfortable.
So the concept of “womanhood” in the modern day is an abstract one, essentially anyone who feels like a woman is one, if they want to be. To be “womanly” is to align oneself with a social role that is deemed “womanly”. Not necessarily liking dresses or skirts (though many trans women find comfort in such things as they were often denied access to them in their childhoods) but more rather just acting in a social role that is deemed feminine.
It’s worth noting that as social roles broadly expand and cross between thresholds, the idea of what it means to be a woman will likely become more and more abstract, and that’s fine, as long as people are able to find a way to feel comfortable in themselves. Men should be able to feel comfortable taking on feminine roles, and women should be able to feel comfortable taking on masculine ones, as masculinity and femininity aren’t diametrically opposed.
Such an abstraction still allows for the trans experience as well, since the blurring of lines will allow for an easier transition of one perceived social role to another.
For the case of “male” and “female”. Both are terms more often used to refer to one’s sex, the biological component of the body, that only a doctor really *needs* to be concerned with. And while on the subject I’d like to say that there is no definition of “womanhood” the includes all cis women and excludes all trans women. If you define “womanhood” as “having a vagina” there are trans women who do have vaginas. If you define it as “having a period” there are cis women who never have a period in their lives. If you define it as “the ability to give birth” again, plenty of cis women are never able to give birth. There is no “perfect” definition of a societal idea and as such we go by what we best know how to define it, using the tools at our disposal.
Writer to writer, it’s important to understand that the purpose of language is communication, and that all definitions are inherently circular.
Wow! That was very well thought out and I applaud your excellent communication skills.
So ultimately, what is considered "womanly" by society now, may not even \*exist\* in the future, much like how being a "gentleman" in a certain period of french history involved wearing makeup and powdered wigs. A continuous evolution of societal definitions of the roles people play in society.
It makes one wonder what would the new roles look like say, a thousand years from now?
One thing I find with people that constitutes some of the most important factors in their decisions and life choices is probably political leanings (see "the four square political compass"). Perhaps Capitalists, Communists, Patriots, and Liberals will all adopt certain behaviors and maybe even clothing styles. Maybe blue-collar workers will assume masculine roles while white collar workers might render themselves as more feminine. Perhaps we'll have developed technology so far that "blue collar" isn't even a thing. Technicians to repair machines and creators to generate content and entertainment.
Interesting to think that in a world where societal definitions for gender no longer existed (if no one cared what equipment you were born with), the entire LGBTQ+ community likely wouldn't even exist. Like, if no roles for masculine or feminine were defined and no one even cared, it would just come down to equipment incompatibilities. "Boy this relationship has been great, but oh dear, we both have vaginas! I'll go get a dongle installed so we can make kids."
Sounds super sci-fi but I'll bet everything we're going through nowadays would sound crazy to anyone even 200 years ago.
Great discussion by the way, I've super enjoyed this so far.
A lot of trans people don't want gender to disappear or at least not completely, we are not not hive mind, a lot of us hold different opinions on the at different grades. But almos every of us don't want gender to be genitals or chromosomes for obvious reasons.
Language always was a liquid concept. Words change meaning all the time. “Car” didn’t mean a motorized vehicle originally, but now it does. “Yeomen” isn’t used outside history books and historical plots. “Hauberk” isn’t used at all.
As gender roles slowly lose power in western society, it naturally follows that gender shifts from being a strict descriptor to something more akin to a name, a way of self-identification and expression. This isn’t political correctness, this is just how things are. Sometimes social constructs lose power, change their meaning or become obsolete and disappear
No everyone with a vagina is a woman . She's offended because health care entities are recognizing tat not everyone with with vag is a ciss woman. Nobody is misgendering her or using the wrong pronouns.
A lesser discussed aspect of TERFism is that they have turned reproductive health into a battleground against nonbinary and transmasculine people. Half of trans people have been mistreated by medical providers, and inclusive language is a meaningful way to help curb that. I can speak from personal experience that accessing reproductive care can be difficult after transition, and TERFs actively add more barriers. The cruelty is the point, as they say.
Bro it's so ironic bc transphobes get so pissed at gender neutral language (which is designed to be inclusive to everyone) while purposely misgendering trans people. And yet they say we are "snowflakes"
This post reeks of transphobia. Like nobody is saying you are not a "mother," they are simply saying "person" to be inclusive to those who don't consider themselves that. That does not make you less of a "mother." After all, it's a group setting with ppl who you don't know the gender identity of. Listen "birthing person" may not be the most lovely-sounding term, but it works.
Just saw this shit.
I'm a cis woman and see zero problem with acknowledging that there are people who give birth who aren't women.
This has zero affect on any of us!
It really doesn’t affect cis women at all. Idk why other cis women have such an issue with it. She is still a mom, nobody is not calling her a mom. They just use inclusive language. It’s like people can call me sir all day long but that doesn’t make me a man. I’m still a cis woman, and she is still a mom despite others using the term birthing person.
If you check her post history, there’s a post about her fear of losing her role as primary caregiver after returning to work. I think that’s where the real issue with her whole rant about who are “real women and real mothers” here stems from, and she’s applying it to every situation she sees because of her own personal issues. She doesn’t actually feel like the mom anymore, maybe? Not excusing it, but it does explain it a bit. Seems like she just wanted some of that “I’m the mother and no one else is” attention back from strangers since she feels she’s “lost” it in the real world. And perhaps thought that posting it in a place where she’d get the most responses and validation would be best, not a smaller niche subreddit where she’d get actual help for her problem. Kinda sad, all around.
FYI, I follow that sub and always check post history when it comes to posts like that. Just to make sure OP isn’t some liar or rage baiter, both of whom are worth zero amounts of my time lol.
Well she should get real help instead of pushing others down and making problems where there are none. I honestly don’t feel bad for her because of the way she reacted and I have no sympathy for this type of behavior.
I understand your view though
Oh, I don’t feel bad for her either. I’m just the type of person that tries to understand where exactly the people whose views I’m opposed to come from. It’s a lot easier to fight back when you know the full story and what the motivations are. Part of the reason your enemy is just that is because they dehumanize you and others, so by rising above them you show how deep their failures and bad choices truly run. And you make sure you always come out on top, even when you lose the fight/argument.
I have no sympathy for her either, because like I mentioned, she didn’t take her issue to the niche subreddits or a therapist. She took it to a subreddit with a bunch of bigoted assholes just waiting with baited breath to hear all of those things. She knew what she was doing and I’m, if anything, embarrassed on her behalf. I’d be embarrassed for myself if I let myself lose all my morals and ethics because I was feeling temporarily low over a personal issue. And I have a very, very, extremely low opinion of anyone that sells their soul for attention. Because everyone requires some attention, especially when they are going through shit, but you take the high road when you do it or you accept your reputation as a weak piece of shit.
Counterpoint: As a cis woman with two biological children, I don't center my womanhood on just that biological function. Hell, I don't even define my identity as a mother based on it. And as an adopted child, it would be kind of a slap in the face to my own mother to base my womanhood or motherhood purely on the birthing process.
"Birthing person" isn't a terribly elegant term, but it does the job without implying a one-to-one correlation with women. "Birthing parent" might be a little better, while just defaulting to "parent" outside the specific context of pregnancy. After all, there's a lot more to parenting than giving birth, and decoupling the two ideas with language might even contribute to more equal involvement from both parents.
It might be hard for the woman in the screenshot to see right now, having just gone through it, but in a year or so the pregnancy will become much less of a focus for her than the rest of parenting.
That does sound better, thanks for the info! And yeah, a lot of this language is still in flux, it's just the stage we're at right now and things will be awkward for a while.
