I'm not going to do the research, or present a word/article count. I'm just going to ask a question. It is a question akin to, "Do you smell something burning?"
Have you noticed the frequency with which articles and even bills being considered by state legislators no longer refer to "pregnant women" but, rather, talk about "pregnant persons?"
A bit of thinking and looking--I'll leave it up to you to do some investigation--will show the reason behind this language shift. In the new scheme of things, it is possible for a person who is a biological female, a woman (a human who from conception has the XX chromosome pairing, and who as a result typically has the ability to bear a child) to declare themself to be a male, a man (a human who from conception has the XY chromosome pairing, and who as a result typically has the ability to impregnate a woman) to become pregnant. I realize the previous sentence is complicated. I left it that way because the reasoning it is dealing with is complicated. Go back and parse it and think about it. Here is the simplified version.
In other words, if one accepts the doctrine of gender fluidity it is possible for a man to be pregnant. So one can't/shouldn't/mustn't speak about pregnant women. One needs to use the more general terms "pregnant people," "pregnant persons," or "birthing persons."
So, I pose the question more generally and simply:
Do you smell something?
No comments:
Post a Comment