New Trans Families →

transreprojustice:

About:

It’s tough being the only woman in the deposit line at the sperm bank. What’s worse is feeling like you’re the only person in the world who’s been there.

New Trans Families is a site for transgender/transsexual people and their partners to share helpful information and advice about starting families and raising kids.

We made this site because couldn’t find any good information on these topics for trans people and our partners. A lot of LGBT resources are written by and for non-trans people, and don’t include anything about the particular issues trans people face or the questions we have.

How do you explain the “facts of life” to your child in age-appropriate ways? How do you raise a kid to be proud of her family, and still have her understand why it’s not a good idea to “out” her trans mom to her whole first-grade class? How do you deal when that happens anyway? Many two-mom families find ways not to answer the awful “whose baby is it?” question, but what do you say to lesbian friends who are trying to conceive and want to talk shop, but don’t know about your history?

So many questions! This site is for helping each other figure out the answers, and for sharing trans-specific information on:

• Banking genetic material
• Fertility and conception
• Pregnancy and birth
• Adoption
• Surrogacy
• Babies!!!
• Raising kids
• Explaining trans stuff to your child
• Dealing with teachers and school
• Legal issues
• And a whole lot of stuff we haven’t even realized we have to figure out yet.

xox,

Sarah & Amy

Write for New Trans Families:

We’re looking for:

• Personal experience stories that focus on how you solved a problem or made an important decision.
• Reviews of queer pregnancy, parenting, and children’s books that are especially good or bad on trans issues.
• First-hand recommendations and tips on how to find trans-sensitive doctors, midwives, doulas, cryobanks, endocrinologists, and other service providers.
• “What to expect” stories and tips for getting through uncomfortable situations, to help others be more prepared and less afraid than we were.
• Videos of babies and kitties playing or snuggling together (we may not post it, but we will love it).
• Suggestions for new categories not listed above.

To submit something, just email write@newtransfamilies.com. It’s fine if you don’t want to use your real name. If you’re not sure if something would work on the site, just ask. If you have a lot of things you want to share and need help breaking them down into useful posts, we can help with that too.

(via outlawmidwives)

fuck cis feminism.

inflateablefilth:

I haven’t seen a single trans person deny that anti-abortion laws are often rooted in misogyny. I really haven’t. We’re genuinely not asking you to ignore this. However, when you’re talking about these things, when you say things like ‘this harms women’ or ‘this is bad for women’ or post anything with a picture of a uterus or a vuvla cupcake or whatever and talk about women women women, you’re being a cissexist asshole. You’re telling me that either I’m a woman because of my uterus or I’m just not important. You’re telling my DMAB trans siblings that they aren’t women because they don’t have these parts. You’re telling me my personal experiences with abortion that had a strong relation to my transness aren’t important, that the work I’ve done for the pro-choice movement is meaningless. Above all, you’re telling me that because the lifers see me as a woman because of my genitals, you will too.

Because I’ve seen that excuse. And do you know how much that fucking hurts? Do you know how much it hurts to know that the assholes trying to take away the little control you’re allowed over your body misgender you, but those trying to stop that do the same thing? And excuse me while I ignore the cis women’s tears here but when you talk about reproductive rights you talk about abortions. Maybe even IVF for cis women. You talk about how important it is that women have abortion rights and if men could get pregnant this wouldn’t be an issue and all the rest of it and you never mention that men DO get pregnant, you never mention that a lot of countries demand we are sterilized before we are legally recognized as our gender.

What about our fucking rights, eh? What about my reproductive rights? What about my right to bodily autonomy, my right to have hormones and surgery without some cis gatekeeper telling me I’m just not trans enough because I still wear skirts? What about our rights to be recognized as our ACTUAL FUCKING GENDERS without being lumped under ‘women’ because you people find it too hard to include us at all. Actually, I don’t think you even find it hard. I think cis feminists seem to find it harrowing and painful to even consider including us.