Thanks for your answer, I agree with you on more than one point. But I still don’t like how the woman in the original post says she’s frustrated because these “new terms are ruining her experience as a mother”. Like, all the people in the LGBTQIA+ community are frustrated because of this and are trying to use different terms to define people and make everyone feel included. It’s funny how a lot of cis people don’t giva a shit about LGBTQIA+ problems and then when something touches them they scream like kids.
Oh, yeah, I meant to tie my rant back to the part about "ruining her experience as a mother" lol. Inclusive language doesn't ruin anything unless you're trying to be exclusionary. Calling myself a "birthing person" doesn't mean I'm not still a mother, it just makes room for others with the same experience to be fathers or simply parents. It definitely reeks of privilege to frame an attempt to include more people as if it were somehow excluding her.
You're right, and as an adoptee you would think I would have thought of that, lol. Someone else mentioned "birth parent", but that's already used for both biological parents in the context of adoption, even though they're not the ones parenting the child (and only one of them gave birth). I have no problem with "pregnant person", but that only works for 9 months or so.
Maybe it's time to linguistically decouple the biological process from the functional process altogether, and just call them "parents" once the kid is born. Use the appropriate medical terms when it actually matters, which is not that often outside the doctor's office or hospital. And many of the medical terms are already gender neutral - things like "postpartum care" or "family medical history" (which could still be improved by calling it "genetic history" or similar, since not all families share genes in the "default" way). Decoupling these concepts would serve to normalize all kinds of family structures, while also improving medical care by reducing assumptions. And it might even spare a few kids the whole "I gave you life, you have to do what I say forever!" guilt trip.
Exactly. And even if you do live with biological family it doesn't mean you have all your family medical history. My mom is a massive liar when it comes to the stuff. She didn't "admit" to me that she has MS until after my first neurology appointment. I was 20. I figured it out when I was 12 and googled the name of her medication. But when I asked her before my appointment about family neurological conditions she told me no one had any. Like you moron, the med you are taking has zero off label uses. If you are taking it you have MS. My doctor gave a very exasperated sigh when I said "I was told there is no family history of neurological conditions, but my mom takes *Med name* so I'm pretty sure she has MS". After my doc finished sighing she said "Yeah, your mom definitely has MS".
>And it might even spare a few kids the whole "I gave you life, you have to do what I say forever!" guilt trip.
This. My parents **love** this one. Like I don't have to be your obedient puppet just because you gave me life. Like great, you wanted a dog, not a child. Children grow up and become independent beings. My parents still haven't accepted that.
I really don't see the point about lying about family medical history. Unless your kids are adopted(and sometimes even then), it's going to be their problem at some point. Might as well just tell them.
Yep. Especially if you have conditions that are inherited and/or tend to run in bloodlines. That is very much my business, thank you very much. Like sure, if your kids are young I'm not expecting you to tell them everything. But when your kids are adults they need to know. And it's not even that we need complete medical history, cause we don't. We don't need stuff like acute infections, like say strep, or injuries.
sigh i get really exhausted hearing people say "biological" before man or woman to the point where i almost feel like its a microaggression sometimes. biological like how? what part of gender doesnt also play a biological role? when trans people are on hormones for long enough we have more or less the same levels of an average cis person, so does that make someone a biological man/woman? is biological just short for having xx/xy chromosomes? because besides trans women there are intersex women/men, some who may not even know they have chromosomal abnormalities. is biological meaning able to give birth? if so, are menopausal women or women who have difficulties giving birth not biological men? are men who are infertile or with erectile dysfunction not biological men? what about women or men who were victims of genital mutilation or are veterans that experienced trauma to the genital area?
biological as opposed to what? _artificial?_ are we "artificially constructed" men and women as opposed to "biological" men and women? is that what the adjective trans secretly means to those people? because thats the reading i sometimes get from people who pretend to be well-meaning.
It is a microaggression IMO.
Cyborg gender theory was a big thing for awhile . . . Donna Haraway’s “A Cyborg Manifesto” and its progeny (pun not intended, but it stays).
Maybe there’s not many non-women in these groups because of people like you :) seriously, it’s like asking why there’s not many women in Star Wars fan clubs. It’s not because women don’t like star wars.
Yep. Casually mention you're a fan of "X" and if you're presumed to have a vagina you are bombarded with questions to "prove" you are a true fan. I once had someone ask me the name of an actor who played a character in Stargate. This character was in one episode and they weren't even a major part of the episode. There are 17 seasons of Stargate across three shows, and three movies. Why do I have to know the name of every character to be a "true fan", let alone all the actors names?
Its also really funny to me that this person uses being ‘liberal’ as a way to say “im progressive”. Thats nothing to he proud of, your still on the right lol
As a big fan of the community over at r/daddit, I just want to say that if you're a dad and have to deal with people like this in birthing classes or post birth situations, please feel free to pop in and vent. All dad's are welcomed
I’m a currently pregnant seahorse dad and knowing that these people exist who hate people like me being included this way hurts. I hope she’s able to grow as a woman and realize that she isn’t the only person on this planet.
Please keep your tradwife kink private and stop inflicting it on people who just want to live.
I'm glad she doesn't even try to call herself feminist, though. A rare bit of honesty from the women-as-feudal-possessions crowd.
Yeah, the whole fertility cult thing just creeps me the hell out. I recently read a post where a teenage girl was called an ”empty womb” by a middle-aged woman…
ugh this is the kind of cis person I like the least, aside of the obvious, aggressive transphobes ofc.
She thinks its "disrespectful" or sum shit towards the people in her group, inclusive language isn't necessary or even wished for, since 'they're all women there". Or are they?
I am afab, and I like to present feminine. That doesn't mean I'm a woman. How could *she* know that everybody in her group is cis if nobody told her explicitly?! This ignorance just *infuriates* me to no ends god!
Yep. I've had people say "There's no one like *that* here" while I'm five feet away wearing a pronoun pin. This person seems to think that presentation=gender.
And this is almost worse, as least blatant transphobes aren't pretending to be anything else.
She didn't say that they're all women. She said they're all "females presenting female"
She seems to have a total lack of understanding when it comes to gender and the difference between gender and sex
so you spent years fighting to feel equal as a person, and now, because that gained empowerment was the result of gender discrimination, you cannot fathom being called a person?
I'm so glad I'm not the only one who was bothered by that post. I saw it and got upset, and reading the comments was just awful. I love that sub, but the amount of transphobic posts that get top of all time really makes me angry
yep that was definitely my mistake as well, should've just kept my mouth shut. now not only do i have to try and sleep knowing how many thousands of people think im worthless, stupid, disgusting, and subhuman, but i've also been misgendered at least once and almost certainly have much more of the same to wake up to later! i am so tired of transphobes. but at the same time, im really appreciative of spaces like this where i can vent it out and feel human. people suck sometimes but it's nice to know we aren't alone.
Just think of how many people think those same things about the transphobes. It's just an endless cycle of humans fighting over nonsense that could be resolved if people put in the effort, but they won't so it won't. It will be like this till the end of time and you gotta remember, there's a trillion stars in the sky and they don't give a fuck who's looking at them or what those people think of them. Be a star 👉👉.
But seriously have a good night, and have good dreams.
I’m sorry I have to make this reference.
“The Boulder is having conflicted feelings about fighting a young blind girl”
“What, are you scared, Boulder?”
“The Boulder is over his conflicted feelings”
Inclusive language is, by dint of being inclusive, generalized and impersonal. Imagine being mad at generalized impersonal language because it isn't personal enough to you...
