Is this going too far? Always removes Venus symbol to acknowledge transmen who menstruate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The question is, should language about menstruation become more inclusive. It isn't about a specific package of pads, who cares about a specific package of pads. Not me and not others here. I do care very much about language around menstruation losing woman focused language BECAUSE of reasons like I cited.

Do you know any trans people well? I do, including a trans man with whom I am very close. He can and does menstruate, and menstruation is something that triggers intense dysphoria because of the association with femaleness. I don't think that would be cured by reducing that association in how we talk about menstruation, but that's actual intense human suffering that we could try to alleviate with fairly simple changes in language. You can say you support trans people all you want, but at the end of the day you're looking at their pain and wringing your hands about hypotheticals.

I feel sorry for him, but there are limits. I can't change the fact he menstruates.

[Anonymous]

DP. I am an ardent feminist and am not convinced that somehow acknowledging that there are some menstruating trans men in any way diminishes women's quest for equality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The question is, should language about menstruation become more inclusive. It isn't about a specific package of pads, who cares about a specific package of pads. Not me and not others here. I do care very much about language around menstruation losing woman focused language BECAUSE of reasons like I cited.

Do you know any trans people well? I do, including a trans man with whom I am very close. He can and does menstruate, and menstruation is something that triggers intense dysphoria because of the association with femaleness. I don't think that would be cured by reducing that association in how we talk about menstruation, but that's actual intense human suffering that we could try to alleviate with fairly simple changes in language. You can say you support trans people all you want, but at the end of the day you're looking at their pain and wringing your hands about hypotheticals.

I feel sorry for him, but there are limits. I can't change the fact he menstruates.

It’s like you are not even following the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. I am an ardent feminist and am not convinced that somehow acknowledging that there are some menstruating trans men in any way diminishes women's quest for equality.

Yeah, I don't get it either. Somehow, acknowledging that there are some menstruating trans men erases the existence of people who are women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. I am an ardent feminist and am not convinced that somehow acknowledging that there are some menstruating trans men in any way diminishes women's quest for equality.

Yeah, I don't get it either. Somehow, acknowledging that there are some menstruating trans men erases the existence of people who are women?

I am one of the people this bothers and I have not once denied the existence of menstruating trans men. This is not the issue.

[Anonymous]

At the end of the day, transmen are biologically women...so of course they menstruate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I can't think of an example that will not come off as extraordinarily insensitive but we do not change language or reality as a result of the way other mental illnesses cause disordered thinking.

It's very difficult to read this comment as anything other than incredibly transphobic, but I might be misunderstanding. A trans person's gender identity isn't "disordered thinking," it's what they are. Trans men are men, period. They also menstruate, so referring to "menstruating people" instead of "women," is changing language to reflect reality.

All of those things do effect menstruating transgendered men. But the conditions in which they effect transgendered men are not the same. If a transgendered man needs tampons that needs to be about being a transgendered man in men's prison. There are no 'women' in men's prisons, using language that is clear is important there.

This is also very confusing. A trans man who is arrested or sentenced could very easily end up in a woman's jail or prison (probably would depending on how he looked, etc.), he'd experience the same thing as a cis woman under the same conditions. It's also 100% untrue that "there are no women in men's prisons," lots of trans women wind up in men's prisons. I'm not sure what you're saying there.

You can say grapes, and you can also say seedless grapes and green grapes and red grapes and moon grapes etc. That you correctly describe something does not mean you are excluding things that don't actually fall into that category.

And that's an argument for referring to "people who menstruate" when you mean everyone who needs access to tampons or "people who can become pregnant" when you mean everyone who needs access to abortion. You don't say "grapes" to mean seedless grapes only. If you mean cis women say cis women, if you mean everyone who has periods say that. There's no plausible argument that the traditional language is more accurate, because both men and women have periods, get abortions, etc., and saying "women" is both under and over inclusive if what you mean has something to with reproductive organs specifically.

You're also never explain why bringing trans men under the umbrella of "people who menstruate" impacts cis women who also menstruate in the least. The argument is very hand wavy.