You talk about how women are marginalized because vaginas are seen as bad things and you never mention how your own communities marginalize women without vaginas. You worship at the altar of the vulva and talk about how important periods are to shared womanhood or whatever else and leave trans women at the sidelines, while telling DFAB trans folk that they’re only trans because the patriarchy made them hate their ‘womanhood’. 

You lionize the vilest anti-trans second-wavers, you stick up for Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival, you talk about lesbian sex like it can only ever include vaginas, you tell me I should feel shared womanhood with you because I was born with a set of organs I didn’t even want…

No, fuck you, cis feminism. Fuck you. You are a movement of primarily cissexist assholes. I am unfollowing more and more of you every day because of how many of you I see sticking up for cissexism or talking about how mean us trans folk are for daring to ask for more inclusive language. I see you crying cis tears at ‘die cis scum’, I see you bullying my trans siblings out of activism, I see you sticking up for well-known cissexists every day and I want nothing more to do with any of you.

(Source: campdracula5eva)

Reproductive issues does not only include abortion.

clatterandclank:

something that is seriously frustrating me right now is that the way abortion is constructed is that it is the total be-all end-all of reproductive issues. The mainstream rhetoric about this basically looks like this:

when actually it looks like this:

There are so many other issues involved in reproductive rights. Things like the ability of trans* parents, queer parents, parents of color, and poor parents to keep their children. Things like access to good and respectful birthing centers. Things like the sheer cost of birth and how that affects those who don’t have insurance. Things like that all of this incredibly complicated for undocumented immigrants.

Things like the utter lack of support for people (especially people of color, who are overly sexualized anyway) to breastfeed at the same time that breastfeeding is pushed down our throats as the only thing we could ever do if we love our kids. This results in a lot of people trying to breastfeed exclusively and doing it solely from the home, which - news alert!- reproduces the whole work/domestic gender dichotomy. 

Things like the utter inaccessibility of child care for anyone who is not super rich, but how the rest of us poor folks actually really need it because we are the ones working all the damn time. And you know, I think you can make links here to the disgusting disparities in public education, as well.

Things like the fact that people of color have been historically and systematically forcibly sterilized on the one hand, and on the other are vilified for ‘having too many kids’. That is eugenics, people. 

Constructing reproductive rights only as who has access to abortions - who is choosing not to be a parent - excludes so many of these issues. It also ties the whole notion of reproduction to biological abilities, which leads to oodles of cissexism. 

I am not saying abortion and birth control aren’t important - they are. they are incredibly important, and those battles definitely need to be fought, and waged, and won. But reproductive rights also includes the right to reproduce and parent, as well, and those are battles being fought and waged and lost by queer people, people of color, and poor people. I want to see that included in mainstream feminist dialogue along with abortion. 

(I totally made those graphics myself because I love diagrams)

(via brashblacknonbeliever)

Comprehensive Sex Education Bill Introduced in the House and Senate

safersexuality:

On November 1st, a comprehensive sex education bill - The Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2011 (HR 3324) - was introduced to Congress. With this bill, youth would not only have access to information though evidence-based effective programs on relationship skills and healthy decision-making, knowledge of how to prevent unwanted pregnancy and STIs, information on gender, gender identity and equality, protection from sexual assault, bullying, dating violence, harassment, and promotion of self-esteem; BUT ALSO would disallow the government from spending federal money on programs that withhold information on HIV, are medically inaccurate or scientifically ineffective, promote gender stereotypes, are insensitive and unresponsive to the needs of sexually active adolescents, are insensitive and unresponsive to the needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender youth, or are inconsistent with the ethical imperatives of medicine and public health.

We need to make sure this bill gets passed! According to the ACLU, Congress has spent a half a billion dollars on Abstinence-only education since 1997 (programs that promote abstinence emphasize abstinence but also teach about contraception and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases are not eligible for this money). Abstinence-only approached are problematic not only from the public health perspective, but they also perpetuate shame and discrimination. Contact your Reps and tell them you support HR 3324 and so should they!

