celeb news Bette Midler turns into Jk Rowling, post transphobic tweet

[Bosque]

1 minute ago, Headlock said:

 

 

They literally do but okay 

Okay, what's the analogous discussion that Republicans have, compared to this discussion between Democrats about whether they should use the term "birthing people" or "women"? 

[Headlock]

6 minutes ago, Trent W said:

I connect the term far left with high-taxes, green deal and labor rights.

 

What I’m reading in this thread is mental asylum talk about terms that don’t even make sense.

 

It’s insane honestly 

Something doesn't make sense to you/you refuse to educate yourself = they must be crazy.

 

Yeah, that doesn't align at all with a certain reactionary political demographic 

[Communion]

13 minutes ago, Harrier said:

It's kind of a non-point because we also say 'egg donor'  

So wait - you mean we already have language that describes a group of people who are mostly cis women but yet we don't use the word "women" in the phrase itself!?  

 

I think the point went over your head a bit, sis. 

 

The point is that, no matter whether you choose "sperm donor" vs "people who produce semen" or "egg donor" vs "people who ovulate"... the former in both cases are already long-standing examples of medical terminology that describes mostly cis people without requiring the usage of the word "man" or "woman" in either phrase.

 

The mention of phonetics was to concede to @Trent W that some words, since new language is invented everyday, will end up sounding clunky, especially when how things sound is a big part of native English, but something sounding ugly and awkward in diction does not make it an inherently bad word. 

Edited July 5, 2022 by Communion

[Harrier]

3 minutes ago, Communion said:

So wait - you mean we already have language that describes a group of people who are mostly cis women but yet we don't use the word "women" in the phrase itself!?  

 

I think the point went over your head a bit, sis. 

 

The point is that, no matter whether you choose "sperm donor" vs "people who produce semen" or "egg donor" vs "people who ovulate"... the former in both cases are already long-standing examples of medical terminology that describes mostly cis people without requiring the usage of the word "man" or "woman" in either phrase.

 

The mention of phonetics was to concede to @Trent W that some word, since new language is invented everyday, will end up sounding clunky, especially when how things sound is a bit part of native English, but something sounding ugly and awkward in diction does not make it an inherently bad word. 

Is the bolding necessary? I didn't miss your point. I'm not arguing against the use of gender-non specific language, I'm arguing against the use of clunky, awkward, politically correct sounding language  It just serves to get people offside as you've seen in this thread.

[Headlock]

Just now, Dephira said:

Okay, what's the analogous discussion that Republicans have, compared to this discussion between Democrats about whether they should use the term "birthing people" or "women"? 

That isn't what I said, sorry if I misunderstood your sentence. The point I was making is that conservatives ARE having this conversation about "women being erased", purposefully, to influence people like YOU, into thinking this is actually a real issue, all the while they take your rights away.

 

The issue arrises, my dear friend, when it is EXPLAINED to you and others like you, how this isn't actually a real issue, and you DOUBLE-DOWN on the incorrect information fed to you by reactionary right-wing polemics. And then the "far left" gets blamed for you falling for said propaganda.

[Bosque]

1 minute ago, Headlock said:

That isn't what I said, sorry if I misunderstood your sentence. The point I was making is that conservatives ARE having this conversation about "women being erased", purposefully, to influence people like YOU, into thinking this is actually a real issue, all the while they take your rights away.

 

The issue arrises, my dear friend, when it is EXPLAINED to you and others like you, how this isn't actually a real issue, and you DOUBLE-DOWN on the incorrect information fed to you by reactionary right-wing polemics. And then the "far left" gets blamed for you falling for said propaganda.

You're being unnecessarily combative when, to be frank, you didn't really even understand my point at all. I was talking about how leftists get wrapped up in petty fights while Republicans at the end of the day are united, show up to vote, and don't give a **** about small differences in opinion as long as they can push their agenda. The fact that you randomly accuse me of "doubling-down on incorrect information fed to me by reactionary right-wing polemics" (please quote the post where I was spreading "incorrect information spread by reactionary right-wing polemics"?) once again proves my point. I'm gonna bow out at this moment because it seems like you're getting emotionally involved in the debate (which is understandable) and really not even reading my posts accurately. 