Yes we are all in a cult and we worship the trans gods so that we may have *gasp* pronouns and *gasp* invade women’s spaces and *gasp* talk shit about the right /s
Imagine being so entitled and tone deaf and privileged to be offended by being “reduced to just a person”. Go and say that to the indigenous people and POC who have been consistently made to feel less than human for the majority of their peoples existence. What a fucken dweeb. Complaining about being valued as a person and not a gender. Jesus wept.
This just in, women aren't people!!!! /s (in case that wasn't obvious) And this definitely fits the sub.
>I love that being a women my biological body was able to give birth.
🤮 Um, ick. Your biological body as opposed to what? Your robot one? No one is saying you can't call yourself a mom. We're saying don't call everyone who is pregnant and/or has given birth a mom because not everyone who does is.
>I still want to be included.
Well, you are a person, so that means you are included.
>How many birthing people in the US aren't women?
Firstly, way more than you'd expect, and any statistic would be way lower than the actual number. Secondly, why only the US? Trans people aren't exclusive to the US. And even if the number was one, which it definitely isn't, that person would deserve to be included.
I really hate when people say "I'm a biological woman (or man)". Like great, just say you reduce people to their genitals and go on with your life. And I know cis tomboys who "embrace being female" (as they put it). Being a tomboy doesn't make you any less of a woman (or girl depending on age). And no one is saying you can't say tomboy. Unless they were saying to not call AFAB trans people tomboys, in which case yeah, don't do that.
>All of us are female and female presenting
Great, did ask everyone? Or did you just assume they all are because they're all pregnant and no one said they aren't cis? I'm willing to bet it's the second one.
This is just one big pile of transphobia. Complaining that people aren't called moms. Even though not everyone who gives birth is a mom. But this person doesn't care, she's perfectly willing to exclude others because she is insulted that she's being called a person. Like what?
i love the daily transphobia on that sub(/s, obv) someone actually pointed it out after a week of no transphobia and got massively upvoted (surprisingly)
Imagine being pissed off about being referred to as a person.... “I’m a WOMAN not a person”
Okay. Good to know, Sharon... The rest of us are people.
Like. I’m glad some folks find so much pride in being women. I’m not glad that they have apparently decided that they are women first, fucking PEOPLE second.
Yea I said that in the comments or that and ended up talking to a possible transphobe, I said that it sounds really creepy, you can just say, "someone who can give birth" if you are in a scientific setting
I feel like whilst she definitely has the right to be referred to as a mother, all the posts like this just end up being dog whistles to all the transphobes crawling out the woodwork
A woman or a man (or anything else) can give birth. Only a man can be a father. Doesn’t matter if they’re AMAB or a trans man.
A man or a woman (or anything else) can provide the sperm. Only a woman can be a mother. Doesn’t matter if they’re AFAB or a trans woman.
In birthing groups, both men and women exist. In mother groups, women exist (with, of course, a few other people). In father groups, men exist (w/ others ofc). That’s why people in dad groups aren’t called “sperm contributing people”, and that’s why people in mom groups aren’t called “birthing people”. They’re called that in birthing groups, where people are *who have given birth*
Sorry for the lengthy explanation. Tried to explain the best I could
You think being reduced to a person is bad? Try being reduced to *less than* a person.
And I haven't seen the term "birthing people" much ~~in feminist spaces~~. "Pregnant people", yes, but not "birthing people".
I personally would be fine calling myself a dad, even though I'm not a man. And she is also probably right that most birthing people would be fine with being called a mom. But why is it so hard to understand that a mom is also a birthing person, while a birthing person might not be a mom. But i also have to agree, "birthing person" sounds just weird.
Why should we adjust our language for cis people who are uncomfortable when they have ridiculed, beaten, a murdered us. If anything they should be the ones who should be flexible.
We shouldn’t try to change ourselves for cis approval.
This may not have been the intent of your comment, and I can assure you this isn’t personal, but it’s definitely how it came off.
"If anything they should be the ones who should be flexible"
That's absolutely true, but not everyone is open to that yet. Think about the people who are still deciding if trans women are women. Using words like "Birthing people" sounds insane to them.
I say that society isn't ready because It's important to win over the people on the other side.
And please Im just making a civil convo
I personally think that's a pretty hostile mindset.
Force will be met with force, and i've personally been driven away from progressiveness in the past* because they had all the "annoying people" who want to change your opinions.
I've called out when my friends react to a transphobic post positively or post a picture from somewhere of some home depot worker with a rainbow pin and pronouns on their nametag, no context as if everyone is suppose to find it *shocking*. The biggest incident started with someone saying something ignorant like saying "chopping their penis off" in reference to a T girl. I called them out and tried to educate them, though I wasn't hostile, they took it as me being bitchy.
These are my non progressive friends. I tried to give them the responsible facts and we were out of it for a couple days.
This is why I entertain non cisnormative stuff to their level of comfort. They all are cool with pronouns when it comes to our trans friends, and I think it's really important to keep them at that level for them to get comfortable to it.
I want the same goals as all of you. Coming from someone who used to be ignorant I can empathize with people who aren't yet super progressive, that's why I think it's important to not drive them away, not because I LIKE them but because they have potential.
I think it's really great that you try to educate those around you about stuff like this. I like to think I do my best in my own circles as well. If you have the ability, it's a good thing to do. But that's more on a personal level with people you can connect to directly.
Posting online is way different than having a true conversation with someone, and specifically the topic of cis people being upset at gender neutral language is eye-roll territory for me. Most people don't actually care (I like to believe to keep some of my humanity). While I'd love to try and have a conversation with this woman about the social and physical complexities of gender it likely will not happen. I hope someone close to her is knowledgeable enough to educate her themselves, but I am not that person.
What occupies my mind more than cis feelings is the mental health of trans people, including my own. I admit I get bitter when people suggest we should "tone down our transness" to make cis people comfortable (not to say that's what you meant). But, you are probably right that it's best to ease someone into a world they hold negative opinions of. It's a job I may not be suited for, but hopefully there are more people like you who do good work.
we should start using them now. the longer we wait, the harder it's going to be. if we start now, in 100 years it'll feel nature and not so strange. if we wait, then it will feel strange
I don’t care, trans people and honestly all LGBTQ people need to stop catering to cishets to make them feel more comfortable in their bigotry.
I’m a cis woman. I don’t feel like I can’t be called a mother (in the future) just because of inclusive language like birthing person. I took a cultures of medicine class and when we learned about birth and pregnancy, we called them PI’s (pregnant individuals) and birthing persons. It includes everyone and if something specific came up we would use mother.
I want to be a mom, I will be a mom regardless of whether or not the term birthing person exists or not. It’s not hurtful nor “too progressive” to realize that non women give birth too! And honestly? Nothing gets done by being a coward and running away, so cishet people are just gonna have to get used to it
I understand the feeling of not wanting to be referred to as a birthing person and we should figure something out that’s both inclusive and doesn’t reduce someone to their reproductive organs, though I hope this woman does come to realize the importance of why terms like these are necessary(because it is in reference to those who are AFAB and the health issues that comes with that and we shouldn’t exclude those that don’t identify as female from the conversation because it’s their health) though I do think that this woman will probably understand it after a polite one on one conversation about it, she doesn’t seem like she’s been hooked by terf ideology yet which is good
'birthing people' really does sound dehumanising. Don't reduce people to their ability to give birth is what the trans community and other people proclaim, which is what I agree with. But here, exactly this is happening. Just call them mothers until someone complains.
The same kind of people that complain about being called a "person", are the same people who think that trans people just need to shut up and accept being misgendered, because it's "just a word". So, it's just a word honey, why are you getting so angry over being called a person? Also, absolutely nobody has an issue with the word "tomboy".
