Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Only Females Menstruate
Am I missing something here?
https:/
"The row erupted when Dr Poen responded to a tweet by a Twitter user called 'Lilo the Autistic Queer' which read: 'Not everyone who menstruates is female. Not everyone who is female menstruates. Let's shift our language.'"
I hate to break it to 'Lilo the Autistic Queer', but the ONLY people who menstruate are women.
On a scale on 1 to 10, with 10 being you're a total ***, how much of a *** is 'Lilo the Autistic Queer'?
https:/
"The row erupted when Dr Poen responded to a tweet by a Twitter user called 'Lilo the Autistic Queer' which read: 'Not everyone who menstruates is female. Not everyone who is female menstruates. Let's shift our language.'"
I hate to break it to 'Lilo the Autistic Queer', but the ONLY people who menstruate are women.
On a scale on 1 to 10, with 10 being you're a total ***, how much of a *** is 'Lilo the Autistic Queer'?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Deskdiary. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
What certainly matters is that everybody ought to agree on what they mean by given words. These arguments come about because there's no such common ground, nor even an attempt to find it.
But I have to say it seriously doesn't help when the people who are starting the discussion do so in such stark terms that are deliberately designed to be provocative and to encourage such reactions. Whether or not "Not everybody who menstruates is female" can ever make sense, Lilo must have known that most people reading it would see it as stupid, and react accordingly. What purpose is served by that?
But I have to say it seriously doesn't help when the people who are starting the discussion do so in such stark terms that are deliberately designed to be provocative and to encourage such reactions. Whether or not "Not everybody who menstruates is female" can ever make sense, Lilo must have known that most people reading it would see it as stupid, and react accordingly. What purpose is served by that?
We have always known what "male" and "female" has meant, since humans have existed. Otherwise, heterosexual men would have constantly found themselves going om accidental gay dates...
The problem is not the words... but the attempts to redefine them, by a small minority, so that not only do they not mean anything to anyone, but that it also puts at risk, safety, privacy, sports, etc.
The problem is not the words... but the attempts to redefine them, by a small minority, so that not only do they not mean anything to anyone, but that it also puts at risk, safety, privacy, sports, etc.
//What people mean by given words is irrelevant. Hes are hes and she’s are shes.//
Bullocks. The intent of the speaker is uncountably the most important thing. It's the difference between deliberately insulting people and possibly upsetting a snowflake of two.
The first is the work of an ***. The second can be solved with an explanation or apology.
Bullocks. The intent of the speaker is uncountably the most important thing. It's the difference between deliberately insulting people and possibly upsetting a snowflake of two.
The first is the work of an ***. The second can be solved with an explanation or apology.
Not really, mozz...the truth is the truth. It is nothing to do with "snowflakes" either. Some people genuinely have problems.
However, not a single person on this thread, has tried to claim that men menstruate... because we all know they don't.
It also shows that no matter how you want to identify... neither your brain or body believe it.
However, not a single person on this thread, has tried to claim that men menstruate... because we all know they don't.
It also shows that no matter how you want to identify... neither your brain or body believe it.
//It also shows that no matter how you want to identify... neither your brain or body believe it.//
Nor am I arguing that point. What I am saying is that sometimes people don't intend to be insulting, like Dr Poen is being accused of.
If someone stands up and deliberately says something abusive, hold them accountable, but some activist calling out someone in circumstances just like this is ridiculous, and highly counter productive for their cause
Nor am I arguing that point. What I am saying is that sometimes people don't intend to be insulting, like Dr Poen is being accused of.
If someone stands up and deliberately says something abusive, hold them accountable, but some activist calling out someone in circumstances just like this is ridiculous, and highly counter productive for their cause
Words mean what they do because there's a general consensus, rather than an absolute rule that is fixed for all time. The corollary is that people can use the same word to mean different things on occasion. For example, I can't take the claim that "not everyone who menstruates is female" seriously (beyond possibly certain rare genetic anomalies), because I have always understood female to be a description of sex and biology, and I suspect that everybody else on AB does too. But it's clear that Lilo is using it to mean something different, ie "female" is about gender rather than biology. Or, at least, I *hope* that's what they mean. For my part I can't agree with that definition, but it remains good practice to ensure you've properly understood what someone is saying before telling them they're speaking tripe.