[arceus]

This is why Republicans are winning every where 

[Trent W]

13 minutes ago, Headlock said:

Jesus ******* christ I don't even know where to start with this dumpster fire of a sentence, there's so many things going wrong 

 

That's literally how medicine and science works 

It changes CONSTANTLY given new insights and data, (good) doctors are constantly researching new developments and adapting their care to better serve their patients. Not to mention to keep your license you have to re-take boards multiple times throughout your career to ensure your practice is up to date and you maintain your quality of care.

I know how medicine and science work.

 

You keep ignoring my main question.

 

Who benefits from calling cis women “menstruators” and “birthing people”.

 

The only group that comes to mind is transmen, which has been pointed out multiple times that is illogical to think that they would want to have a baby after becoming a man

 

Sounds like the same ridiculous group that want latinos to be called latinx when almost all of them loathe the term

[Rican]

18 minutes ago, Trent W said:

I connect the term far left with high-taxes, green deal and labor rights.

 

What I’m reading in this thread is mental asylum talk about terms that don’t even make sense.

 

It’s insane honestly 

Now that I think of it my experience with it was in 2019  at the Women’s March and the female I was with was being refer to as a “birthing person” (my first and last time ever experiencing that word) and considering the type of protest it was I know for certain that it wasn't a right winger doing the labeling and that's why I'm confuse as to why Republicans are being accuse of such language on this thread lol

 

We were there as pro choice and It came off that her only purpose was to give birth because she was there as a pro choice advocate, it was soooooo awkward and brand new to us. If it was to happen today I would definitely speak up. I view woman as human beings who have more purpose in life than just birthing children. 

[Communion]

28 minutes ago, Harrier said:

use of clunky, awkward, politically correct sounding language

This is projection, removed from the reality of the language being discussed, unfortunately. The terms you're calling "politically correct" have been added into medical lexicon for nearly 20 years now.

 

We could have a conversation over the importance of phonetics and how rhetoric in movements should be slogan-izable, ie: "keep it simple, stupid!". But we can't actually converse if the goal post is rationalizing reactionary ideas.

 

Doctors and medical officials have been discussing this language, whether related to growing awareness of trans people or not (intersex people also exist!), for over two decades now. The language originated because it is "medically accurate", not because it is "politically correct", which in itself means essentially nothing at this point.

 

Many of the same people who say "people who menstruate" is "PC" think using proper pronouns is also "PC".

 

Of course people should have the right to be called what they want to be called, but at one point, it verges into giving the benefit of the doubt that not everyone is transphobic to enabling anti-science reactionary rhetoric no different than people who are anti-vaxxers. The language is medically accurate and used almost exclusively in appropriate medical context.

 

This is quite literally no different than the far-right seizing on things like "critical race theory" as used in academia or the way "privilege" rhetoric popularized in online social media spaces throughout the 2010s to create a fake hysteria that serves no purpose than to marginalize an already disenfranchised demographic. 

 

Again, this conversation was literally the other way around just a few years ago. Cis people were demanding that trans people take no issue with being called "female" or "male" in medical settings "for medical accuracy" and, well, they got what they wanted - such language transformed into even more accurate language.

 

Turns out "female" isn't actually that accurate or specific of a term and can be one-up'd in utility for doctors by "people who ovulate/menstruate/etc. "Ew PC SJWs!!" is neither a rational nor respectable reaction to the realities of medicine or modern healthcare. And I'm not saying that's *your* reaction but I can't be asked to respect sensitivities to... "political correctness". 

