13 ms·

> For my partner's entire pregnancy, our providers only referred to "birthing people" Calling my wife a "birthing person" just made her feel like some gross ve

> For my partner's entire pregnancy, our providers only referred to "birthing people" Calling my wife a "birthing person" just made her feel like some gross vessel for having a baby. We purposefully chose providers that didn't use that language. "Chestfeeding" is another one that's cropping up and makes zero sense. Men have breasts, so breastfeeding is already gender-neutral. But it's seen as female-centric so out the door it goes. There seems to be this weird erasure of women taking place at the moment. To the extent that it's now controversial to ask "what is a woman?"

flippinburgers 4y ago
The utterly hilarious defense by the left for a movement that - above all others - is deeply patriarchal in its attempt to overwhelm and wipe out the very concept of "woman".
zmgsabst 4y ago
Our entire group of animals is named after tits: Mammals. How can referring to the fact people have what our entire branch of the tree of life is named after be offensive?
- TomK32 4y ago
  Good thing tits are global but have have different names in other languages, Meisen in the case of my primary-guardian language.
- ertian 4y ago
  ...Probably better not to point that out, or next thing you know we're gonna have to rewrite damn near every textbook...
  - kergonath 4y ago
    Isn’t this ongoing already?
    - SyzygistSix 4y ago
      Yeah, it's like a competition between the worst of two groups of people as to who can change them more and skew the language, or lack of it, in their ideological direction.
- slackdog 4y ago
  Incidentally not all mammals have nipples. Male kangaroos don't.
  - kgwgk 4y ago
    Time for some class-affirming surgery then.
JenrHywy 4y ago
> There seems to be this weird erasure of women taking place at the moment. This is the crazy thing. After a century of legitimate struggle for equality, women are having the language of feminism turned on them to deny the existence of femininity. Honestly, I thought the lines would have been drawn with sport, but that fact that it's leaking into medicine is pure insanity. I've been somewhat worried about there not being much of place in the world for my sons when they grow up. Now I'm imagining needing to explain to my daughter that there's no point having any sporting aspirations unless they are in a sport where biological women have an advantage. Edit: on reflection, perhaps it was completely foreseeable. Modern feminism spent a lot of time dismantling masculinity; it makes some sense that femininity would be next against the wall.
- theossuary 4y ago
  You do realize that the terminology is meant for transmen right? It's weird you're complaining about terminology used for transmen, and then linking it to transwomen in sports.
  - JenrHywy 4y ago
    Why it is weird? In both cases, as the GP said, the concept of womanhood is being erased.
    - theossuary 4y ago
      Neither are erasing womanhood. That's like saying gay marriage is erasing hetero marriage.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- _cenw 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - istinetz 4y ago
undersuit 4y ago
[flagged]
- catiopatio 4y ago
  Of course there is. Adult human female.
  - undersuit 4y ago
    What is an adult human female?
    - catiopatio 4y ago
      An adult is a fully mature organism. An adult human is a fully mature member of the species Homo sapien. An adult human female is a fully mature member of the species Homo sapien who belongs to the reproductive class that produces large, immobile gametes. The reproductive system of an individual may be actual, potential, historic or broken. How do you define “woman”?
      - cassonmars 4y ago
        I'll play ball here. What do you classify intersex people as? Especially those born with either completely mixed gonadal representation or genitalia? Are they neither male nor female? These things are bimodal in distribution, but they are not perfectly binary.
        vxNsr 4y ago
        Correct. They are intersex. They are the exception that proves the rule.
        cassonmars 4y ago
        But what do you classify an intersex person as when you see them, assuming you don't know this detail? Our social lens is focused to a binary, even if there isn't a definitive binary.
zarzavat 4y ago
It's ironic because the entire concept of online language policing was invented by arch rivals the radical feminists in the 2010s (anyone remember donglegate?), but the pendulum has swung so far back in the other direction that now the very concept of women is being erased. Geez! Of course offline language policing is as old as time, but until the late 20th century it was the domain of religions or regimes - those with actual power. It was only in the ~90s that people realised that you don't need a power structure backing your language policing, you can just apply it anyway, taking advantage of existing status-structured organisations such as universities. In any sizeable population there's enough authoritarians who will gleefully police your linguistic regulations, simply to have power over others. However, without a serious religious movement backing any of this, the elites will eventually tire of the current linguistic fashion and move onto another cause celebre.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  "Mail carrier" instead of postman started in the 70's. Same with "flight attendant" instead of stewardess. This has been going on a long time.
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Gender suffixes have always had a gender connotation, because it is plainly what they mean.
    - fsckboy 4y ago
      > Gender suffixes have always had a gender connotation, because it is plainly what they mean. no, it isn't what they mean. you might say it's "equally" sexist, but "man" meant "mankind", it meant "person", and woman comes from "wifeman", person who is a wife. So mailman is "person who delivers mail". A good way to think of it is that language is actually neutral. Cultures have ideas and values, and those ideas and values suffuse communication, but the language is just a transport mechanism and will be bent and altered to communicate what people are thinking. But the language, always neutral. it's similar to the names of native american tribes. There are so many examples of "the Sioux didn't call themselves the Sioux, they called themselves Lakota, their enemies called them the Sioux." What did Lakota mean in Lakotan? It means "the people". Everybody else? they weren't even people. Every native american tribe did that, and probably our own hunter gatherer ancestors did that too. None of this is cause for concern, it's actually really interesting.
_cenw 4y ago
I was kind of with you, birthing person does sound pretty obstruse. But then you threw in the (self-described!) theocratic fascist dogwhistle. There are some uses radfems get super upset about that I find useful, though. Like "people with cervixes" if you are asking for cervical cancer screenings. Because increasingly, that affects people who do not feel spoken to if you use the word woman and this adds clarity to who the audience is.
- josephg 4y ago
  > But then you threw in the (self-described!) theocratic fascist dogwhistle. Huh? What fascist dog whistle? Sounds like the person was just describing their opinion and experience. The whole idea of dogwhistling sounds like a weird conspiracy theory. I’m sure it’s happened more than 0 times, but thinking dogwhistling is everywhere sounds just as unhinged to me as any of the wacky right wing conspiracies.
  - _cenw 4y ago
    "What is a woman" is the rhetorical work of Matt Walsh, who describes himself as a "theocratic fascist". The beginning of this essay explains the phrase pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAMM3l156Oo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAMM3l156Oo
    - parineum 4y ago
      And since nobody has asked that question before that well known rhetorical work we know everyone who mentions the same question is just dog whistling a reference to it. You left that part out.
      - _cenw 4y ago
        The throughline of >it's now controversial to ask "what is a woman?" to Matt Walsh is pretty clear. The entire documentenary is based on the premise that it's now controversial to ask this, because the answer must inevitably be "adult human female". It's treated as if these are magic words that dispel gender ideology instantly. Meanwhile in reality, nobody finds this question controversial, only that Matt Walsh puports to know the one and only, extremely obvious answer. That many people disagree with.
Gareth321 4y ago
I would be pissed if anyone referred to my wife as some kind of breeding vessel. These DEI bureaucrats have lost their minds, and companies have lost their minds for allowing this layer to grow so large.
- kenjackson 4y ago
  Wait, so you’re saying words matter and you want to language police them?
lumb63 4y ago
This is the idea behind TERFs, right? How can women have equal rights if “women” don’t even exist? I’m honestly surprised more feminists don’t have strong anti-transgender sentiment.

