This week in trans: The Lancet, the ACLU, the Guardian

[Metaphor]

I've been wrong about the ACLU. I thought its commitment to free speech was at its zenith in the distant past, but it is so committed to free speech right now that it felt free to alter the words of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in a quote it posted on Twitter:

Justice Ginsburg underwent Senate confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court in 1993. Asked where she stood on reproductive rights, she did not equivocate.

“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity,” she said. “It is a decision she must make for herself. When government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
The A.C.L.U. rendered her quote this way: “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity…When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”

Oddly, despite the executive director of the ACLU saying he 'regretted' the alteration and saying that 'we don't be altering people's quotes', the original Tweet (as of the composition of this post) is still up.

---

The Guardian has some advice: pregnant women should get the COVID vaccine (August 2021)

The Guardian has since updated that advice: pregnant people should get the COVID vaccine (October 2021)

The Guardian has yet to issue an apology for its transphobic and exclusionary articles referring to pregnant women.

---

The Lancet took some heat from terfs and other knuckle-dragging scumbags after the cover for the September 25th issue which featured the quote "Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected". The editor-in-chief Richard Horton "apologised" to those who felt offended but spent the second half of the statement defending the cover. Mel Gibson called Richard Horton to congratulate him on his apology.

 

[Trausti]

The patriarchy’s plan to marginalize women to obscurity is going well. Great success!

 

[Metaphor]

The patriarchy’s plan to marginalize women to obscurity is going well. Great success!

It is indeed curious that men's health is still men's health, the cancer dangers of bodies with prostates notwithstanding.

 

[crazyfingers]

This fixation that some people have about finding news on trans people is kinda peculiar. Yup. Very peculiar I'd say.

 

[Trausti]

This fixation that some people have about finding news on trans people is kinda peculiar. Yup. Very peculiar I'd say.

The disinterest others have in the erasure of women is also kinda peculiar.

 

[crazyfingers]

This fixation that some people have about finding news on trans people is kinda peculiar. Yup. Very peculiar I'd say.

The disinterest others have in the erasure of women is also kinda peculiar.

Erasure of women? A tiny number of people change their gender one direction or the other = erasure of women. Some people get all twisted up over it. Peculiar reaction.

 

[Trausti]

This fixation that some people have about finding news on trans people is kinda peculiar. Yup. Very peculiar I'd say.

The disinterest others have in the erasure of women is also kinda peculiar.

Erasure of women? A tiny number of people change their gender one direction or the other = erasure of women. Some people get all twisted up over it. Peculiar reaction.

E.g., calling a pregnant woman a "birthing person" is erasing women. Quite misogynistic.

 

[crazyfingers]

Words don't erase people. Bob warned about mixing Texas medicine with railroad gin. It makes people look uglier, strangles up the mind and one looses one's sense of time.

 

[Elixir]

This fixation that some people have about finding news on trans people is kinda peculiar. Yup. Very peculiar I'd say.

Truly. It comes across (to me) as a cry for help with deep-seated insecurities that are embattling them.

 

[thebeave]

Words don't erase people. Bob warned about mixing Texas medicine with railroad gin. It makes people look uglier, strangles up the mind and one looses one's sense of time.

So, getting away from pointless, snide comments and getting back to the OP. Just to be clear, are you FOR swapping out the words "women" to "person" like the ACLU initially did with RBG's quote, or are you on the side of Metaphor and Trausti that we should leave the terms "women" in place. Also, how about other situations, such as referring to "Mother's Day" as "Birthing Parent's Day" instead, or calling biological women "people who menstruate" or using "pregnant people" rather than "pregnant women" as has been advocated by many on the left.

 

[crazyfingers]

Words don't erase people. Bob warned about mixing Texas medicine with railroad gin. It makes people look uglier, strangles up the mind and one looses one's sense of time.

So, getting away from pointless, snide comments and getting back to the OP. Just to be clear, are you FOR swapping out the words "women" to "person" like the ACLU initially did with RBG's quote, or are you on the side of Metaphor and Trausti that we should leave the terms "women" in place. Also, how about other situations, such as referring to "Mother's Day" as "Birthing Parent's Day" instead, or calling biological women "people who menstruate" or using "pregnant people" rather than "pregnant women" as has been advocated by many on the left.