Edited July 6, 2022 by Communion

[Headlock]

6 minutes ago, Dephira said:

I was talking about how leftists get wrapped up in petty fights 

We are not arguing with leftists in here sis 

 

7 minutes ago, Dephira said:

please quote the post where I was spreading "incorrect information spread by reactionary right-wing polemics"

 

1 hour ago, Dephira said:

The fact that she completely randomly attacked language that is usually used by people on the far left (objectively speaking), and completely ignored the fact that it was Republicans who just ended the right to abortion And there are 17 pages on this forum full of left-center people fighting each other over irrelevant nomenclature, while all Republicans are peacefully sitting at a table, completely unified in their quest to end the legislative rights of women, gay people, and all minorities. This is why the left/center-left will never win any political fights. 

Here is you blaming the "far left" for a manufactured issue created by conservatives 

[Headlock]

6 minutes ago, Trent W said:

I know how medicine and science work.

Okay, I'll see where you're going with this...

 

7 minutes ago, Trent W said:

Who benefits from calling cis women “menstruators” and “birthing people”.

Medical professionals, trans men, non-binary individuals, cis women themselves when utilizing new techniques found through research utilizing those terms, let's see if you got any of those!

 

8 minutes ago, Trent W said:

The only group that comes to mind is transmen

You did! We're getting somewhere!

 

9 minutes ago, Trent W said:

which has been pointed out multiple times that is illogical to think that they would want to have a baby after becoming a man

*Plane falls out of the sky* 

[Trent W]

7 minutes ago, Rican said:

Now that I think of it my experience with it was in 2019  at the Women’s March and the female I was with was being refer to as a “birthing person” (my first and last time ever experiencing that word) and considering the type of protest it was I know for certain that it wasn't a right winger doing the labeling and that's why I'm confuse as to why Republicans are being accuse of such language on this thread lol

 

We were there as pro choice and It came off that her only purpose was to give birth because she was there as a pro choice advocate, it was soooooo awkward and brand new to us. If it was to happen today I would definitely speak up. I view woman as human beings who have more purpose in life than just birthing children. 

 

Yes it’s completely dehumanizing.

 

I don’t think even Republicans refer to women like this.

[Headlock]

11 minutes ago, Rican said:

(my first and last time ever experiencing that word)

So... you agree.... that...... this isn't actually a thing that regularly happens or will affect people in any way on a tangible level 

 

11 minutes ago, Rican said:

brand new to us. 

So..... you agree...... that...... your reactionary distrust of certain terms has to do with your unfamiliarity with them and how they are utilized 

Edited July 6, 2022 by Headlock

[Communion]

8 minutes ago, Rican said:

and the female I was with

You realize it's a bit ironic to complain about specific language being dehumanizing when many cis women, particularly cis women of color, have made it a point that referring to women as "females" or to use "female" as a noun is degrading, especially cis WOC feeling so in reference to the way it is so often used as shorthand by cis men right? 

[Trent W]

4 minutes ago, Headlock said:

 

 

Medical professionals, trans men, non-binary individuals, cis women themselves when utilizing new techniques found through research utilizing those terms, let's see if you got any of those!

 

 

Is basically just non-binary people and very very very very few transmen, women won’t have any benefit, only erasure.

 

Well I don’t think these terms are ever going mainstream, but good luck with that.

 

It’s such a small percentage of people out of a very very small community that most of them don’t even care about birthing.

[Rican]

4 minutes ago, Headlock said:

So... you agree.... that...... this isn't actually a thing that regularly happens or will affect people in any way on a tangible level 

 

So..... you agree...... that...... your reactionary distrust of certain terms has to do with your unfamiliarity with them and how they are utilized 

Why are ya attacking members for being honest that the terminologies are brand new to them? Not every “cis” woman is going to feel comfortable being referred to anything not name “woman” or not feel comfortable to be affiliated with those that are comfortable with alternative terms as “birthing people”.

Bettie clearly feels uncomfortable by the alternative terminology and do her feelings as a woman don’t matter?
 

Ya say ya want to compromise but display the opposite when members are displaying their true feelings and the feelings displayed in here is more confusion than being more “anti”  

 

 

[PoisonPill]

Standing up against the devaluing and dehumanization of women =/= transphobia

[More Than A Melody]

You can say "women and other affected people" and be done with it. Being inclusive is important but it doesn't mean that you have to be offensive and "birthing people" is reductive and kind of gross. 

