I’d be wary about labelling people bigots solely because they say “women” instead of “people” in abortion debates. Fact remains that anti-choice activism is rooted in misogyny. By leaping at people’s throats because of a word and an issue they might never have even thought about does nothing to advance our cause. On the contrary, “men can get pregnant, too” IS TRUE, but it being used as an argument for pro-choice has, to me, a whiff of reinforcing patriarchy (“Look, nevermind about women, but what about the MEN?!”).
The primary targets of anti-choicers are cis women, full stop. I use inclusive language as much as I can, but trans* rights are not the main point of the abortion debate.
Fuckyeahchoice (answer): No. Please. Stop.
First and foremost, if someone is new to this debate or this topic or this scene or whatever you want to call it, I’m not going to jump down their throat. I will explain the topic as I have multiple times in the best way that I can and hope they’re not too much of an asshole to not be able to say ‘people’.
Second, it is not a ‘what about the men’. That makes me think you don’t fully understand this issue at all. It’s not just women and men who can get pregnant. It’s also intersex people. Non-binaries and a plethora of other identities as well that you’re ‘trying to use inclusive language for’. Poor you.
You don’t think bigotry against trans* individual has a taste of misogyny? And they’re targeting cis women because they are ALSO excluding trans* people in their debates but their shitty laws are FULLY affecting them, just as they affect cis women.
This isn’t a matter of ‘trans* rights trumps abortion rights’, it’s a matter of being a decent fucking human being. It’s treating people as they should be treated within a discussion that is just as much theirs. Why battle for the rights of some? Why should only one group of people be recognized? Is it really a victory if it is at the cost of our allies?
Basically, in summary, if you can’t be bothered to say ‘people’ instead of ‘women’ or recognize that this is not a cis woman issue then I highly doubt you could be contributing anything useful to the abortion debate.
“By leaping at people’s throats because of a word…”
It’s not just a word, it’s the violent erasure that occurs when they insist on using women, despite knowing that excluding us leads to discrimination towards and deaths of trans* people.
And as FYChoice alluded to, inclusivity is not “men vs women”, it’s “trans* people vs cis people”. The power dynamics are totally reversed, and I have no respect for people that disingenuously cry that this is a “what about the men?!” argument when we’re asking for inclusivity.
“Basically, in summary, if you can’t be bothered to say ‘people’ instead of ‘women’ or recognize that this is not a cis woman issue then I highly doubt you could be contributing anything useful to the abortion debate.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself. This is how to be an ally.
You say, “it’s the violent erasure that occurs when they insist on using women, despite knowing that excluding us leads to discrimination towards and deaths of trans* people.”
That is a wild exaggeration. Words are not violent. Your hyperbole is harmful to respectful debate— furthermore, you set your position up as a strawman for those who disagree with you to easily knock down.
Radical feminists and trans-critical individuals do not wish harm to trans people— really. We really don’t. We instead wish to stand up for females and against gender stereotypes.
Unwanted pregnancy is a uniquely female issue. Neither access to SRS nor a SRS requirement for legal recognition are equivalent to that issue. It is not helpful to conflate the issues— it is confusing and does not help your cause.
Please stand up for female access to contraception/abortion. Be an ally- not all the issues are about you.
Words absolutely can be violent (so can erasure) it’s astonishing you’re ignorant of that fact. And, no, it’s not hyperbole when feminist/prochoice rhetoric that excludes trans* people leads to medical discrimination and [TW] people self aborting with paint thinner post-Roe. This isn’t a debate, it’s my life and health. I don’t debate my rights, especially not with bigots.
Radscum don’t wish [TW] harm to trans* people? Really? Could have fooled me.
Who said a single word about SRS other than you? Both are issues of bodily integrity which is what the core of reproductive rights, including abortion, is about, but that’s not what this post was about. It’s about trans* people affected by antichoice legislation being included in discussions about our rights and our bodies. Not a hard concept, so who’s making straw men now?
And unwanted pregnancy is not an issue just for cis women or “females.” You think abortion restrictions make it hard for you, a cis woman, to obtain safe, legal care? Try being a trans* person whose pregnancy would out them and potentially make them vulnerable to being murdered. Or being a trans* person who is triggered by how medical pamphlets and doctors frame the issue—that can make accessing care near to impossible (like in the story I linked). Or how about the common intersections of being trans*, a person of color, in poverty, and without insurance, a job, or a home? Unwanted pregnancy and antichoice legislation affects us all (some more than others, some differently than others) and refusing to acknowledge that fact is an act of violence.
“Please stand up for female access to contraception/abortion. Be an ally- not all the issues are about you.”
This last part is truly adorable. Allies are outsiders who are not directly (or at all) affected by an issue who are in solidarity with those they have privilege over on a particular axis. Do tell how or why I should be an “ally” to access to contraception or abortion when it directly affects me? As in, I USE it and I NEED it just the same as you. I don’t need to be an “ally” to you or your scummy friends on an issue that’s about me. Contrary to your cissexist beliefs abortion is about me. Contraception is about me. Reproductive rights are about me. Antichoice legislation is my business. Refusing to include me and other trans* people in this discussion isn’t just cissexist, it has devastating consequences. Of course, we’ve already established people like you don’t care.
This is my movement and I don’t find silencing tactics all that radical, in fact they’re downright patriarchal.
All of that lovely commentary, minus the foolishness from smashesthep.
I still boggle at the idea that people can think that being “trans-critical” doesn’t make them flaming bigots. “I’m not against you, I’m just critical of you and your life and existence.” Yeahhhh.
Fuck yeah commentary.
Some people can’t see their privilege at all.