flippinburgers 4y ago

The utterly hilarious defense by the left for a movement that - above all others - is deeply patriarchal in its attempt to overwhelm and wipe out the very concept of "woman".

zmgsabst 4y ago

Our entire group of animals is named after tits: Mammals. How can referring to the fact people have what our entire branch of the tree of life is named after be offensive?

TomK32 4y ago
Good thing tits are global but have have different names in other languages, Meisen in the case of my primary-guardian language.
ertian 4y ago
...Probably better not to point that out, or next thing you know we're gonna have to rewrite damn near every textbook...
- kergonath 4y ago
  Isn’t this ongoing already?
  - SyzygistSix 4y ago
    Yeah, it's like a competition between the worst of two groups of people as to who can change them more and skew the language, or lack of it, in their ideological direction.
slackdog 4y ago
Incidentally not all mammals have nipples. Male kangaroos don't.
- kgwgk 4y ago
  Time for some class-affirming surgery then.

JenrHywy 4y ago

> There seems to be this weird erasure of women taking place at the moment. This is the crazy thing. After a century of legitimate struggle for equality, women are having the language of feminism turned on them to deny the existence of femininity. Honestly, I thought the lines would have been drawn with sport, but that fact that it's leaking into medicine is pure insanity. I've been somewhat worried about there not being much of place in the world for my sons when they grow up. Now I'm imagining needing to explain to my daughter that there's no point having any sporting aspirations unless they are in a sport where biological women have an advantage. Edit: on reflection, perhaps it was completely foreseeable. Modern feminism spent a lot of time dismantling masculinity; it makes some sense that femininity would be next against the wall.