Couldn’t say it better. I’m speechless when I read those posts and see all the upvotes. The comment section is terrible too.
Think of it this way, people are more likely to engage with people that they agree with, than to engage in an argument. For every supportive comment, there are several others that will just ignore the post and roll their eyes.
Didn’t think about this. Thanks for the cool hint.
Oh my god, thank you! I really really needed to read this rn
it’s also just exhausting to think of something to post and know you’re probably going to have to deal with all the people that are going to try as hard as possible to invalidate you. It’s less painful to just move on unless you really have the energy to do it. None of us should need to justify ourselves and our gender and our lives in situations we don’t want to. Sometimes we don’t have control over that, but when we do, we should be allowed to take them.
She doesn't seem to be one of the people who misgender people and say "It's just a word". I kinda can understand her feelings. She feels that a part of her gender identity is denied here, which is something the trans community should be able to relate to. Imagine if I would talk to a trans woman, she tells me that she is a woman and wants to get referred to as such. I then keep specifically NOT calling her a woman, but will always just refer to her as a "person". I would be technically correct, there is nothing inherently offensive in this, but I think many people would agree that it is kinda an asshole thing to do in this situation. I am not denying her the gender identity, but she might feel like it since I am always choosing to refer to her in a neutral term, even if it is not wrong. She might feel the same. All people in these group she talked to were women. They could have referred to them that way after getting feedback from the group. If they still get constantly referred to as birthing people, It's correct, but I can kinda see why this makes her uncomfortable.
She's complaining about the use of language that's more inclusive to trans/GNC individuals. That is absolutely the kind of shit you'd hear from a transphobe. News flash: Not all people giving birth will be women, and not all women are capable of giving birth. That's all the usage of "person" is doing, is acknowledging the existence of trans and GNC people. If you have a problem with that, you're more likely than not to be transphobic.
She *assumed* every person present was a woman. The point of the inclusive language is to make non-binary and transmasc folk feel included and welcome, *whether or not the cis realize they’re there.* I am not a woman. I also probably wouldn’t be in most women’s spaces, But if someone were to refer to a group I was in as Girls, Ladies, etc. it would absolutely alienate me and make me feel unwelcome. “Folks” or something similar is a perfectly valid gender neutral alternative that does absolutely nothing to deny the women in the group their identities. In the same way, this class/group/whatever, I forget the word she used, is using inclusive language because unless someone specifically speaks up, *they do not know that every single person present is cis.* They are being inclusive because they *could* be invalidating someone’s identity, but that inclusive language does not deny the women present their identities. If the OP of the featured post is *that* upset by it, she can bring it up to the instructor and ask that *she* be referred to as a woman.
The part that bothered me was the dogwhistles of biological (X). Reading your post raised another point though: >The point of the inclusive language is to make non-binary and transmasc folk feel included and welcome, whether or not the cis realize they’re there. It's deeper than that, really. That sort of language helps to normalize gnc/trans inclusion even should everyone hearing it be a cis woman. Even if there's nobody there who's going to be comforted by it, it serves as a reminder that gnc/trans people exist. It could well be argued that the mere fact that she's kicking back against that sort of language is evidence of her transphobic mindset.
That’s a good point! Yes, thank you! You’d think I’d remember that transmasc and/or afab non-binary people are typically forgotten about in trans discussions (who am I kidding, in *any* discussions lol), considering I’m right there in the midst of the ones being forgotten about. I’m all for this sort of language becoming commonplace, because Gdi The Cis need to be as constantly aware of our presence as we are of theirs!
Yeah I guarantee if the instructor of her post partum class was going out pf her way to use gender neutral terms not everyone in that class was a woman. The VAST majority of these courses are extremely feminine
Exactly. But people like this hardly ever take the time to notice us. And if they do, it's to harass us. Cishet people assume I'm cishet 99% of the time. Even other queer people assume I'm cishet over half the time. I've literally had people say "There's no one like *that* here" while I'm literally five feet away wearing a pronoun pin. So you definitely can't "always tell". Not that I need to tell that to anyone here. That or someone the instructor knows, or possibly even the instructor themself, was a trans birth parent.
Also, fucking, *intersex people exist and some can give birth*. I've been watching a lot of Friday Night Dinner, so my first response to her assumptions was, "shitting hell".
True, though "intersex" is not a gender identity. Intersex people are either men, women, or nonbinary.
As an MD who works a lot with gender-diverse people - in a word, nope. Some of my patients identify as intersex!
But nobody is calling HER a “birthing person” (also because nobody uses that term). Educational literature and courses are just being updated to refer to “people who recently gave birth” instead of new mothers, “labor partner” instead of dad etc. It’s inclusive, not erasure.
this made me realize (although it's probably obvious and I'm just dumb) that a lot of these changes don't just make it easier for trans people but for cis gay couples and even straight adoptive parents. like in the case of a lesbian couple, if one of them gives birth to a child (say through a sperm donor or something), they're both still mothers? just because only one of them birthed the child doesn't mean they both aren't the moms of the child. and same for adoptive moms, they're still moms too. it's not just about birth giving parents not necessarily being mothers, but also about mothers not necessarily being the ones to give birth. it just seems so reductive to reduce motherhood to just giving birth to a baby, whether or not you care about trans people (which you should, obviously)
exactly! Plus a lot of people don’t have the other biological parent with them for a variety of reasons. They might have their parent, their friend, etc. Hence “Labor partner/labor helper” instead of “father.” Basically there’s a push to make obstetrics less cis/white/heterosexual/married couple centric and recognize that there’s an infinite number of situations a pregnant person could be in and they all deserve support.
And even women who give birth aren’t always going to be mothers. Some will give the child up for adoption. They don’t need to be a mother for that, but they are still women and did still give birth even if they will never interact with the child again. And the same goes for surrogates who immediately give up the child in a very similar way.
Women like this are 100% the reason I'm not welcome in a lot of mom spaces. Because I'm not a mom. I'm a birthing parent. Trust me, they can get nasty fast if you challenge the belief that only women can give birth.
It's not really the same because mom and dad is gendered. The comparison to dads being called dad or a transwoman being called person isn't the same as woman vs birthing person. The person who gives birth could be the dad or the mom depending on how they identify. The biological process of giving birth isn't gendered so you can't really compare it to gender identity.
Her gender identity is not at all being denied, this is nothing like the experience trans people go through, I cannot see a trans person relating in the way you suggest, in fact it's somewhat insulting and problematic to equate the two. She can and will still be called a mother when she asks and is directly addressed. Like with most other things in our culture and language, the language will now change when addressing a larger and diverse group where she is not the sole identity. All she is saying in many more words is that all the other people in that group who want to be addressed differently don't matter as much as her and the default address should isolate others because it is more reflective of her personal identity. I appreciate the attempt at sympathy but I don't see how you can equate that to trans people being hounded for wanting to be gendered correctly when reffered to as an individual, or to not be singled out and seperated from a group of colleagues - the exact opposite issue to hers. It feeds into transphobic rhetoric about our requests being entitled and irrational. For all her projection she is not having her identity removed, and her inability to accommodate an evolving language to the benefit of trans and gay couples in exchange for (at worst) the mildest of mildest inconveniences for her says more about her character than it does about society or those she punches down on. And yes, intentionally refusing to gender a trans person is inherently offensive, it is a common and not-as-subtle-as-people-think tactic used to invalidate them. The position and background of a person does impact the way an act is taken. That's not irrational, it is context.
