Brighton and Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust unveiled 'gender inclusive' phrases
 

They are Crazy

Its Breast Milk
not Human Milk


You Woke Freaks


[Hospital tells doctors, nurses and midwives to
say 'birthing parents' and 'human milk'
instead of 'mothers' and 'breastmilk' because
they risk offending transgender people
Brighton and Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust
unveiled 'gender inclusive' phrases
The Trust is the first in the country
to formally implement such a radical overhaul
Document released this week, said staff
should not stop using the word 'woman]


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...uman-milk.html



Debated on Politics Live BBC2HD

Always replacing the word woman, why is that? I've yet to see the word man be replaced by Prostate owner or father being replaced by Sperm giver

Women really are the only group of people who can't stand up for their rights without being called names like "TERF" ... Which is ironic really, as they seem to be losing the right to even be called women!

Seriously. All this kind of thing is just so regressive to women's rights and trying to get out of those bloody gender role boxes

are there any humans other than woman that can produce milk? If not, why the need to reclassify

"Brighton and Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust reduce women down to bodily functions" is the correct title.

Also, why would "breastmilk" be offensive to a transgender person?

Probably isn't.

Absolutely.

Birthing parents, menstruators, cervix havers ..........so ****ing dehumanising

Trans men and non binary people can menstruate, have cervix’s and give birth. What exactly is your solution for general terms that they can use to include all these groups?

My question is why would a trans man want to give birth? and wouldn't the hormones they are taking prevent them getting pregnant?

and a non binary person might still have breasts, they would be attached to their body, why would they not want to mention breasts...?

Females?

Well I’m not a trans man so you’d have to ask someone who is, also google has never failed me. All I know is that there is trans men giving birth and that’s enough for me to justify more gender butyrate language in the hospitals. I don’t see the need for knowing exactly why they want a child.

Why do I need to think of a solution? I'm a woman, I don't like being reduced to my bodily functions, why doesn't that count for anything?

Why is it only women who are being forced to change our language?

sounds a bit cake and eat it to me if I am honest, if you want to be male, and I honestly think if you are taking testosterone that would negate female hormones, but I am not up on science, also I asked you because you seemed so sure I thought you might know?

any comment on the breasts that the non binary person has attached to their body..

You don’t actually need to do anything...

From what I’ve seen it’s not just women I’ve heard things like “people with penises/prostates” used. I’m not going to click on the dailymail article but from arista’s extract it looks like they’re talking specifically about the birthing process and people who are born male don’t do that.

Half the population are women, and only a micropercentage of those women identify as men or nonbinary. Why should half the population lose their name for <1% ?

In my opinion trans men have as much right as anybody else to have children so I’ve never actually thought to question their motives. Also not everybody who is trans or non binary is gonna be on hormones so it might be that but i’m also no scientist so idk if you can still have children after hormones.

The breast thing has me as confused as everyone else coz I’ve honestly never heard of breasts being offensive. On the same hand I don’t understand how Human milk is anymore dehumanising than breast milk

silly woke pandering nonsense

:facepalm:

Every human has breasts....be they male or female so to now have to say chest feeding sounds daft.

I don't mind gender neutral medical terms to be honest, it often is the case that Doctors use medical terms rather than the more colloquial ones non medical people will use.

What will become discriminatory in my view is forcing born women to change the way they speak about their own body to use gender neutral terms. I can't see how that could ever happen but if I were to have another child and want to feed my child using breast milk from my breasts I don't want to have to call it human milk :shrug:

What exactly made them do this??? , why is there an issue with saying female and woman.

Why would trans people be offended :facepalm: , I'm extremely confused and frustrated with this type of silliness . And when someone transitions from male to female surely they wouldn't have a problem with female phrases?? this literally makes no senses :huh:.

'Inclusive language' stuff, I tend to not see an issue IF its used..for transmen/non binary people. Like, theres no issue at all for medics ad such to be trained to talk in a different way if treating someone who does not identify as female.

Using it wholesale though, just kind of seems crappy. Its honestly like woman, mother, etc are dirty words. And yes, its never anything to do with men, seemingly. Only ever women. Infact, oddly, I have found those who tend to shout about how the correct term is menstruators or whatever, REALLY do not like you also using terms such as penis people if referring to men. I don't do it often like, I did it a couple of times in a convo about this stuff, and got a lot of abuse for it, apparently, men is fine. So, tell me this is not rampant misogyny really..honestly..

An article from the Daily Mail that's full of language and terminology meant to incite gammon about gender? Surely not!?

Yes it is.

Male entitlement. Women have to sacrifice terms which refer to them to appease male people, who of course don't have to give anything up for those females who identify as men...

I just read the article Vicky and it sounds like they're calling father's "birthing parent" & "co parent " instead of man :facepalm: . And yeah it should just be for people who identify that way rather than making it for everyone. But it seems female phrases are being targeted mostly .