[Rican]

29 minutes ago, Trent W said:

 

Yes it’s completely dehumanizing.

 

I don’t think even Republicans refer to women like this.

You seen that post from that member that said that they encounter a intake form at a doctors office with the label "if you have a front hole" check this box.

 

If my mother was to ever go to a clinic like that I would personally find her another doctors office. This shouldn't make anyone a right wing or left wing. 

She is a human being and should be treated as such. 

[Jynx672]

36 minutes ago, Communion said:

This is projection, removed from the reality of the language being discussed, unfortunately. The terms you're calling "politically correct" have been added into medical lexicon for nearly 20 years now.

 

We could have a conversation over the importance of phonetics and how rhetoric in movements should be slogan-izable, ie: "keep it simple, stupid!". But we can't actually converse if the goal post is rationalizing reactionary ideas.

 

Doctors and medical officials have been discussing this language, whether related to growing awareness of trans people or not (intersex people also exist!), for over two decades now. The language originated because it is "medically accurate", not because it is "politically correct", which in itself means essentially nothing at this point.

 

Many of the same people who say "people who menstruate" is "PC" think using proper pronouns is also "PC".

 

Of course people should have the right to be called what they want to be called, but at one point, it verges into giving the benefit of the doubt that not everyone is transphobic to enabling anti-science reactionary rhetoric no different than people who are anti-vaxxers. The language is medically accurate and used almost exclusively in appropriate medical context.

 

This is quite literally no different than the far-right seizing on things like "critical race theory" as used in academia or the way "privilege" rhetoric popularized in online social media spaces throughout the 2010s to create a fake hysteria that serves no purpose than to marginalize an already disenfranchised demographic. 

 

Again, this conversation was literally the other way around just a few years ago. Cis people were demanding that trans people take no issue with being called "female" or "male" in medical settings "for medical accuracy" and, well, they got what they wanted - such language transformed into even more accurate language.

 

Turns out "female" isn't actually that accurate or specific of a term and can be one-up'd in utility for doctors by "people who ovulate/menstruate/etc. "Ew PC SJWs!!" is neither a rational nor respectable reaction to the realities of medicine or modern healthcare. And I'm not saying that's *your* reaction but I can't be asked to respect sensitivities to... "political correctness". 

Gender is not a medical term - sex is.

[Headlock]

24 minutes ago, Trent W said:

Well I don’t think these terms are ever going mainstream, but good luck with that.

 

Good thing they were never intended to because they are literally used for medical purposes in very specific instances oh my GOD  

 

25 minutes ago, Trent W said:

It’s such a small percentage of people out of a very very small community that most of them don’t even care about birthing.

Not that it matters because it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about but it is kind of hilarious you keep saying this and provide not one source 

[Communion]

6 minutes ago, Jynx672 said:

Gender is not a medical term - sex is.

That's why doctors are opting out of using "men" and "women" in medical language. You're grasping it!

[awesomepossum]

19 hours ago, applestar said:

At this point, it doesn't really matter if the left uses women or birthing people, because they've already lost on this issue and many others.

 

The left virtually can't win a debate with the right on abortion, because they'll just pivot to, "You can't even define what a woman is." Thanks to this, now contraception, gay marriage, and many more rights determined by the Roe precedent will be taken away. People will also die as a result of the Roe overturn

 

Policing language is a losing battle for anyone, and obviously we've seen the effects of that in 2016, 2018, and probably in 2022 & 2024 as well.

Yup

[Bloo]

16 minutes ago, More Than A Melody said:

You can say "women and other affected people" and be done with it. 

Because that language would include women who with medical conditions wherein they cannot give birth when it shouldn't.

 

I'm not sure why people feel like they need to instruct how medical experts should refer to medical phenomenon. Language adapts and changes as we as a society evolve. Medical professionals are going to pick language that is most conducive to serving their patients.