I don't think you are misunderstanding me. You yourself cited dysphoria as the cause for those feelings and acknowledge that today it exists as a diagnosis in the DSM. I think that there is a large stigma on mental illness in the United States that makes the conversation around this issue extremely difficult. To me there is no conflict between the idea that being born transgender means you have been born with a mental illness and the idea that people who are transgendered should be able to treat that condition how they like and live their life as they want. A person who is born transgendered but who is happy when living life as a member of the opposite sex to whatever surgical or hormonal degree they choose should be able to do so with only the input of their own chosen medical professionals. I don't think that this makes me transphobic. I have a different belief about the origin of the condition than you do, but no different beliefs about how they should be treated by society. And I think the issue with labeling that origin has more to do with prejudices that I think are terrible about the way our brain works and how we talk about it when something happens in the human brain that is not neurotypical.

I think that trans women have different medical needs than women who were born biologically female. I think that women are not equal to men and that we need to advocate for women's rights and trans rights and LGB rights and rights for black and hispanic and asian people. I suppose you are correct we can just start saying cis women and trans women sure. It seems impractical to me to create that distinction and impose it on all language in order to accommodate a very small amount of people. But in reality I don't think that will ever happen for that reason. So in that sense you're right silly to be arguing about something that is unlikely to happen. But I do wonder if you feel the same way about men's products. Shampoo for men, old spice, whatever. Are you advocating for complete gender neutrality?

I am not arguing that trans women can't call themselves women, just that trans men shouldn't call themselves women. Because by their own desire they don't want to be women, they don't feel like they are women. Menstruating makes them uncomfortable because, as you say, it is so defining of being a woman. The very fact that trans gendered people is a thing that happens is because there is a difference between men and women. We will never live in complete neutrality. And imposing complete neutrality also denies the experience of many people. There is no language that will never hurt anyone.

Women need to talk about being women because women still need advocacy. I, and I think a lot of other posters, are happy to include trans women in that advocacy. But not by forgoing the word woman in favor of the word 'person' because men are the group that has control over women. Men are the people who have prioritized their rights over women. So women need to advocate FOR WOMEN. Include trans women and men who are transitioning in that, that is fine. No problem. But I will not start saying pregnant person instead of pregnant woman because pregnancy has been both the gift and the curse of women. You want to erase the distinction that is central to women's rights advocacy. I would have less of an issue with saying 'pregnant men and women' than I do with the idea of saying 'pregnant people'.

[Anonymous]

Going to far where exactly? For your discomfort? Why do you care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day, transmen are biologically women...so of course they menstruate.

So give them all the products they need since they’re all women. Changing packaging is only going to alienate women who present as women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The question is, should language about menstruation become more inclusive. It isn't about a specific package of pads, who cares about a specific package of pads. Not me and not others here. I do care very much about language around menstruation losing woman focused language BECAUSE of reasons like I cited.

Do you know any trans people well? I do, including a trans man with whom I am very close. He can and does menstruate, and menstruation is something that triggers intense dysphoria because of the association with femaleness. I don't think that would be cured by reducing that association in how we talk about menstruation, but that's actual intense human suffering that we could try to alleviate with fairly simple changes in language. You can say you support trans people all you want, but at the end of the day you're looking at their pain and wringing your hands about hypotheticals.

I feel sorry for him, but there are limits. I can't change the fact he menstruates.

It’s like you are not even following the conversation.

The problem is that making the language about women's reproductive functions more inclusive, means erasing women. In the example of your dysphoric friend, it's also not clear how changing the packaging is going to help. If menstruation brings on depression, I'm not sure how the packaging changes that. And where's the limit? Should menstrual products also be hidden in a back room because it's triggering to see him? That may seem like a parade of horribles, but I'm actually not sure that it's so crazy to think someone might argue that.

I'm not against your friend transitioning, getting medical care, mental health care, whatever. I AM against a new rule that we can't talk about women and women's rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I can't think of an example that will not come off as extraordinarily insensitive but we do not change language or reality as a result of the way other mental illnesses cause disordered thinking.

It's very difficult to read this comment as anything other than incredibly transphobic, but I might be misunderstanding. A trans person's gender identity isn't "disordered thinking," it's what they are. Trans men are men, period. They also menstruate, so referring to "menstruating people" instead of "women," is changing language to reflect reality.