Full text of HR 3324 available here!

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

unknowablewoman:

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

[NB: more than just people who identify as “women” need or want access to birth control, abortion care, and prenatal care.]

^ True, but that’s no reason to obscure the violent misogyny at the root of Amendment 26. It’s okay to center women when discussing abortion. Really. Especially when, as in this context, their lives are being erased.

Who is obscuring? And how? There are more than just women who will be affected by this amendment if it passes. That’s guaranteed.

And women ARE centered when discussing abortion, hence the tweet and, you know, 99.9% of the discussion about it.

I would never and have never denied the misogyny that is at the heart of this struggle. But let’s be honest - if any group is constantly and consistently obscured in the discussion of reproductive rights (on both the anti- and pro-choice sides), it is people who need access to reproductive health care but don’t fit nicely into a binary gender/sex system.

(Source: keepyourbsoutofmyuterus, via keepyourbsoutofmyuterus)

Choice!

I just reblogged a list on someone’s personal pro-choice philosophy, which has already garnered a number of positive responses.

Nessfraserloves correctly pointed out that not all of the items on the list were choices - I assume the points addressing sexuality and gender identity. However, there are some things to consider about the other choices on the list.

We know choice doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Socioeconomic status, relationship status, religion, race, gender identity, sexuality, ability and past experiences all play a part in our reproductive futures, and to say that, for example, a home birth with a full birthing team is just as viable a choice for one person as it is another would be to ignore these factors.

Being pro-choice means supporting and fighting for access to affordable reproductive care for everybody. Too often the pro-choice movement has left behind those who are not white, well-off, able-bodied, and straight. We let injustices occur under our noses - the sterilization of people of color, the refusal to treat people who do not fit neatly into the gender binary, and those who are virtually forced to give up their babies for adoption because they cannot afford to care for them, much as they may want to.

Being pro-choice also means working to improve the conditions that play a role in our reproductive futures - affordable education, support for parents and children of all incomes, sexualities, gender identities, and abilities, safe places for abuse survivors, education on sex, sexuality and birth control, affordable housing, affordable health care, a better foster care system, and the destigmatization of reproductive experiences like abortion, adoption, infertility, surrogacy, and voluntary sterilization.

How do you support choice?

Getting Some Nuance Up In Your Reproductive Rights

prolongedeyecontact:

Reproductive rights is a dominant social issue in the United States right now. No wonder, with an ongoing onslaught against it from almost all political quarters, between the GOP’s straight up attempts to make it impossible to access any kind of reproductive health services to pro-life Democrats. Yet, the discussion of reproductive rights seen in most dominant spaces focuses on a very narrow framework and world view, and is less about full access to reproductive rights and justice than it is about a very specific issue: abortion.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I am a huge fan of abortion access, I think it should be safe, legal, and readily accessible for everybody. But abortion is not the only issue at stake here, and it is critical to be talking about reproductive rights as a whole framework, not a single issue.

Three key things to take away: Reproductive rights is not just about women. Reproductive rights is not just about abortion. Reproductive rights has tremendous intersections with race, class, sexuality, and disability.

Read More

If you aren’t following prolongedeyecontact by now, you should be. Their blog is full of awesome essays and information on reproductive rights, feminism, and rape culture.

Dooo iiiiit.

Prochoice on Tumblr and Twitter

prolongedeyecontact:

Amazing prochoice people to follow on Twitter: Auragasmic, Clinic Escort, Abortion Funds, I Am Dr. Tiller, Georgia Lewis, Trust Women, Period Piece, Realtin Connor, PPact, Ms_UK_American, Lizzy_Massacre, Psychomia, Jingurei, Happy_Sai, Lady Atheist, ProLifeLove, Mjbyars, Sapient Ape, Canned Sexy, Raindncemaggie, Katsworld500, Heathen Chick, Magnetist, Which Crafty, GOP Choice, STLhousewife, MSizer, letat_lechat, Catholics For Choice, SineQuaN0nUSA, evrybdeezgt1, Gloria Feldt, Kushiels Moon