I hope this daft trend stays in Brighton, if a woman go into labour they can't expect her to be called just a "person" with "human milk" sounds ridiculous .

TRUE fair point

But they can't erase female phrases and the word woman , so i'm hoping this just applies to people who identify that way .

Not all transmen are on hormones. Especially given..a lot of transmen these days tend to be very very young. A 16 year old child of a friend of mine came out as trans last year. They are not on hormones or anything, and are now pregnant. From the utterly ridiculous situation of listening to online groups and basically convincing themselves into believing that they are actually male, and they have no pregnancy risk, etc etc, sleeping with a 'non binary person' (who also, cannot get them pregnant, as not a man) and..funnily enough..as can happen when a male and female person shag, ending up pregnant. Like, its like something from some messed up comedy at times. This is part of why I am hugely against the denial of biology really. Seems to be creating some weird alternate reality where people are actually convinced that sex is not a real thing because they want to think that, and end up in situations that are..easily avoidable with some sense applied. Again, that^ seemed a rarity, usually confined to america tbh, but its everywhere now, with so so many young female people saying they are trans/non binary. No issue in itself really, but when they fall for the social media/media bull****? It becomes a bit of an issue. I do not think its 'kind' or 'nice' to be playing to that narrative.

Kids are..easily 'brainwashed'. I dont think the term fits 100%, but you can see where I am coming from. When many many older people tell young impressionable minds that they can identify their way out of biology, you get these kinds of results tbh. Its insanity.

Thats got to be a first..bloody hell. In practise, I really doubt they will though..its been a 'thing' for a while now. Cervical cancer charities totally removing the word woman/female, meanwhile, mens cancers..left alone. I don't WANT mens charities to be targetted mind. But, its always seemed very stark, the lack of 'inclusive language' for male people. And..the reaction of a lot of those who use 'inclusive language' if you do attempt to define male people as scrotum havers or something.

Honestly have not read the actual article as..read this elsewhere so the mails take is not too important to me :laugh:

...I don’t really have much comment atm because I don’t want to just take a DM article for something like this...I have tried to Google more and the terminology seems to be specific to these hospitals in their new guidance...I mean for staff use, not what would be expected of any terminology used beyond that...it’s a difficult one...for me anyway...because I do feel that trans inclusivity has importance also...


...there is a maternity pay bill being rushed through today, I read...I’m not sure the details but it’s being apparently rushed through because of a minister about to go on maternity leave...I always wonder with this type of story, if it’s there for a diversion, it’ll be interesting as to what the bill is exactly...

I don't want to be referred to that way though, is it not OK for me to say I find it dehumanising?

Where have you seen men being referred to as anything other than men? Is it men's health literature or in hospitals or on mens hygiene products?

Well according to that article so I guess we just take it with a pinch of salt :rolleyes: .

But "woman" & "female" cannot be erased of the English language and terminology , if they want to have inclusive terms then that's one thing but they shouldn't remove another .

Its on Every News Headlines
Forget the DM

Well thats always been it for me on this topic. I see no issue, at all (and its maybe even preferable tbh) in midwives or whoever using 'inclusive'/nonsexbased terms for those who do not identify with their sex. Make the patient as comfy as possible right? Affects noone else really if for their appointments, they are called chest feeders, or anything like that. And could help the patient, a lot.

However I do NOT find it inclusive at all, to wholesale remove usual language.

Like, even the likes of this ridiculous 'menstruators' thing (possibly the most well known instance of this?). Menstruators, and 'people who menstruate' are bloody awful terms for so so many. I have never, since the start of this, understood why the answer was not...'women, transmen and non binary people'?! Seems the bloody obvious answer? But no. Not acceptable.

Why isn't acceptable to add rather than remove is the question?

Exactly. If people don't wish to be named women, fine. Add them. Do not ****ing remove women. And then, replace women with 'person who bleeds' or other such nonsense. Jesus.

The story has also been covered by the Mirror and Metro, for those who find the Daily Mail too scary :laugh:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...terms-23473645
https://metro.co.uk/2021/02/10/brigh...sive-14055419/

That term would be too long to say , why not just say 'women and people'

I heard about the 'menstruator' one, but I didn't think many used that term as people are still openly saying 'woman and period' in the same sentence. The ads on TV still say female and women when talking about periods.

Even ' tenor ladies ' still say women , I just can't imagine them changing that all .

Or even better ... Women.

If you're giving birth and/or breastfeeding, you're a woman. That's nature. I don't see why women can't be referred to as women because a handful of women identifying as men, and still having unprotected sex, might be offended.

Right got you Vicky, its not something I thought about in terms of very young people so yes of course they wont immediately be on hormones, so that make sense