All of those things do effect menstruating transgendered men. But the conditions in which they effect transgendered men are not the same. If a transgendered man needs tampons that needs to be about being a transgendered man in men's prison. There are no 'women' in men's prisons, using language that is clear is important there.

This is also very confusing. A trans man who is arrested or sentenced could very easily end up in a woman's jail or prison (probably would depending on how he looked, etc.), he'd experience the same thing as a cis woman under the same conditions. It's also 100% untrue that "there are no women in men's prisons," lots of trans women wind up in men's prisons. I'm not sure what you're saying there.

You can say grapes, and you can also say seedless grapes and green grapes and red grapes and moon grapes etc. That you correctly describe something does not mean you are excluding things that don't actually fall into that category.

And that's an argument for referring to "people who menstruate" when you mean everyone who needs access to tampons or "people who can become pregnant" when you mean everyone who needs access to abortion. You don't say "grapes" to mean seedless grapes only. If you mean cis women say cis women, if you mean everyone who has periods say that. There's no plausible argument that the traditional language is more accurate, because both men and women have periods, get abortions, etc., and saying "women" is both under and over inclusive if what you mean has something to with reproductive organs specifically.

You're also never explain why bringing trans men under the umbrella of "people who menstruate" impacts cis women who also menstruate in the least. The argument is very hand wavy.

I don't think you are misunderstanding me. You yourself cited dysphoria as the cause for those feelings and acknowledge that today it exists as a diagnosis in the DSM. I think that there is a large stigma on mental illness in the United States that makes the conversation around this issue extremely difficult. To me there is no conflict between the idea that being born transgender means you have been born with a mental illness and the idea that people who are transgendered should be able to treat that condition how they like and live their life as they want. A person who is born transgendered but who is happy when living life as a member of the opposite sex to whatever surgical or hormonal degree they choose should be able to do so with only the input of their own chosen medical professionals. I don't think that this makes me transphobic. I have a different belief about the origin of the condition than you do, but no different beliefs about how they should be treated by society. And I think the issue with labeling that origin has more to do with prejudices that I think are terrible about the way our brain works and how we talk about it when something happens in the human brain that is not neurotypical.

I think that trans women have different medical needs than women who were born biologically female. I think that women are not equal to men and that we need to advocate for women's rights and trans rights and LGB rights and rights for black and hispanic and asian people. I suppose you are correct we can just start saying cis women and trans women sure. It seems impractical to me to create that distinction and impose it on all language in order to accommodate a very small amount of people. But in reality I don't think that will ever happen for that reason. So in that sense you're right silly to be arguing about something that is unlikely to happen. But I do wonder if you feel the same way about men's products. Shampoo for men, old spice, whatever. Are you advocating for complete gender neutrality?

I am not arguing that trans women can't call themselves women, just that trans men shouldn't call themselves women. Because by their own desire they don't want to be women, they don't feel like they are women. Menstruating makes them uncomfortable because, as you say, it is so defining of being a woman. The very fact that trans gendered people is a thing that happens is because there is a difference between men and women. We will never live in complete neutrality. And imposing complete neutrality also denies the experience of many people. There is no language that will never hurt anyone.

Women need to talk about being women because women still need advocacy. I, and I think a lot of other posters, are happy to include trans women in that advocacy. But not by forgoing the word woman in favor of the word 'person' because men are the group that has control over women. Men are the people who have prioritized their rights over women. So women need to advocate FOR WOMEN. Include trans women and men who are transitioning in that, that is fine. No problem. But I will not start saying pregnant person instead of pregnant woman because pregnancy has been both the gift and the curse of women. You want to erase the distinction that is central to women's rights advocacy. I would have less of an issue with saying 'pregnant men and women' than I do with the idea of saying 'pregnant people'.

I agree with your last line. "Pregnant men and women." Go for it. As well as menstrual products branded with the Mars symbol. Why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The question is, should language about menstruation become more inclusive. It isn't about a specific package of pads, who cares about a specific package of pads. Not me and not others here. I do care very much about language around menstruation losing woman focused language BECAUSE of reasons like I cited.

