4 ms·
Don’t forget ‘houseless’ or ‘transient’ to describe homeless. Or ‘bodies with vaginas’ to describe women. Or ‘latinx’ to describe latinos. Pretty sure all of th
by myfartsarefoul 5y ago
Don’t forget ‘houseless’ or ‘transient’ to describe homeless. Or ‘bodies with vaginas’ to describe women. Or ‘latinx’ to describe latinos. Pretty sure all of these are exonyms. The linguistic contortions we have to perform to describe things we already had perfectly acceptable words for is absurd and rarely serves the person or thing being described.
- dTal 5y agoAs I understand it, "people with <x> genitalia" is a trans-accepting way of discussing medical issues without rejecting anyone's gender identification. Having a vagina is no longer considered necessary or sufficient to be called a "woman".
- myfartsarefoul 5y agoA pretty simple solution to this is to call trans women ‘trans women’. Or just ‘men’. Since they’re male.
- myfartsarefoul 5y agoFunny how calling women ‘bodies with vaginas’ or ‘menstrators’ isn’t considered offensive, while calling all males ‘men’ will get you fired and potentially in legal trouble. People have lost their damned minds.
- true_religion 5y agoI’m not the OP, but I think we deeply erred by conflating gender and biological sex characteristics into a single word. Unfortunately, the solution to retain men/women for gender and use more specific terminology for sex is problematic. - There’s a greater argument to be made for binary biological sex, and you can attach obvious descriptions to it to make the two categories distinct. - Gender on the other hand is more fluid (both historically in its expression, and in between cultures). - Biological based terminology can be used historically (e.g. Women’s History) But this is all off topic, so I’ll stop here.
- blacktriangle 5y agoLets just all go back to calling them mentally ill.