what truly baffles me is that trans/nb “inclusive” language is not actually inclusive at all. people all over the world would recognize my body as female despite me having had a hysterectomy and no longer having a uterus because sexual dimorphism is coherent enough that we all know damn well what “female” means to most people, even if you think it’s a transphobic definition.
you know what kind of language DOESN’T include me? “people who menstruate” or “people with a uterus.”
y'all claim that “terfs” are the ones who don’t account for infertile women, for women who’ve had hysterectomies, for premenstrual girls, for menopausal women, for intersex women. y'all say “terfs” reduce people to their genitals. but the reality is that isolating bodily functions and organs as defining characteristics of a cohesive group of people: 1) actually results in exclusion, 2) actually reduces people to their genitals, and 3) obscures misogyny by pretending issues affecting the female body “affect people of all genders.”
I’m not telling you to change your pronouns or the way you conceive your individual body. I’m telling you to look at the larger picture and realize that misogyny is a societal problem and that it has targeted the female body, and oppression will not come to an end if we cannot name it.
bringing this back because I’ve been thinking about how it’s particularly tone-deaf and cruel to discuss the needs of female bodies using this kind of language.
let’s go through some examples of females who may not menstruate/have a uterus/have ovaries/etc:
- a premenstrual girl. not included in “people with periods.” may not currently need, say, access to bathrooms that have sanitary pads. most absolutely needs comprehensive education on her body and how menstruation works for when the time comes.
- a woman with PCOS who’s stopped menstruating. not included in “people with periods.” still in absolute need of research on her female-specific condition because doctors still don’t know what exactly causes it or how to effectively treat it.
- a woman who had an oophorectomy because she had ovarian cancer. not included in “people with ovaries” or “people who produce more estrogen than testosterone.” would maybe still have her ovaries if her male doctor had believed her when she first started to feel pain and her cancer had been treated early on. still has the same hormonal needs as other females and needs to be on HRT.
- a woman who became infertile after having a clandestine abortion. not included in “people who can get pregnant.” would have possibly not become pregnant if she’d had access to education and contraceptives and if we didn’t live in a world where men raping women was commonplace. could have had a safe abortion if women were granted full autonomy over their bodies.
- a girl who was the victim of fgm. not included in “people with a clitoris.” would not have been the victim of fgm if men did not specifically seek to control and punish female bodies.
should I go on?



