I am neither for nor against. I don't care. I posted in this thread and the other because I find it interesting in a "here we go again" kind of way that two threads on Trans people were at the very top of the thread list. It's like Trans people are next big googy-man/woman/person for some people to get all hot under the collar about when the "problem" if it is a problem, gets back to the same old Sex stuff that some people can't stand because in their view it's not "Normal" or "Natural"..

I really believe that the underlying issue is not sports but that some people have a perpetual golden rod up their butts on anything that's not "normal" about sex.

 

[TomC]

I really believe that the underlying issue is not sports but that some people have a perpetual golden rod up their butts on anything that's not "normal" about sex.

You'd be very wrong.
It's the kind of blindness I've referred to before.
Tom

 

[crazyfingers]

I really believe that the underlying issue is not sports but that some people have a perpetual golden rod up their butts on anything that's not "normal" about sex.

You'd be very wrong.
It's the kind of blindness I've referred to before.
Tom

I believe that for most people it's their golden rod.

Whenever something comes up related to sex or gender, the golden rods come out of the woodwork to try to stomp it out. It's as predictable as morning.

 

[TomC]

I really believe that the underlying issue is not sports but that some people have a perpetual golden rod up their butts on anything that's not "normal" about sex.

You'd be very wrong.
It's the kind of blindness I've referred to before.
Tom

I believe that for most people it's their golden rod.

Whenever something comes up related to sex or gender, the golden rods come out of the woodwork to try to stomp it out. It's as predictable as morning.

Maybe your problem is confirmation bias.

For the vast majority of stuff, sex and gender play no important role. Elite sports competition is profoundly different. But the politically correct(to use the charitable term) are blind to the difference. Because their ideological blinders won't allow them to see the reality.
Tom

 

[Trausti]

I believe that for most people it's their golden rod.

Whenever something comes up related to sex or gender, the golden rods come out of the woodwork to try to stomp it out. It's as predictable as morning.

Maybe your problem is confirmation bias.

For the vast majority of stuff, sex and gender play no important role. Elite sports competition is profoundly different. But the politically correct(to use the charitable term) are blind to the difference. Because their ideological blinders won't allow them to see the reality.
Tom

It’s also that guys think other guys entering women’s sport are just fucking jerks.

 

[Elixir]

Maybe your problem is confirmation bias.

His problem?


Like many others (incl me) he seems to be devoid of interest, let alone bias. The only interesting thing about this IMO is how wound up and preoccupied some conservatives are with labels.

 

[crazyfingers]

I believe that for most people it's their golden rod.

Whenever something comes up related to sex or gender, the golden rods come out of the woodwork to try to stomp it out. It's as predictable as morning.

Maybe your problem is confirmation bias.

For the vast majority of stuff, sex and gender play no important role. Elite sports competition is profoundly different. But the politically correct(to use the charitable term) are blind to the difference. Because their ideological blinders won't allow them to see the reality.
Tom

No I don't believe so.

What I see is that every time sex/gender is viewed as not normal some people have to get all twisted.

Even now some schools try to ban boys from having hair long hair
https://nypost.com/2017/08/24/american-indian-boy-banned-from-school-for-having-long-hair/
https://www.click2houston.com/news/...ise-concern-over-hair-policy-at-magnolia-isd/
Some schools still try to ban girls from wearing pants
https://www.today.com/style/school-s-uniform-doesn-t-allow-girls-wear-pants-so-t141519
https://doyouremember.com/121011/girls-not-allowed-pants-school
Anti-oral sex laws
https://www.ayupp.com/social-viral/...states-alabama-arizona-florida-etc-15145.html
And then the whole thing about gay sex which is still going on and the golden rods want to get the supreme court to reverse and ban

Anti-Trans is just a continuation of the same crap

As for elite sports, if it went away I'd probably never notice.

 

[Toni]

I believe that for most people it's their golden rod.