Do you know any trans people well? I do, including a trans man with whom I am very close. He can and does menstruate, and menstruation is something that triggers intense dysphoria because of the association with femaleness. I don't think that would be cured by reducing that association in how we talk about menstruation, but that's actual intense human suffering that we could try to alleviate with fairly simple changes in language. You can say you support trans people all you want, but at the end of the day you're looking at their pain and wringing your hands about hypotheticals.

I feel sorry for him, but there are limits. I can't change the fact he menstruates.

It’s like you are not even following the conversation.

The problem is that making the language about women's reproductive functions more inclusive, means erasing women. In the example of your dysphoric friend, it's also not clear how changing the packaging is going to help. If menstruation brings on depression, I'm not sure how the packaging changes that. And where's the limit? Should menstrual products also be hidden in a back room because it's triggering to see him? That may seem like a parade of horribles, but I'm actually not sure that it's so crazy to think someone might argue that.

I'm not against your friend transitioning, getting medical care, mental health care, whatever. I AM against a new rule that we can't talk about women and women's rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I can't think of an example that will not come off as extraordinarily insensitive but we do not change language or reality as a result of the way other mental illnesses cause disordered thinking.

It's very difficult to read this comment as anything other than incredibly transphobic, but I might be misunderstanding. A trans person's gender identity isn't "disordered thinking," it's what they are. Trans men are men, period. They also menstruate, so referring to "menstruating people" instead of "women," is changing language to reflect reality.

All of those things do effect menstruating transgendered men. But the conditions in which they effect transgendered men are not the same. If a transgendered man needs tampons that needs to be about being a transgendered man in men's prison. There are no 'women' in men's prisons, using language that is clear is important there.

This is also very confusing. A trans man who is arrested or sentenced could very easily end up in a woman's jail or prison (probably would depending on how he looked, etc.), he'd experience the same thing as a cis woman under the same conditions. It's also 100% untrue that "there are no women in men's prisons," lots of trans women wind up in men's prisons. I'm not sure what you're saying there.

You can say grapes, and you can also say seedless grapes and green grapes and red grapes and moon grapes etc. That you correctly describe something does not mean you are excluding things that don't actually fall into that category.

And that's an argument for referring to "people who menstruate" when you mean everyone who needs access to tampons or "people who can become pregnant" when you mean everyone who needs access to abortion. You don't say "grapes" to mean seedless grapes only. If you mean cis women say cis women, if you mean everyone who has periods say that. There's no plausible argument that the traditional language is more accurate, because both men and women have periods, get abortions, etc., and saying "women" is both under and over inclusive if what you mean has something to with reproductive organs specifically.

You're also never explain why bringing trans men under the umbrella of "people who menstruate" impacts cis women who also menstruate in the least. The argument is very hand wavy.

I don't think you are misunderstanding me. You yourself cited dysphoria as the cause for those feelings and acknowledge that today it exists as a diagnosis in the DSM. I think that there is a large stigma on mental illness in the United States that makes the conversation around this issue extremely difficult. To me there is no conflict between the idea that being born transgender means you have been born with a mental illness and the idea that people who are transgendered should be able to treat that condition how they like and live their life as they want. A person who is born transgendered but who is happy when living life as a member of the opposite sex to whatever surgical or hormonal degree they choose should be able to do so with only the input of their own chosen medical professionals. I don't think that this makes me transphobic. I have a different belief about the origin of the condition than you do, but no different beliefs about how they should be treated by society. And I think the issue with labeling that origin has more to do with prejudices that I think are terrible about the way our brain works and how we talk about it when something happens in the human brain that is not neurotypical.

I think that trans women have different medical needs than women who were born biologically female. I think that women are not equal to men and that we need to advocate for women's rights and trans rights and LGB rights and rights for black and hispanic and asian people. I suppose you are correct we can just start saying cis women and trans women sure. It seems impractical to me to create that distinction and impose it on all language in order to accommodate a very small amount of people. But in reality I don't think that will ever happen for that reason. So in that sense you're right silly to be arguing about something that is unlikely to happen. But I do wonder if you feel the same way about men's products. Shampoo for men, old spice, whatever. Are you advocating for complete gender neutrality?

I am not arguing that trans women can't call themselves women, just that trans men shouldn't call themselves women. Because by their own desire they don't want to be women, they don't feel like they are women. