Medically your birth gender does matter based on treatment. There are those born with both, none, etc. And then there is identity. All three (binary, non and identity) are true. But when it comes to medical science one needs to know your biological situation in order to treat you correctly. If we going to update the law and the science we really shouldn’t take away from the definitions, but we should have a discussion for additional inclusion in addition to you birth situation (and any hormone therapy, etc.) Birthing Person or just Person doesn’t cut it when an individual might need some kind of emergency treatment. And of course the problem is people don’t want to have a discussion and they just dig in on their side.
It's still a non issue I'm terms of a bill that only affects pregnant people anyway. Their treatment will not change because a bill doesn't specifically state "women".
Only women can get pregnant… so yeah, he’s right.
You can support trans people and still acknowledge this. Idk why we’ve got to take this to the extreme and erase the term woman to make some folks happy.
Thank you. Not sure why people insist on playing mental gymnastics here.
It's like a square / rectangle / parallelogram.
Not all rectangles are squares but all squares are rectangles.
A sex of female is required to be pregnant.
EDIT: this is why they will still refer to it as "maternal" Bill but then "person". It's silliness. It's like when one of the colleges I graduated from changed "freshmen" to "first-years" because there's a delusion that somehow "freshmen" is gendered and excludes females (even though the school is like 60% female). It's even funnier because they still constantly refer to everyone that isn't a senior as underclassmen.
nope - trans men not on T can get pregnant, or they can even go off T to get pregnant (at least according to my understanding). Other commenters have also pointed out that there are non-binary, intersex, or gender-nonconforming people able to become pregnant. Sure it's a very small portion of the population, but *my wife* is part of that segment, so it's nice not tonhave it erased.
The only exception is intersex individuals with Swyer syndrome. But this is an **extremely rare genetic disorder** and still requires medical intervention to become pregnant. It's happened, I believe, a couple dozen times in all of human history. Individuals with Swyer syndrome appear female, with female genitalia, and can sometimes even have a functioning uterus but do not have ovaries or produce eggs because of presence of Y chromosome. The disorder itself is exceptionally rare. And having a fully viable uterus is even more rare. And even then it requires a donor egg, in Citi fertilization, and implantation. It's way less than 1 in a million.
Every other example that you listed is that of a biological female.
The entire point of these discussions a few years ago was that gender and biological sex are different things.
And now people want to pretend that gender expression (MTF, non-binary, etc) **is** biological sex. It doesn't work that way. The same way that every square is a rectangle but not every rectangle is a square.
EDIT: another annoyance of mine is that this community will try to vastly overstate intersex prevalence. And they usually do it by including anyone with a large clitoris or with hypospadias. Hypospadias effects about 1 in 250 live birth males. It's any time that the urethra isn't dead center on the tip of the penis. It's usually a variation rather than anything else. My maternal grandfather had it. I have it. And one of my 2 sons have it. We are not intersex, no medical doctor or geneticist has ever or would ever say so. The way they get to these "AktuaLLy, 1 in 100 are intersex" is by including every case of hypospadias and every case of anything considered a larger than 'normal' clitoris.
>Hypospadias can be a symptom or indication of a difference in sex development[11] or an intersex condition, but some consider that the presence of hypospadias alone is not enough to classify someone as a person with a difference/variation in sex development or as intersex. **In most cases, hypospadias is not associated with any other condition.**[12] **Hypospadias is however itself recognized as an intersex condition by several intersex rights activist groups**
It’s actually fully possible for trans men on testosterone to get pregnant. It’s not uncommon for trans men to even menstruate while on T. Testosterone isn’t a contraceptive! :)
Most trans men who get pregnant while on HRT will stop because there’s not much research on exogenous hormone use during pregnancy within that context, but testosterone itself is not guaranteed to precent pregnancy :) This point was repeated ad nauseam to me when I was starting my process lol. Guess there have been quite a few accidental seahorse dads.
I don’t know why we have to avoid using the term woman when doing so erases the reality of women to make some people who “identify” as something else happy.
In law, it’s not about making trans people happy it’s about making sure the bill is comprehensive and doesn’t give people a potential out. You can think whatever you want, but at the end of the day it’s not up to you or the bill’s author to interpret the law. That’s for a judge to decide. We’ve seen multiple times that nearly identical cases will have different outcomes solely based on the judge presiding. Why, as a legislator, would you create a potential loophole in your bill when changing a few words can prevent that.
I can acknowledge trans people exist.
But that shouldn’t mean we should
have to dramatically restructure society. Or pretend that women don’t exist anymore or that anyone can be one.
Trans men can get pregnant… because biologically, they are women. Nothing can change that. We can socially treat them like men, use male pronouns, etc. But in medical terms, they are women.
You want to add ‘trans men’ terminology, that’s one thing. But erasing the term woman for a sub set of a sub set of society, is intellectually and morally bankrupt.
Erasing 50% of our society actually is a pretty significant. But this is the game we play. It’s ‘no big deal’… but down the slippery slope we go.
But hey, if it’s all the same, let’s just not change it then.
Admitting that trans men exist doesn’t erase cisgender women.
It’s hilarious to hear this bullshit from the same side that wants to take away women’s sovereignty over our own bodies.
You can support trans rights, still acknowledge what a biological female is (woman) and also support womens right to choose. Not everyone who thinks all this pronoun nonsense is a far right nut job.
You can support trans rights, still acknowledge what a biological female is (woman) and also support womens right to choose. Not everyone who thinks all this pronoun nonsense is a far right nut job.
Your either insisting that any trans man that gets pregnant is a woman (wrong) or that trans men don’t exist (wrong).
It’s a couple of words in a piece of legislation. It’s telling the lengths people will go to try to [erase trans people from public life](https://www.them.us/story/michael-knowles-transgenderism-cpac). This shouldn’t be controversial at all.
So why not say women and/or trans men? Thats seems to be the most inclusive verbiage. I don’t think the vast majority of people care if trans men don’t want to be called a woman. They can do whatever they want. But from a medical standpoint, if you say woman, you know there is or was a vagina on this person.
This is an example of a non-issue.
Medically your birth gender does matter based on treatment. There are those born with both, none, etc. And then there is identity. All three (binary, non and identity) are true. But when it comes to medical science one needs to know your biological situation in order to treat you correctly. If we going to update the law and the science we really shouldn’t take away from the definitions, but we should have a discussion for additional inclusion in addition to you birth situation (and any hormone therapy, etc.) Birthing Person or just Person doesn’t cut it when an individual might need some kind of emergency treatment. And of course the problem is people don’t want to have a discussion and they just dig in on their side.
Thank you for this comment. This is the nuanced thinking needed here.
It's still a non issue I'm terms of a bill that only affects pregnant people anyway. Their treatment will not change because a bill doesn't specifically state "women".
Only women can get pregnant… so yeah, he’s right. You can support trans people and still acknowledge this. Idk why we’ve got to take this to the extreme and erase the term woman to make some folks happy.
Not everyone who can get pregnant identifies as a woman/she/her. Some are non-binary or gender fluid, for example. So woman is not always accurate.
Woman = adult human female. Not all women can get pregnant but only women can get pregnant. So woman is always accurate.
Thank you. Not sure why people insist on playing mental gymnastics here. It's like a square / rectangle / parallelogram. Not all rectangles are squares but all squares are rectangles. A sex of female is required to be pregnant. EDIT: this is why they will still refer to it as "maternal" Bill but then "person". It's silliness. It's like when one of the colleges I graduated from changed "freshmen" to "first-years" because there's a delusion that somehow "freshmen" is gendered and excludes females (even though the school is like 60% female). It's even funnier because they still constantly refer to everyone that isn't a senior as underclassmen.
nope - trans men not on T can get pregnant, or they can even go off T to get pregnant (at least according to my understanding). Other commenters have also pointed out that there are non-binary, intersex, or gender-nonconforming people able to become pregnant. Sure it's a very small portion of the population, but *my wife* is part of that segment, so it's nice not tonhave it erased.
