So? 0.1% of Americans still equals hundreds of thousands of people. It comes down to a choice between using certain language in a legal or medical context in order to include and protect the rights of a vulnerable group...or making another group of people feel icky because of a word they don't like.
Oh stop. For example, the rare trans-man who still has a uterus KNOWS he's a rare case, and normal language does not account for every single instance. And he can handle any convo with the few people who actually need to know his intentions and condition.
Again, by your own estimate it accounts for hundreds of thousands of people, so there's no need to frame it as "the rare trans man," let alone act like you conveniently know how this singular person feels about the issue.
Also nonbinary people. Do we need to go back to calling it a “womb” as well or did “normal people” somehow learn to update their vocabulary when we learned more about how things work.
"Womb" is still used for "uterus" just as "baby" is used for "infant". Where's the memo that we're to avoid "womb" good grief
“People that think trans folk deserve basic human dignity” encompasses so many more people than “trans people with a uterus they might use”. The right (conserva Dems included) forget this.
I'm sure the trans men really appreciate you speaking over them on their behalf
And you? Speaking for them are you?
I very specifically did not do that thing, as you may notice, if you read my post again more carefully
I mean I know at least a dozen in real life, am close friends with four, and every single one can speak for himself
One doesn't have to be a member of a group to speak about a group. If you think there is a reason what I said was *wrong* then you're free to say so and say why.
"It's okay they wouldn't mind" is speaking for, not about There are plenty of trans guys on this very app you can talk to if you want. I shan't ping them (it's rude) but we can see what they have to say
In a legal or medical context anything can be spelled out - there are VASTLY more unique and unusual circumstances than the few that are singled out for linguistic protection - and that is exactly what tells the world that there are favored groups in the eyes of the left.
Language about trans people needs to be specific because their legal rights and medical autonomy are constantly being undermined. If there is another vulnerable group who is being targeted for discrimination or whose needs are being ignored, I am more than happy to include them.
That's an interesting angle. What groups do you think are being left out?
I'm referring to the whole of human and individual experience and how that's unique to every individual. But see you're already trying to see if some underpriviliged group might be left out ...
What's wrong with wanting to not leave people out? Caring for others is not a bad thing. I don't see how it could possibly offend someone.
🎯🎯