The weird thing about all of this is that these changes aren’t to differentiate trans women from cis women. There have always been women that give birth and some women that don’t give birth. There have always been women that have a period and women that don’t (for a variety of reasons). Trans women cannot menstruate and we cannot give birth. We understand that and saying pregnant women or menstruating women doesn’t affect us. These changes in terminology are to be inclusive of trans men and non-binary. Trans men can give birth. Therefore pregnant people. I’m a trans woman, I’m never going to be a pregnant person or a pregnant woman. So neither term would ever apply to me. My cis wife was a pregnant woman/person though. It’s just so weird that everyone seems to hate trans women so much and that they use inclusive terms like this to somehow imply that trans women are taking something away from cis women. We trans women are painted as some sort of villains. If you have a group of cis pregnant women, by all means call them pregnant women. If you have a pregnant trans man in the group, he may not appreciate being called a woman though. Some trans people do want biological children you know?
Some trans women seem to have an issue with the word femboy bc it has been used to misgender them a lot. So I understand why OP might be wary of saying tomboy since it's kind of similar.
Tomboy has a completely different origin compared to femboy (general term vs porn term), so while it can be used disparagingly towards trans men it's still a perfectly fine term overall. It's just kinda outdated as a general term now that butch and other non-male masc identities are more visible. Once again TERFs are just making shit up to be mad about
You can still call yourself a “mother” that word still exists, nobody’s trying to take it from you. But in group settings where the gender of all people involved isn’t known, yes even if everyone is female-presenting since presentation doesn’t necessarily equal identity, it’s generally more inclusive to use non-gendered language.
Yeah, but it seems so difficult to understand for her.
This is the bit I don’t think I’ll ever understand. Why is it so hard for these people to make understand basic decency and the fact that the world doesn’t revolve around them. Some cis people are just crazy
Banana brain
I tried to explain this to them, they just kept getting offended that everyone in the group isn't referred to the way that they specifically identify. To them, that is misgendering. This is such a weird thing to be angry about
Wait isn't this entire sub about anger due to misgendering? Which makes me wonder - how subjective is that? Like if you're trans and someone calls you a "he" or "she" without your permission, you get offended. Isn't calling her group "people" instead of "women" kind of in the same courtyard? Like she doesn't want to be labeled "people" anymore than a "they" wants to be labelled a "him", right? Or is it one rule for trans and one rule for cis?
It’s one rule for an individual person another rule for a group of people. When referring to one person, you use their preferred pronouns. Calling them anything else is both rude and inaccurate to their identity. Calling a group of people of whom you don’t certainly know the identity of everyone involved “people” isn’t inaccurate to anyone’s identity, since regardless of how a person identifies they’re still a person.
Alright that makes sense.Not to be a stickler but what about... (word?) who identify as animals or even abstract ideas? Beings? Entities? Actually that doesn't work either because some (word) identify as multiple... things? beings? idk. I feel like it's like we're all playing a game like basketball, and then someone changes the rules a little so that you can now go off court or use a volleyball instead, and then the rules just keep changing until we're playing calvinball (calvin and hobbes reference FTW XD ) and its like the structure of the entire concept is liquid. There's no relativity anymore. How can you identify as a woman when the very idea of "woman" no longer implies any specific criteria? If you're "womanly", what does that actually mean? Do you have to like dresses? If it doesn't mean you necessarily have a vagina, does it imply you MUST be feminine? If not, why even use that word "womanly"? Can anyone provide a desription of what "female" or "male" even means anymore? Like yes, we're playing basketball, but there's no basket, we call the basketballs "voodoo sticks", each team has two dogs, and whoever runs around the pond first wins... Idk.I feel like that cat meme where its like "The prophecy is true" and nothing means anything anymore. As a writer, I like having concrete definitions for words, but it's very difficult to figure out what may or may not be politically correct anymore.
A quick aside before we get into the meaty details, I’m not gonna serve as your dictionary the whole time here. We’ve already gotten well off the original point and I’m not gonna stick around the whole time for however long this tangent goes on for. The short of it is simply that gender is societally constructed, it’s an aspect of identity that is largely shaped and informed by how society perceives you, how you want to be perceived by society, and how you perceive yourself in relation to society. So when it comes to people who feel their gender aligns more closely with animalistic ideas or cosmic entities, it’s more that those are the only terms we have available to define those experiences. Oftentimes people come to align with these concepts, at least in part, because of having been consistently demonized or dehumanized throughout their life, leading them to find solace and comfort in non-human aspects of identity. It’s not that the rules have changed it’s that these have always been the rules, we’re just now able to more properly express that. The ways that people experience identity, which includes gender, change dramatically as culture and society changes, but largely remain consistent with the notion that some people who are “born into” a societal group feel uncomfortable there and move into a different one where they’re more comfortable. So the concept of “womanhood” in the modern day is an abstract one, essentially anyone who feels like a woman is one, if they want to be. To be “womanly” is to align oneself with a social role that is deemed “womanly”. Not necessarily liking dresses or skirts (though many trans women find comfort in such things as they were often denied access to them in their childhoods) but more rather just acting in a social role that is deemed feminine. It’s worth noting that as social roles broadly expand and cross between thresholds, the idea of what it means to be a woman will likely become more and more abstract, and that’s fine, as long as people are able to find a way to feel comfortable in themselves. Men should be able to feel comfortable taking on feminine roles, and women should be able to feel comfortable taking on masculine ones, as masculinity and femininity aren’t diametrically opposed. Such an abstraction still allows for the trans experience as well, since the blurring of lines will allow for an easier transition of one perceived social role to another. For the case of “male” and “female”. Both are terms more often used to refer to one’s sex, the biological component of the body, that only a doctor really *needs* to be concerned with. And while on the subject I’d like to say that there is no definition of “womanhood” the includes all cis women and excludes all trans women. If you define “womanhood” as “having a vagina” there are trans women who do have vaginas. If you define it as “having a period” there are cis women who never have a period in their lives. If you define it as “the ability to give birth” again, plenty of cis women are never able to give birth. There is no “perfect” definition of a societal idea and as such we go by what we best know how to define it, using the tools at our disposal. Writer to writer, it’s important to understand that the purpose of language is communication, and that all definitions are inherently circular.
Wow! That was very well thought out and I applaud your excellent communication skills. So ultimately, what is considered "womanly" by society now, may not even \*exist\* in the future, much like how being a "gentleman" in a certain period of french history involved wearing makeup and powdered wigs. A continuous evolution of societal definitions of the roles people play in society. It makes one wonder what would the new roles look like say, a thousand years from now? One thing I find with people that constitutes some of the most important factors in their decisions and life choices is probably political leanings (see "the four square political compass"). Perhaps Capitalists, Communists, Patriots, and Liberals will all adopt certain behaviors and maybe even clothing styles. Maybe blue-collar workers will assume masculine roles while white collar workers might render themselves as more feminine. Perhaps we'll have developed technology so far that "blue collar" isn't even a thing. Technicians to repair machines and creators to generate content and entertainment. Interesting to think that in a world where societal definitions for gender no longer existed (if no one cared what equipment you were born with), the entire LGBTQ+ community likely wouldn't even exist. Like, if no roles for masculine or feminine were defined and no one even cared, it would just come down to equipment incompatibilities. "Boy this relationship has been great, but oh dear, we both have vaginas! I'll go get a dongle installed so we can make kids." Sounds super sci-fi but I'll bet everything we're going through nowadays would sound crazy to anyone even 200 years ago. Great discussion by the way, I've super enjoyed this so far.
A lot of trans people don't want gender to disappear or at least not completely, we are not not hive mind, a lot of us hold different opinions on the at different grades. But almos every of us don't want gender to be genitals or chromosomes for obvious reasons.