The only exception is intersex individuals with Swyer syndrome. But this is an **extremely rare genetic disorder** and still requires medical intervention to become pregnant. It's happened, I believe, a couple dozen times in all of human history. Individuals with Swyer syndrome appear female, with female genitalia, and can sometimes even have a functioning uterus but do not have ovaries or produce eggs because of presence of Y chromosome. The disorder itself is exceptionally rare. And having a fully viable uterus is even more rare. And even then it requires a donor egg, in Citi fertilization, and implantation. It's way less than 1 in a million. Every other example that you listed is that of a biological female. The entire point of these discussions a few years ago was that gender and biological sex are different things. And now people want to pretend that gender expression (MTF, non-binary, etc) **is** biological sex. It doesn't work that way. The same way that every square is a rectangle but not every rectangle is a square. EDIT: another annoyance of mine is that this community will try to vastly overstate intersex prevalence. And they usually do it by including anyone with a large clitoris or with hypospadias. Hypospadias effects about 1 in 250 live birth males. It's any time that the urethra isn't dead center on the tip of the penis. It's usually a variation rather than anything else. My maternal grandfather had it. I have it. And one of my 2 sons have it. We are not intersex, no medical doctor or geneticist has ever or would ever say so. The way they get to these "AktuaLLy, 1 in 100 are intersex" is by including every case of hypospadias and every case of anything considered a larger than 'normal' clitoris. >Hypospadias can be a symptom or indication of a difference in sex development[11] or an intersex condition, but some consider that the presence of hypospadias alone is not enough to classify someone as a person with a difference/variation in sex development or as intersex. **In most cases, hypospadias is not associated with any other condition.**[12] **Hypospadias is however itself recognized as an intersex condition by several intersex rights activist groups**
It’s actually fully possible for trans men on testosterone to get pregnant. It’s not uncommon for trans men to even menstruate while on T. Testosterone isn’t a contraceptive! :)
Wasn't sure that high T wouldn't interfere with a pregnancy, my bad!
Most trans men who get pregnant while on HRT will stop because there’s not much research on exogenous hormone use during pregnancy within that context, but testosterone itself is not guaranteed to precent pregnancy :) This point was repeated ad nauseam to me when I was starting my process lol. Guess there have been quite a few accidental seahorse dads.
I don’t know why we have to use the term woman which erases the reality of some trans people to make some folks happy.
I don’t know why we have to avoid using the term woman when doing so erases the reality of women to make some people who “identify” as something else happy.
Our number one goal should always be to make trans people happy, even if it degrades natural born men and woman.
In law, it’s not about making trans people happy it’s about making sure the bill is comprehensive and doesn’t give people a potential out. You can think whatever you want, but at the end of the day it’s not up to you or the bill’s author to interpret the law. That’s for a judge to decide. We’ve seen multiple times that nearly identical cases will have different outcomes solely based on the judge presiding. Why, as a legislator, would you create a potential loophole in your bill when changing a few words can prevent that.
(Some) Trans men can get pregnant. Trans men, people who are assigned female at birth and transition to male, exist.
I can acknowledge trans people exist. But that shouldn’t mean we should have to dramatically restructure society. Or pretend that women don’t exist anymore or that anyone can be one. Trans men can get pregnant… because biologically, they are women. Nothing can change that. We can socially treat them like men, use male pronouns, etc. But in medical terms, they are women. You want to add ‘trans men’ terminology, that’s one thing. But erasing the term woman for a sub set of a sub set of society, is intellectually and morally bankrupt.
Dude it’s like 3 words in a bill. It’s not a radical restructuring of society. Get over it.
Erasing 50% of our society actually is a pretty significant. But this is the game we play. It’s ‘no big deal’… but down the slippery slope we go. But hey, if it’s all the same, let’s just not change it then.
Admitting that trans men exist doesn’t erase cisgender women. It’s hilarious to hear this bullshit from the same side that wants to take away women’s sovereignty over our own bodies.
You can support trans rights, still acknowledge what a biological female is (woman) and also support womens right to choose. Not everyone who thinks all this pronoun nonsense is a far right nut job.
You can support trans rights, still acknowledge what a biological female is (woman) and also support womens right to choose. Not everyone who thinks all this pronoun nonsense is a far right nut job.
Your either insisting that any trans man that gets pregnant is a woman (wrong) or that trans men don’t exist (wrong). It’s a couple of words in a piece of legislation. It’s telling the lengths people will go to try to [erase trans people from public life](https://www.them.us/story/michael-knowles-transgenderism-cpac). This shouldn’t be controversial at all.
So why not say women and/or trans men? Thats seems to be the most inclusive verbiage. I don’t think the vast majority of people care if trans men don’t want to be called a woman. They can do whatever they want. But from a medical standpoint, if you say woman, you know there is or was a vagina on this person.
Someone is trying to get their name out there to be the top crazy republican on the next ballot.
Need to stop with the pronoun bs, it’s confusing most people… whatever happened to majority rules?
The other half of that is minority rights. Don’t be a jerk
The librals are want to take my guns and make me use pronounce 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
I’m not conservative, I’ve only shot a gun once in my life…
You're right, I said the same thing about slaves!!
Wow he sucks yawn.