Amazing prochoice people to follow on Tumblr: Bebinn, Propaganda For Life, Rabble, Fuck Yeah Choice, STFU Anti-Choicers, Keep Your Boehner Out of My Uterus, She Had An Abortion, Prolife Hypocrisy, The Oppressed Little Fetus, Lady Atheist, STFU Pro-Life, I Am Dr. Tiller, STFU Hypocrisy

*Not focused on prochoice, but still awesome and informative: My Culture is Not a Trend, Hipster Appropriations, Redlight Politics, Genderqueer ID, Marxist Feminism, Non-Binary Conversations, Ask A Non-Binary, Equality Myth, Carefree White Girl, Microaggressions, Fuck Yeah Feminists, STFU Fauxminists

[TW: sexism apologia type stuff]I swear to fucking god

cinnamonwheel:

bebinn:

cinnamonwheel:

i-sauntered-vaguely-downwards:

unknowablewoman:

There is a specificity to phrases like “let women die” or “trust women” that is functionally weakened when the language is changed.

No, when the language is changed they become more inclusive and don’t erase a shit ton of people.

How the hell can you deny that “let women die” has specificity that is functionally weakened. “Let women die” reflects that the GOP specifically WANT to LET WOMEN DIE. They are motivated by MISOGYNY and they are trying to target WOMEN.

“Let people die”, as spiralofbees said, implies that no one is being particularly targeted. It glosses over what is so fucking disgusting about the bill.

(Edit: I do agree that “irrelevant linguistic nitpicking” was a shitty thing to say, in this case.)

So call it the “Let Pregnant People Die” bill. Dang, guys, I already said this, and addressed how using inclusive language weakens the anti-choice arguments that use gender essentialism and misogyny to deny people the right to their bodies.

WAT MORE DO YOU WANT

No.

I want trans* people to acknowledge that WOMEN ARE BEING TARGETED. There is a fucking LEGISLATED HATE CRIME aimed at WOMEN and I refuse to demand women do what they’re always expected to do and prioritise everyone else’s concerns over their own. That’s what I fucking want.

Asking marginalized people to acknowledge that cis-women are being targeted is such a laugh. That’s all anyone ever does.

You are prioritizing intent over effect, and that’s where we disagree. I’m addressing the rampant cissexism in the pro-choice movement. Inclusivity means everyone. Nobody is being prioritized by acknowledging that this bill puts anyone who can get pregnant in danger.

If you want to talk about misogyny in the anti-choice movement, be my guest. Join the crowd. When you’re ready to provide a space for everyone affected by this bill, let us know.

Shitty arguments against inclusive language that will never, ever be acceptable

fromonesurvivortoanother:

In response to this ridiculous post which attempts to justify transphobia and queerphobia in the pro-choice movement.