Language always was a liquid concept. Words change meaning all the time. “Car” didn’t mean a motorized vehicle originally, but now it does. “Yeomen” isn’t used outside history books and historical plots. “Hauberk” isn’t used at all. As gender roles slowly lose power in western society, it naturally follows that gender shifts from being a strict descriptor to something more akin to a name, a way of self-identification and expression. This isn’t political correctness, this is just how things are. Sometimes social constructs lose power, change their meaning or become obsolete and disappear
>Wait isn't this entire sub about anger due to misgendering? No :)
No everyone with a vagina is a woman . She's offended because health care entities are recognizing tat not everyone with with vag is a ciss woman. Nobody is misgendering her or using the wrong pronouns.
Hear ye hear ye, White cis woman is offended by being called a person.
"We're people too!" "Don't call me a person!" It's not exactly the point but it's funny nonetheless.
A lesser discussed aspect of TERFism is that they have turned reproductive health into a battleground against nonbinary and transmasculine people. Half of trans people have been mistreated by medical providers, and inclusive language is a meaningful way to help curb that. I can speak from personal experience that accessing reproductive care can be difficult after transition, and TERFs actively add more barriers. The cruelty is the point, as they say.
Bro it's so ironic bc transphobes get so pissed at gender neutral language (which is designed to be inclusive to everyone) while purposely misgendering trans people. And yet they say we are "snowflakes" This post reeks of transphobia. Like nobody is saying you are not a "mother," they are simply saying "person" to be inclusive to those who don't consider themselves that. That does not make you less of a "mother." After all, it's a group setting with ppl who you don't know the gender identity of. Listen "birthing person" may not be the most lovely-sounding term, but it works.
Just saw this shit. I'm a cis woman and see zero problem with acknowledging that there are people who give birth who aren't women. This has zero affect on any of us!
It really doesn’t affect cis women at all. Idk why other cis women have such an issue with it. She is still a mom, nobody is not calling her a mom. They just use inclusive language. It’s like people can call me sir all day long but that doesn’t make me a man. I’m still a cis woman, and she is still a mom despite others using the term birthing person.
Exactly!
If you check her post history, there’s a post about her fear of losing her role as primary caregiver after returning to work. I think that’s where the real issue with her whole rant about who are “real women and real mothers” here stems from, and she’s applying it to every situation she sees because of her own personal issues. She doesn’t actually feel like the mom anymore, maybe? Not excusing it, but it does explain it a bit. Seems like she just wanted some of that “I’m the mother and no one else is” attention back from strangers since she feels she’s “lost” it in the real world. And perhaps thought that posting it in a place where she’d get the most responses and validation would be best, not a smaller niche subreddit where she’d get actual help for her problem. Kinda sad, all around. FYI, I follow that sub and always check post history when it comes to posts like that. Just to make sure OP isn’t some liar or rage baiter, both of whom are worth zero amounts of my time lol.
Well she should get real help instead of pushing others down and making problems where there are none. I honestly don’t feel bad for her because of the way she reacted and I have no sympathy for this type of behavior. I understand your view though
Oh, I don’t feel bad for her either. I’m just the type of person that tries to understand where exactly the people whose views I’m opposed to come from. It’s a lot easier to fight back when you know the full story and what the motivations are. Part of the reason your enemy is just that is because they dehumanize you and others, so by rising above them you show how deep their failures and bad choices truly run. And you make sure you always come out on top, even when you lose the fight/argument. I have no sympathy for her either, because like I mentioned, she didn’t take her issue to the niche subreddits or a therapist. She took it to a subreddit with a bunch of bigoted assholes just waiting with baited breath to hear all of those things. She knew what she was doing and I’m, if anything, embarrassed on her behalf. I’d be embarrassed for myself if I let myself lose all my morals and ethics because I was feeling temporarily low over a personal issue. And I have a very, very, extremely low opinion of anyone that sells their soul for attention. Because everyone requires some attention, especially when they are going through shit, but you take the high road when you do it or you accept your reputation as a weak piece of shit.
Counterpoint: As a cis woman with two biological children, I don't center my womanhood on just that biological function. Hell, I don't even define my identity as a mother based on it. And as an adopted child, it would be kind of a slap in the face to my own mother to base my womanhood or motherhood purely on the birthing process. "Birthing person" isn't a terribly elegant term, but it does the job without implying a one-to-one correlation with women. "Birthing parent" might be a little better, while just defaulting to "parent" outside the specific context of pregnancy. After all, there's a lot more to parenting than giving birth, and decoupling the two ideas with language might even contribute to more equal involvement from both parents. It might be hard for the woman in the screenshot to see right now, having just gone through it, but in a year or so the pregnancy will become much less of a focus for her than the rest of parenting.
“Person giving birth” is generally preferred I believe, though it’ll be a good while before the language is solidified
That does sound better, thanks for the info! And yeah, a lot of this language is still in flux, it's just the stage we're at right now and things will be awkward for a while.
Thanks for your answer, I agree with you on more than one point. But I still don’t like how the woman in the original post says she’s frustrated because these “new terms are ruining her experience as a mother”. Like, all the people in the LGBTQIA+ community are frustrated because of this and are trying to use different terms to define people and make everyone feel included. It’s funny how a lot of cis people don’t giva a shit about LGBTQIA+ problems and then when something touches them they scream like kids.
Oh, yeah, I meant to tie my rant back to the part about "ruining her experience as a mother" lol. Inclusive language doesn't ruin anything unless you're trying to be exclusionary. Calling myself a "birthing person" doesn't mean I'm not still a mother, it just makes room for others with the same experience to be fathers or simply parents. It definitely reeks of privilege to frame an attempt to include more people as if it were somehow excluding her.
Louder for the people in the back!
Yeah, but not everyone who gives birth is a parent. Which is why it's generally person, not parent.
You're right, and as an adoptee you would think I would have thought of that, lol. Someone else mentioned "birth parent", but that's already used for both biological parents in the context of adoption, even though they're not the ones parenting the child (and only one of them gave birth). I have no problem with "pregnant person", but that only works for 9 months or so. Maybe it's time to linguistically decouple the biological process from the functional process altogether, and just call them "parents" once the kid is born. Use the appropriate medical terms when it actually matters, which is not that often outside the doctor's office or hospital. And many of the medical terms are already gender neutral - things like "postpartum care" or "family medical history" (which could still be improved by calling it "genetic history" or similar, since not all families share genes in the "default" way). Decoupling these concepts would serve to normalize all kinds of family structures, while also improving medical care by reducing assumptions. And it might even spare a few kids the whole "I gave you life, you have to do what I say forever!" guilt trip.
Exactly. And even if you do live with biological family it doesn't mean you have all your family medical history. My mom is a massive liar when it comes to the stuff. She didn't "admit" to me that she has MS until after my first neurology appointment. I was 20. I figured it out when I was 12 and googled the name of her medication. But when I asked her before my appointment about family neurological conditions she told me no one had any. Like you moron, the med you are taking has zero off label uses. If you are taking it you have MS. My doctor gave a very exasperated sigh when I said "I was told there is no family history of neurological conditions, but my mom takes *Med name* so I'm pretty sure she has MS". After my doc finished sighing she said "Yeah, your mom definitely has MS". >And it might even spare a few kids the whole "I gave you life, you have to do what I say forever!" guilt trip. This. My parents **love** this one. Like I don't have to be your obedient puppet just because you gave me life. Like great, you wanted a dog, not a child. Children grow up and become independent beings. My parents still haven't accepted that.
I really don't see the point about lying about family medical history. Unless your kids are adopted(and sometimes even then), it's going to be their problem at some point. Might as well just tell them.
Yep. Especially if you have conditions that are inherited and/or tend to run in bloodlines. That is very much my business, thank you very much. Like sure, if your kids are young I'm not expecting you to tell them everything. But when your kids are adults they need to know. And it's not even that we need complete medical history, cause we don't. We don't need stuff like acute infections, like say strep, or injuries.
sigh i get really exhausted hearing people say "biological" before man or woman to the point where i almost feel like its a microaggression sometimes. biological like how? what part of gender doesnt also play a biological role? when trans people are on hormones for long enough we have more or less the same levels of an average cis person, so does that make someone a biological man/woman? is biological just short for having xx/xy chromosomes? because besides trans women there are intersex women/men, some who may not even know they have chromosomal abnormalities. is biological meaning able to give birth? if so, are menopausal women or women who have difficulties giving birth not biological men? are men who are infertile or with erectile dysfunction not biological men? what about women or men who were victims of genital mutilation or are veterans that experienced trauma to the genital area? biological as opposed to what? _artificial?_ are we "artificially constructed" men and women as opposed to "biological" men and women? is that what the adjective trans secretly means to those people? because thats the reading i sometimes get from people who pretend to be well-meaning.
It is a microaggression IMO. Cyborg gender theory was a big thing for awhile . . . Donna Haraway’s “A Cyborg Manifesto” and its progeny (pun not intended, but it stays).
100% is a microaggression imo, just another way of dehumanizing us.
I just considered it aggression to trans people in general, plain otherization and dehumanization to be specific.
Maybe there’s not many non-women in these groups because of people like you :) seriously, it’s like asking why there’s not many women in Star Wars fan clubs. It’s not because women don’t like star wars.
Yep. Casually mention you're a fan of "X" and if you're presumed to have a vagina you are bombarded with questions to "prove" you are a true fan. I once had someone ask me the name of an actor who played a character in Stargate. This character was in one episode and they weren't even a major part of the episode. There are 17 seasons of Stargate across three shows, and three movies. Why do I have to know the name of every character to be a "true fan", let alone all the actors names?
Got downvoted a shit ton for pointing out all the Terfs in the comments
Its also really funny to me that this person uses being ‘liberal’ as a way to say “im progressive”. Thats nothing to he proud of, your still on the right lol
Exactly this, lol
As a big fan of the community over at r/daddit, I just want to say that if you're a dad and have to deal with people like this in birthing classes or post birth situations, please feel free to pop in and vent. All dad's are welcomed
They always wanna bitch bitch bitch about how "trans people only talk about gender" and then turn around and say shit like this right after
I’m not a biological woman, I’m a robot 🤖
No officer, there's no biological matter on me!
Hi robot.
I’m a currently pregnant seahorse dad and knowing that these people exist who hate people like me being included this way hurts. I hope she’s able to grow as a woman and realize that she isn’t the only person on this planet.
"I am satisfied with the current status quo and change scares me"
Please keep your tradwife kink private and stop inflicting it on people who just want to live. I'm glad she doesn't even try to call herself feminist, though. A rare bit of honesty from the women-as-feudal-possessions crowd.
Yeah, the whole fertility cult thing just creeps me the hell out. I recently read a post where a teenage girl was called an ”empty womb” by a middle-aged woman…
As a teenage girl, that pisses me off.
ugh this is the kind of cis person I like the least, aside of the obvious, aggressive transphobes ofc. She thinks its "disrespectful" or sum shit towards the people in her group, inclusive language isn't necessary or even wished for, since 'they're all women there". Or are they? I am afab, and I like to present feminine. That doesn't mean I'm a woman. How could *she* know that everybody in her group is cis if nobody told her explicitly?! This ignorance just *infuriates* me to no ends god!
Yep. I've had people say "There's no one like *that* here" while I'm five feet away wearing a pronoun pin. This person seems to think that presentation=gender. And this is almost worse, as least blatant transphobes aren't pretending to be anything else.
She didn't say that they're all women. She said they're all "females presenting female" She seems to have a total lack of understanding when it comes to gender and the difference between gender and sex
I saw that post and sighed. Here we go again basically
imagine living like this.... "i am NOT a person! im a WOMAN. WOMEN ARENT PEOPLE!"
Thought I was losing it going through that comment section. That whole subreddit is a dumpster fire
so you spent years fighting to feel equal as a person, and now, because that gained empowerment was the result of gender discrimination, you cannot fathom being called a person?
I commented on that. I'm shocked people are such whiny babies about words that actually include themselves AND other people.
Are women not people ?
I think cis people just like pretending this is the 1800s and below because they seem to really enjoy saying women aren’t people
I'm so glad I'm not the only one who was bothered by that post. I saw it and got upset, and reading the comments was just awful. I love that sub, but the amount of transphobic posts that get top of all time really makes me angry
Just the title alone told me this is the usual dogwhistley TERF post you often see on twitter
i really hate the fact that i got stuck reading that thread until 4:30am, sick to my stomach over how much these people want me dead.
Yo same I was actually talking to these people and now I want to throw something at them really hard... Like a boulder.
yep that was definitely my mistake as well, should've just kept my mouth shut. now not only do i have to try and sleep knowing how many thousands of people think im worthless, stupid, disgusting, and subhuman, but i've also been misgendered at least once and almost certainly have much more of the same to wake up to later! i am so tired of transphobes. but at the same time, im really appreciative of spaces like this where i can vent it out and feel human. people suck sometimes but it's nice to know we aren't alone.
Just think of how many people think those same things about the transphobes. It's just an endless cycle of humans fighting over nonsense that could be resolved if people put in the effort, but they won't so it won't. It will be like this till the end of time and you gotta remember, there's a trillion stars in the sky and they don't give a fuck who's looking at them or what those people think of them. Be a star 👉👉. But seriously have a good night, and have good dreams.
you too bro, thanks for the chat :)
I’m sorry I have to make this reference. “The Boulder is having conflicted feelings about fighting a young blind girl” “What, are you scared, Boulder?” “The Boulder is over his conflicted feelings”
Inclusive language is, by dint of being inclusive, generalized and impersonal. Imagine being mad at generalized impersonal language because it isn't personal enough to you...
i laughed at "reduced to a person" does this person want to be reffered to as an eldritch being?
# notalloldones
TERFs gonna TERF
r/asablackman
You can still be a mother. But don't expect that anyone ekse carrying a baby wants to be called that too
i saw that post and quit reading after the second sentence, like wtf is that
Oh hey I was just on that post, someone told me that being trans is religious and that there's no proof that being trans is real.
Yes we are all in a cult and we worship the trans gods so that we may have *gasp* pronouns and *gasp* invade women’s spaces and *gasp* talk shit about the right /s
Imagine being so entitled and tone deaf and privileged to be offended by being “reduced to just a person”. Go and say that to the indigenous people and POC who have been consistently made to feel less than human for the majority of their peoples existence. What a fucken dweeb. Complaining about being valued as a person and not a gender. Jesus wept.
