Benny Bunter
Well-known member
I'm pointing out a double standard and that the supposedly inclusive fashionable language of the day is anything but
double standard, OK - sexism exists, no one has said otherwiseI'm pointing out a double standard and that the supposedly inclusive fashionable language of the day is anything but
there's a valid concernWomen with learning disabilities, women with English as a second language, women from poor backgrounds with limited education are actually excluded by a term like 'individuals with a cervix'
perhaps "cisgendered women and other individuals with a cervix"
that's because it's bullshitI cannot imagine finding being termed a cis-man rather than a man being offensive at all, I'm going to need this one explained to me
“Individuals with a prostrate” is fine and would be more inclusive for transwomen.
Perhaps the reason why this hasn’t been seen so much is that in the UK at least smear tests are massively more common than tests for prostrate cancer.
I am not sure what the deal is in the US but in Austria there are mandatory tests for prostrate cancer over the age of 50.
When I asked my Doctor about this they said it wasn’t something we did here because of the high level of false positives.
of course this isn’t the case for smear tests which are recommended regularly for people with a cervix.
Dissensus should be fine then.Serious debate is all but silenced