On the other hand, I can't see the need to get so protective about pronouns. It's been flexible in English historically anyway: "If the salt hath lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted?", and "aye, she's a fine ship" make it pretty clear that we are happy either to ascribe masculine/feminine qualities to inanimate objects, or that "he/his" etc was sometimes a catch-all before we introduced "its". In that case, there's simply no sense in getting so het up when a transperson calls themselves "he" when they were born female, or vice versa, because pronouns have never been so dogmatic.
On the other hand, I can't see the need to get so protective about pronouns. It's been flexible in English historically anyway: "If the salt hath lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted?", and "aye, she's a fine ship" make it pretty clear that we are happy either to ascribe masculine/feminine qualities to inanimate objects, or that "he/his" etc was sometimes a catch-all before we introduced "its". In that case, there's simply no sense in getting so het up when a transperson calls themselves "he" when they were born female, or vice versa, because pronouns have never been so dogmatic.
I'm doing no such thing, Pixie, and I'm disappointed that that's your only response. I'm stating my position as I regard it honestly, and trying to represent Lilo's views as I understand them. Maybe I got the second part wrong, but the first part is entirely consistent with what I've always argued and what I thought we'd more or less reached agreement on before.
Sadly, it seems not, Jim. I have never ever agreed that lying is better for anybody. Particularly for women (obviously) or for transgender/sexual people themselves. There is never an excuse to pretend to be something different. And again... nobody cares whether someone sees themselves to be more masculine or feminine... everything that is segregated, has to be for particular reasons. And every time, they are separated by sex, not gender.
As you know... nobody can change that, so why pretend they can? Why not just a bit more tolerance to allow people to just be how they are?
As you know... nobody can change that, so why pretend they can? Why not just a bit more tolerance to allow people to just be how they are?
// There is never an excuse to pretend to be something different. Why not just a bit more tolerance to allow people to just be how they are? //
On that I agree, but -- and again, is this not going back to the point I was making? -- I don't see that calling a trans woman "she" is pretending anything. I certainly wasn't clutching at straws to point out that throughout the history of English, and indeed any other language, only more so, the gender of pronouns is only loosely linked to biology.
Besides, if you're talking about a transperson in the third person, what, pray, are you going to call them? Which is the more natural option? In other societies maybe we'd have introduced a third pronoun, but as it is the usual options are "he/they" for a trans man and "she/they" for a trans woman. Plus if they changed their name, it would seem clunky indeed to talk about "Oh I hope you've met Charlotte, he's a barrel of laughs!"
On that I agree, but -- and again, is this not going back to the point I was making? -- I don't see that calling a trans woman "she" is pretending anything. I certainly wasn't clutching at straws to point out that throughout the history of English, and indeed any other language, only more so, the gender of pronouns is only loosely linked to biology.
Besides, if you're talking about a transperson in the third person, what, pray, are you going to call them? Which is the more natural option? In other societies maybe we'd have introduced a third pronoun, but as it is the usual options are "he/they" for a trans man and "she/they" for a trans woman. Plus if they changed their name, it would seem clunky indeed to talk about "Oh I hope you've met Charlotte, he's a barrel of laughs!"
The sex pronouns have always been linked to biology. This isn't just about convenience for males... before you know it, they will start wanting to compete against women too ! (Ok, right...).
It is pretence to call a man "she" and vice versa... neither is there any need to.
No man or woman is able to "identify" as the opposite sex, no matter what. The only reason I have found out that I "identify as a woman", is because I am one. So, I literally have no choice.
Can you tell me what a transgender male has in common with women, that he doesn't also have in common with other men? It makes no sense.
The life expectancy for anyone transgender, is just 27-31 years old. In what way do you think this method is actually working? For anyone?
It is pretence to call a man "she" and vice versa... neither is there any need to.
No man or woman is able to "identify" as the opposite sex, no matter what. The only reason I have found out that I "identify as a woman", is because I am one. So, I literally have no choice.
Can you tell me what a transgender male has in common with women, that he doesn't also have in common with other men? It makes no sense.
The life expectancy for anyone transgender, is just 27-31 years old. In what way do you think this method is actually working? For anyone?
Latest Posts
Chicken Drumstick, Pork Pie, Glass Of...
News3 mins ago
News8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
News12 mins ago
Tory Donor Lord Bamford Funds The Reform...
News23 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.