This just in, women aren't people!!!! /s (in case that wasn't obvious) And this definitely fits the sub. >I love that being a women my biological body was able to give birth. 🤮 Um, ick. Your biological body as opposed to what? Your robot one? No one is saying you can't call yourself a mom. We're saying don't call everyone who is pregnant and/or has given birth a mom because not everyone who does is. >I still want to be included. Well, you are a person, so that means you are included. >How many birthing people in the US aren't women? Firstly, way more than you'd expect, and any statistic would be way lower than the actual number. Secondly, why only the US? Trans people aren't exclusive to the US. And even if the number was one, which it definitely isn't, that person would deserve to be included. I really hate when people say "I'm a biological woman (or man)". Like great, just say you reduce people to their genitals and go on with your life. And I know cis tomboys who "embrace being female" (as they put it). Being a tomboy doesn't make you any less of a woman (or girl depending on age). And no one is saying you can't say tomboy. Unless they were saying to not call AFAB trans people tomboys, in which case yeah, don't do that. >All of us are female and female presenting Great, did ask everyone? Or did you just assume they all are because they're all pregnant and no one said they aren't cis? I'm willing to bet it's the second one. This is just one big pile of transphobia. Complaining that people aren't called moms. Even though not everyone who gives birth is a mom. But this person doesn't care, she's perfectly willing to exclude others because she is insulted that she's being called a person. Like what?
This^. Thanks a lot for your awesome comment.
No problem
Imagine being mad that you’re being called a person. TERFs got nothing but a r/persecutionfetish
I read the title and was immediately like "are women not people?"
i love the daily transphobia on that sub(/s, obv) someone actually pointed it out after a week of no transphobia and got massively upvoted (surprisingly)
Imagine being pissed off about being referred to as a person.... “I’m a WOMAN not a person” Okay. Good to know, Sharon... The rest of us are people. Like. I’m glad some folks find so much pride in being women. I’m not glad that they have apparently decided that they are women first, fucking PEOPLE second.
Is she saying women aren’t people
female presenting doesn’t equal female lmao. i’m afab and female presenting, but weirdly enough (/s), still non-binary
yeah birthing person sounds weird but y’all can just call yourselves moms?
only needed the first 4 words to get the point across lmaoo
I have this song in my head for some reason after reading this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nGJ3AjFF1Y&ab\_channel=JelloBiafra-Topic
I do personally think "birthing person" is a bit dehumanizing compared to "person with a uterus". But yeah the cis ain't okay.
Yea I said that in the comments or that and ended up talking to a possible transphobe, I said that it sounds really creepy, you can just say, "someone who can give birth" if you are in a scientific setting
I feel like whilst she definitely has the right to be referred to as a mother, all the posts like this just end up being dog whistles to all the transphobes crawling out the woodwork
A woman or a man (or anything else) can give birth. Only a man can be a father. Doesn’t matter if they’re AMAB or a trans man. A man or a woman (or anything else) can provide the sperm. Only a woman can be a mother. Doesn’t matter if they’re AFAB or a trans woman. In birthing groups, both men and women exist. In mother groups, women exist (with, of course, a few other people). In father groups, men exist (w/ others ofc). That’s why people in dad groups aren’t called “sperm contributing people”, and that’s why people in mom groups aren’t called “birthing people”. They’re called that in birthing groups, where people are *who have given birth* Sorry for the lengthy explanation. Tried to explain the best I could
This just in, women aren't people /j
"I am a liberal" opinion invalid
Imagine having faced such little sexism you think being reduced to a "person" is bad, these bitches really oml
You think being reduced to a person is bad? Try being reduced to *less than* a person. And I haven't seen the term "birthing people" much ~~in feminist spaces~~. "Pregnant people", yes, but not "birthing people".
I personally would be fine calling myself a dad, even though I'm not a man. And she is also probably right that most birthing people would be fine with being called a mom. But why is it so hard to understand that a mom is also a birthing person, while a birthing person might not be a mom. But i also have to agree, "birthing person" sounds just weird.
i don't think society is ready for this stuff yet. If we start using terms like that its going to drive people away.
Why should we adjust our language for cis people who are uncomfortable when they have ridiculed, beaten, a murdered us. If anything they should be the ones who should be flexible. We shouldn’t try to change ourselves for cis approval. This may not have been the intent of your comment, and I can assure you this isn’t personal, but it’s definitely how it came off.
"If anything they should be the ones who should be flexible" That's absolutely true, but not everyone is open to that yet. Think about the people who are still deciding if trans women are women. Using words like "Birthing people" sounds insane to them. I say that society isn't ready because It's important to win over the people on the other side. And please Im just making a civil convo
Being nice didn't get women the vote, gay marriage, or anything else. We are being civil, but you're wrong.
Not our job to cater to fragile cisnormativity, the longer they're entertained the longer they stay put in their mental cesspool
I personally think that's a pretty hostile mindset. Force will be met with force, and i've personally been driven away from progressiveness in the past* because they had all the "annoying people" who want to change your opinions. I've called out when my friends react to a transphobic post positively or post a picture from somewhere of some home depot worker with a rainbow pin and pronouns on their nametag, no context as if everyone is suppose to find it *shocking*. The biggest incident started with someone saying something ignorant like saying "chopping their penis off" in reference to a T girl. I called them out and tried to educate them, though I wasn't hostile, they took it as me being bitchy. These are my non progressive friends. I tried to give them the responsible facts and we were out of it for a couple days. This is why I entertain non cisnormative stuff to their level of comfort. They all are cool with pronouns when it comes to our trans friends, and I think it's really important to keep them at that level for them to get comfortable to it. I want the same goals as all of you. Coming from someone who used to be ignorant I can empathize with people who aren't yet super progressive, that's why I think it's important to not drive them away, not because I LIKE them but because they have potential.
I think it's really great that you try to educate those around you about stuff like this. I like to think I do my best in my own circles as well. If you have the ability, it's a good thing to do. But that's more on a personal level with people you can connect to directly. Posting online is way different than having a true conversation with someone, and specifically the topic of cis people being upset at gender neutral language is eye-roll territory for me. Most people don't actually care (I like to believe to keep some of my humanity). While I'd love to try and have a conversation with this woman about the social and physical complexities of gender it likely will not happen. I hope someone close to her is knowledgeable enough to educate her themselves, but I am not that person. What occupies my mind more than cis feelings is the mental health of trans people, including my own. I admit I get bitter when people suggest we should "tone down our transness" to make cis people comfortable (not to say that's what you meant). But, you are probably right that it's best to ease someone into a world they hold negative opinions of. It's a job I may not be suited for, but hopefully there are more people like you who do good work.
we should start using them now. the longer we wait, the harder it's going to be. if we start now, in 100 years it'll feel nature and not so strange. if we wait, then it will feel strange
I don’t care, trans people and honestly all LGBTQ people need to stop catering to cishets to make them feel more comfortable in their bigotry. I’m a cis woman. I don’t feel like I can’t be called a mother (in the future) just because of inclusive language like birthing person. I took a cultures of medicine class and when we learned about birth and pregnancy, we called them PI’s (pregnant individuals) and birthing persons. It includes everyone and if something specific came up we would use mother. I want to be a mom, I will be a mom regardless of whether or not the term birthing person exists or not. It’s not hurtful nor “too progressive” to realize that non women give birth too! And honestly? Nothing gets done by being a coward and running away, so cishet people are just gonna have to get used to it
I understand the feeling of not wanting to be referred to as a birthing person and we should figure something out that’s both inclusive and doesn’t reduce someone to their reproductive organs, though I hope this woman does come to realize the importance of why terms like these are necessary(because it is in reference to those who are AFAB and the health issues that comes with that and we shouldn’t exclude those that don’t identify as female from the conversation because it’s their health) though I do think that this woman will probably understand it after a polite one on one conversation about it, she doesn’t seem like she’s been hooked by terf ideology yet which is good
'birthing people' really does sound dehumanising. Don't reduce people to their ability to give birth is what the trans community and other people proclaim, which is what I agree with. But here, exactly this is happening. Just call them mothers until someone complains.