• It’s always been that way, so we should keep it like that. Insert thousands of silly things that human beings have done for centuries, and only recently changed (hetero-exclusive marriage, women in the kitchen, writing with quill pens, etc). With this argument, one must ask, “What kind of stake do I have in keeping this language the way it is? Why am I threatened by the possibility of it changing?”
• I’m not offended by it. Because obviously, your opinion takes precedence over everyone else’s. This kind of argument deflects attention away from self-analysis and any actual consideration of the political ramifications of the language.
• I know someone who is a member of that group, and they aren’t offended by it. Because one person = the grand ambassador for the entire group, right? This kind of threadbare argument is easily refuted by solid statistics (or many personal accounts) on how the marginalized group in question suffers from institutional and social oppression.
• Changing the language to be more inclusive would make it sound awkward! First of all, it’s only awkward because you’ve been trained to use noninclusive language for so long. Secondly, if you think that aesthetics matter more than the existence of real human beings, then you have bigger problems at hand. 
• Changing the language to be more inclusive would weaken the message! Because having more people interested would totally weaken your movement. This kind of argument is a very cowardly, passive way of saying, “I’m x-phobic, or many people in this movement are x-phobic and it would bother them”— or it buys into and reinforces the oppressor’s set of rules on who belongs and who doesn’t. 
• But the dictionary or science says that X people don’t belong in this group! Again, this argument buys into the master’s set of rules, while completely ignoring the actual social and cultural reality at hand. This also shows a deep misunderstanding of the way language changes and evolves over time.
• Including X group means that we have to make new accommodations for them, and we can’t afford the time, energy, or resources. This kind of argument-from-laziness-and-willful-ignorance always assumes that the poor, oppressed, “benevolent” dominant culture would have to take on the horrible burden of inclusiveness on their own, when in fact it would make more sense to go straight to the marginalized group and ask them how they want to be included. This also reeks of privilege— the point isn’t that marginalized groups want special treatment, it’s that they are different and therefore need accommodations and acknowledgement that should already be there by default.
• Edit: If the people in X group just wait long enough, we’ll get to them eventually. This has been used many, many times in history— for black women with the vote; black women with the Civil Rights Movement; Genderqueer, Trans people, and Lesbians in the 2nd wave, etc. Each time these groups were promised liberation if they would just wait, but predictably, once the other groups got what they needed, they never came back for those they left behind. If you think that this will work for the millionth time, guess again.

theowlintheolivetree-deactivate asked: Ignoring the fact that non-binary, trans* and gender queer individuals can get pregnant is erasing them and saying that only cis females have the problem with anti-choice legislation. All people who have the ability to become pregnant will die, not just cis women. This is why a lot of non-binary people are afraid to join these movements because we act as if they don't exist when it comes to real problems and they suffer just as much as anybody else. I'm frustrated but I figured you'd understand.

It’s really frustrating and disappointing to see people in your own movement engaging in that kind of stuff. Being cis myself, I will never truly understand what it’s like to have my gender identity belittled, invalidated, or put on the back burner in that way, but I hurt to see it happen to others. I’m really glad others responded to that post, because again, being cis, I’m not coming from a place of authority when I speak on certain marginalized groups, and the last thing I want to do is fuck up and create more oppression while I’m trying to fight the oppression within the fight against oppression aaahhhhhhhhhh-

I see feminists getting pissed off at people who don’t want to join their movement for reasons like these, unable to see past their own privilege, in whatever form it comes. You cannot understand what it is like not to feel safe within a movement that claims to protect you unless you have experienced it yourself.

OP got a message that said this: “We can absolutely acknowledge that legislation like this hurts all people, but we can do so while still allowing women to speak about this bullshit as WOMEN.” I feel like this is, in part, where the “mix-up” is coming from. Nobody is insisting that people who identify as women refrain from talking about their experiences as women, or about other women’s experiences. Those discussions have a place - this is not it. This bill would, as you said, allow hospitals to refuse to treat any dying pregnant patient. Gender-neutrality is especially important here because of how hard it is for some non-binary folks to get medical treatment - imagine what this bill would do to them, then.

These cis-women are so afraid of being erased, they don’t see that they are doing exactly the same thing to others.

I swear to fucking god

handingoutstars:

[TW for cissexism]

fromonesurvivortoanother:

unknowablewoman:

The tumblr social justice circle’s preoccupation with irrelevant linguistic nitpicking instead of fighting actual fucking oppressors is going to make me have a stroke someday.

No, I’m not going to call HR 358 the “Let People Die” bill. Deal with it. Not everything is about you. We are not the ones erasing you from the discussion about abortion rights. The abortion discussion will continue to be cissexist for good reason so long as the pro-life movement is OVERWHELMINGLY motivated by misogyny, fear/hatred of female sexuality, and the desire to control cis women through compulsory maternity.

