I don't want to be identified by what body parts I have or don't have.

[Haveadream]

198. This Thread is Rife with Misunderstanding

There has been a rallying cry to :

And an insistence there be ONLY one, single, solitary catchall phrase to refer to anyone who becomes pregnant. For God sakes, WHY? Who decided it was essential that an umbrella term was the only way to be inclusive? I disagree with that premise on its face. The demand for only one nomenclature actually guarantees exclusion of those who have preferences of different self-descriptors when experiencing an issue (pregnancy) with this much complexity. I would further posit that to demand a catchall term for medical contexts would almost certainly prevent the appropriate pregnancy healthcare recommendations for those facing such a nuanced situation.

1) Women who can or become pregnant is non-exclusionary for women who identify as such.

2) People who can or become pregnant is non-exclusionary for people who identify as such.

3) Transmen who can or become pregnant is non-exclusionary for transmen who identify as such.

There may be other descriptors I have omitted; apologies to those identifying otherwise in the context of pregnancy.

There also seems to be a not-subtle-at-all insinuation that those who identify as women and wish to be referred to as that in all contexts, including pregnancy, are somehow confused, possibly transphobic or misunderstanding the point if they don't want to be defined as "people" or by body part.

How condescending.

Reminds me of being told as a child that "mankind" meant women, even when men were described and depicted.

Gaslighting abounds.