Whenever something comes up related to sex or gender, the golden rods come out of the woodwork to try to stomp it out. It's as predictable as morning.

Maybe your problem is confirmation bias.

For the vast majority of stuff, sex and gender play no important role. Elite sports competition is profoundly different. But the politically correct(to use the charitable term) are blind to the difference. Because their ideological blinders won't allow them to see the reality.
Tom

No I don't believe so.

What I see is that every time sex/gender is viewed as not normal some people have to get all twisted.

Even now some schools try to ban boys from having hair long hair
https://nypost.com/2017/08/24/american-indian-boy-banned-from-school-for-having-long-hair/
https://www.click2houston.com/news/...ise-concern-over-hair-policy-at-magnolia-isd/
Some schools still try to ban girls from wearing pants
https://www.today.com/style/school-s-uniform-doesn-t-allow-girls-wear-pants-so-t141519
https://doyouremember.com/121011/girls-not-allowed-pants-school
Anti-oral sex laws
https://www.ayupp.com/social-viral/...states-alabama-arizona-florida-etc-15145.html
And then the whole thing about gay sex which is still going on and the golden rods want to get the supreme court to reverse and ban

Anti-Trans is just a continuation of the same crap

As for elite sports, if it went away I'd probably never notice.

And.....in order to be supportive of trans individuals, do we have to erase women?

It does feel that way sometimes. We have prominent medical journals engaging in all sorts of gymnastics in order to avoid potentially insulting trans individuals, with nary a thought about how women might feel that once again, the word woman is seen as too inflammatory to be used in polite society.

Are urologists going to start re-wording their articles in medical journals to include pre-surgical trans women who still have their prostate? Are they going to insist on screening transmen for prostate cancer? Are they going to remove MEN from their literature?

I don't think so.

 

[Elixir]

And.....in order to be supportive of trans individuals, do we have to erase women?

The whole idea of being "supportive" of or "opposed to" some group of individuals on the basis of their gender identification, anatomy, or sexual preference seems silly on the face of it to me.
Don't people have anything better to do? Like maybe, watch paint dry?

 

[crazyfingers]

No I don't believe so.

What I see is that every time sex/gender is viewed as not normal some people have to get all twisted.

Even now some schools try to ban boys from having hair long hair
https://nypost.com/2017/08/24/american-indian-boy-banned-from-school-for-having-long-hair/
https://www.click2houston.com/news/...ise-concern-over-hair-policy-at-magnolia-isd/
Some schools still try to ban girls from wearing pants
https://www.today.com/style/school-s-uniform-doesn-t-allow-girls-wear-pants-so-t141519
https://doyouremember.com/121011/girls-not-allowed-pants-school
Anti-oral sex laws
https://www.ayupp.com/social-viral/...states-alabama-arizona-florida-etc-15145.html
And then the whole thing about gay sex which is still going on and the golden rods want to get the supreme court to reverse and ban

Anti-Trans is just a continuation of the same crap

As for elite sports, if it went away I'd probably never notice.

And.....in order to be supportive of trans individuals, do we have to erase women?

It does feel that way sometimes. We have prominent medical journals engaging in all sorts of gymnastics in order to avoid potentially insulting trans individuals, with nary a thought about how women might feel that once again, the word woman is seen as too inflammatory to be used in polite society.

Are urologists going to start re-wording their articles in medical journals to include pre-surgical trans women who still have their prostate? Are they going to insist on screening transmen for prostate cancer? Are they going to remove MEN from their literature?

I don't think so.

I have not advocated anything. Rather I note that I believe that much of the generally negative talk about Trans I see is most often motivated by an underlying issue that people on the right have with anything related to sex or gender that falls outside of their idea of "normal".

However if you were to ask me what a pregnant woman should be referred to as I'd probably say a pregnant woman if that's what pregnant women prefer. If you were to ask me what I think a pregnant trans person should be referred to as I'd probably say whatever they want to be referred to as.

However when people talk about an "Erasure of Women", substitute "Erasure of Gays". What do those mean? It's not the same thing. What would Erasure of Trans mean - especially when initiated by a right winger?