These motivations are REALLY FUCKING SIGNIFICANT, people. They are the foundation of the anti-abortion philosophy. You are erasing an entire fucking history of fear and hatred of female sexuality when you insist that we make all pro-choice language gender neutral. Pro-lifers do not see women as people.

You want to challenge the language? Start with the goddamn source. Call John Boehner. We are fighting for our lives here and the last thing we need is to water down our rhetoric. There is a specificity to phrases like “let women die” or “trust women” that is functionally weakened when the language is changed.

Acknowledge that people other than women can get pregnant—that’s fine. I do that all the damn time. Use gender-neutral language where appropriate. But erasing one history in favor of another is not fucking cool.

This is exactly what 2nd wave Feminists and the Civil Rights Movement did— they excluded people on the grounds that to be inclusive would “weaken” the movement’s arguments. In actuality, this was used as an excuse for transphobia, homophobia, and misogyny. But I guess in this instance it’s totally okay to have a historical rerun, isn’t it?

I also think it’s funny how you magically expect transpeople and other non-cis individuals to somehow be included, despite advocating for their erasure. “It’s okay to mention them a little! But no, they shouldn’t be included in the primary message of the movement, despite being directly affected by it.” Guess what happened to all of the Women of Color, lesbians, and genderqueer people after the 2nd wavers said, “hold on and wait, we’ll get back to you”? Yeah— they didn’t get shit.

If you think it’s okay to pull this same kind of bullshit again, you better gtfo and stop calling yourself a Feminist.

edit: It’s also ironic how the same people who would argue against misogynist slurs and for female inclusiveness in writing are the same ones who turn right around when it comes to transpeople.

(edited to delete really harsh language I should leave in because FUCKFUCKFUCK)

If, I, a genderqueer person, got pregnant, and needed services, I would be affected in my situation. NOT A WOMAN, me. “Pro-lifers don’t see women as people”; well, feminists like you don’t see us as people. We are invisible everywhere. If I died from not being able to get the services I needed, it would not be a woman dying (though that’s what would be written); it would be me dying. I am not a woman. I can get pregnant; I can need services, and I can die from pregnancy complications when my needs aren’t met. YOU are erasing US. While the origin might come from a place of misogyny, and that needs to be recognized (since I am seen as a woman 100% of the time, I do get the receiving of it a lot), it affects a lot more people. I even understand the use of “women” in public forums (hell, I say it pretty regularly to clearly define that I’m talking about abortion with people who may not understand otherwise or understand how I feel about it — and it is okay for me to make those decisions because I am trans*), because no one understands us. But for feminists, for YOU, to do this on Tumblr, is really fucking upsetting.

Don’t just listen to cis people who agree with you. Listen to us.

(via handingoutstars-deactivated2011)

I swear to fucking god

unknowablewoman:

The tumblr social justice circle’s preoccupation with irrelevant linguistic nitpicking instead of fighting actual fucking oppressors is going to make me have a stroke someday.

No, I’m not going to call HR 358 the “Let People Die” bill. Deal with it. Not everything is about you. We are not the ones erasing you from the discussion about abortion rights. The abortion discussion will continue to be cissexist for good reason so long as the pro-life movement is OVERWHELMINGLY motivated by misogyny, fear/hatred of female sexuality, and the desire to control cis women through compulsory maternity.

These motivations are REALLY FUCKING SIGNIFICANT, people. They are the foundation of the anti-abortion philosophy. You are erasing an entire fucking history of fear and hatred of female sexuality when you insist that we make all pro-choice language gender neutral. Pro-lifers do not see women as people.

You want to challenge the language? Start with the goddamn source. Call John Boehner. We are fighting for our lives here and the last thing we need is to water down our rhetoric. There is a specificity to phrases like “let women die” or “trust women” that is functionally weakened when the language is changed.

Acknowledge that people other than women can get pregnant—that’s fine. I do that all the damn time. Use gender-neutral language where appropriate. But erasing one history in favor of another is not fucking cool.

Charming!