theossuary 4y ago
You do realize that the terminology is meant for transmen right? It's weird you're complaining about terminology used for transmen, and then linking it to transwomen in sports.
- JenrHywy 4y ago
  Why it is weird? In both cases, as the GP said, the concept of womanhood is being erased.
  - theossuary 4y ago
    Neither are erasing womanhood. That's like saying gay marriage is erasing hetero marriage.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
_cenw 4y ago
[flagged]
- istinetz 4y ago

undersuit 4y ago

[flagged]

catiopatio 4y ago
Of course there is. Adult human female.
- undersuit 4y ago
  What is an adult human female?
  - catiopatio 4y ago
    An adult is a fully mature organism. An adult human is a fully mature member of the species Homo sapien. An adult human female is a fully mature member of the species Homo sapien who belongs to the reproductive class that produces large, immobile gametes. The reproductive system of an individual may be actual, potential, historic or broken. How do you define “woman”?
    - cassonmars 4y ago
      I'll play ball here. What do you classify intersex people as? Especially those born with either completely mixed gonadal representation or genitalia? Are they neither male nor female? These things are bimodal in distribution, but they are not perfectly binary.
      - vxNsr 4y ago
        Correct. They are intersex. They are the exception that proves the rule.
        cassonmars 4y ago
        But what do you classify an intersex person as when you see them, assuming you don't know this detail? Our social lens is focused to a binary, even if there isn't a definitive binary.

zarzavat 4y ago

It's ironic because the entire concept of online language policing was invented by arch rivals the radical feminists in the 2010s (anyone remember donglegate?), but the pendulum has swung so far back in the other direction that now the very concept of women is being erased. Geez! Of course offline language policing is as old as time, but until the late 20th century it was the domain of religions or regimes - those with actual power. It was only in the ~90s that people realised that you don't need a power structure backing your language policing, you can just apply it anyway, taking advantage of existing status-structured organisations such as universities. In any sizeable population there's enough authoritarians who will gleefully police your linguistic regulations, simply to have power over others. However, without a serious religious movement backing any of this, the elites will eventually tire of the current linguistic fashion and move onto another cause celebre.

WalterBright 4y ago
"Mail carrier" instead of postman started in the 70's. Same with "flight attendant" instead of stewardess. This has been going on a long time.
- kube-system 4y ago
  Gender suffixes have always had a gender connotation, because it is plainly what they mean.
  - fsckboy 4y ago
    > Gender suffixes have always had a gender connotation, because it is plainly what they mean. no, it isn't what they mean. you might say it's "equally" sexist, but "man" meant "mankind", it meant "person", and woman comes from "wifeman", person who is a wife. So mailman is "person who delivers mail". A good way to think of it is that language is actually neutral. Cultures have ideas and values, and those ideas and values suffuse communication, but the language is just a transport mechanism and will be bent and altered to communicate what people are thinking. But the language, always neutral. it's similar to the names of native american tribes. There are so many examples of "the Sioux didn't call themselves the Sioux, they called themselves Lakota, their enemies called them the Sioux." What did Lakota mean in Lakotan? It means "the people". Everybody else? they weren't even people. Every native american tribe did that, and probably our own hunter gatherer ancestors did that too. None of this is cause for concern, it's actually really interesting.

_cenw 4y ago

I was kind of with you, birthing person does sound pretty obstruse. But then you threw in the (self-described!) theocratic fascist dogwhistle. There are some uses radfems get super upset about that I find useful, though. Like "people with cervixes" if you are asking for cervical cancer screenings. Because increasingly, that affects people who do not feel spoken to if you use the word woman and this adds clarity to who the audience is.

josephg 4y ago
> But then you threw in the (self-described!) theocratic fascist dogwhistle. Huh? What fascist dog whistle? Sounds like the person was just describing their opinion and experience. The whole idea of dogwhistling sounds like a weird conspiracy theory. I’m sure it’s happened more than 0 times, but thinking dogwhistling is everywhere sounds just as unhinged to me as any of the wacky right wing conspiracies.
- _cenw 4y ago
  "What is a woman" is the rhetorical work of Matt Walsh, who describes himself as a "theocratic fascist". The beginning of this essay explains the phrase pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAMM3l156Oo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAMM3l156Oo
  - parineum 4y ago
    And since nobody has asked that question before that well known rhetorical work we know everyone who mentions the same question is just dog whistling a reference to it. You left that part out.
    - _cenw 4y ago
      The throughline of >it's now controversial to ask "what is a woman?" to Matt Walsh is pretty clear. The entire documentenary is based on the premise that it's now controversial to ask this, because the answer must inevitably be "adult human female". It's treated as if these are magic words that dispel gender ideology instantly. Meanwhile in reality, nobody finds this question controversial, only that Matt Walsh puports to know the one and only, extremely obvious answer. That many people disagree with.

Gareth321 4y ago

I would be pissed if anyone referred to my wife as some kind of breeding vessel. These DEI bureaucrats have lost their minds, and companies have lost their minds for allowing this layer to grow so large.

kenjackson 4y ago
Wait, so you’re saying words matter and you want to language police them?

lumb63 4y ago

This is the idea behind TERFs, right? How can women have equal rights if “women” don’t even exist? I’m honestly surprised more feminists don’t have strong anti-transgender sentiment.