The entire anti-choice philosophy is rooted in the gender binary and gender essentialism. The movement as a whole, as well as many pro-choicers, believe that anyone born with a uterus is a woman, and that is part of the fucking problem. They depend on stereotypes borne of gender essentialism, and by continuing to humor their ideas about the gender binary, you further promote it. By destroying the concept of gender essentialism, you begin to tear down their position.

You wonder why so many trans, genderqueer, and non-binary folks don’t want to participate in this kind of stuff? This is why. There is no safe space for them. You’ve already got a comment on this post that exhibits exactly what I’m talking about: “Since when can men get pregnant, again??” You also seem to be assuming that I’m not cisgendered - surprise! I am. Makes it hard for this to be “all about [me]” then, doesn’t it?

I’m not just going to *acknowledge* that there are people who aren’t women who can get pregnant - that’s the same weak-ass response as “tolerance.” I’m not going to only include people sometimes - that’s bullshit. People are not objects to be brought in and out of the discussion when it’s convenient for you.

Gender-neutral language is appropriate in this case, because letting pregnant people die is exactly what the bill would do. You think people’s identities are irrelevant? Fuck intent - people who don’t fit into the gender binary have a hard enough time getting medical care as it is, and you’re throwing them under the bus by ignoring them when you talk about the bill.

And I absolutely love that you think we can only participate in one form of activism at a time, or that it’s possible for everyone to do more. Get a clue.

(via little-sword-deactivated2013040)

Stop Calling It the “Let Women Die” Act

proteanteen:

bebinn:

proteanteen:

bebinn:

Women are not the only ones who can get pregnant. Women are not the only ones who need abortions. Trans men, people who are genderqueer, and anyone who does not conform to the stereotypical gender binary are all affected by this bill. By only mentioning women, you are erasing and invalidating people’s identities.

This bill would allow hospitals to let people die.

So… we should start calling it the “Let-People-With-Ovaries-Die” Act?

How about just “people?” I mean, “pregnant people” would be cool, too, but there are so many factors in who would be affected by this that “people” makes the most sense. That’s who we all are, anyway.

Hmm… you know what this is? This isn’t a gender-binary issue. This is a linguistic issue. Same thing with the whole “womyn” and “herstory” thing. A culture’s ideas are confined by the limitations of the dominant language. Like love. The Greeks had seven(?) words for love. The Hebrews had five(?). We have one.

You make sense. “Women” aren’t the only people who get pregnant (I still think just saying “people” is also too broad). But, as sad as it is, you can’t expect people to change their minds about something when it’s linguistically challenging. Which is why for a while I’ve said that if anything, we need to create a new language that can handle all these new conventions. English has a shitload of cultural baggage.

Believe me, I get what you’re saying. I think we can expect a large number of people to get it, though - people who had just never thought about it because gender has never been an issue for them, but have no trouble understanding the concept of trans, queer, and non-binary identities. Until I started reading pro-choice Tumblrs, I had been aware of those identities but had never made the connection, because I’m cisgendered and hadn’t truly exposed myself and learned. Once I saw it? I changed my language. Granted, I still fuck up on occasion, but it was not a difficult switch overall.

I don’t know enough about education to say whether or not it’s effective to expose people to these ideas while discussing related events, like reproductive rights, but I’m not okay with letting this kind of stuff slide anymore - not for the majority of people. For a select group of people who simply cannot or will not get it at this moment, for now, I probably would use the term “women.” However, I haven’t ever encountered such a person, living in my little liberal oasis online and in person, so it hasn’t become an issue.

(via frustrated-teenage-anarchist-de)

Stop Calling It the “Let Women Die” Act

Women are not the only ones who can get pregnant. Women are not the only ones who need abortions. Trans men, people who are genderqueer, and anyone who does not conform to the stereotypical gender binary are all affected by this bill. By only mentioning women, you are erasing and invalidating people’s identities.

This bill would allow hospitals to let people die.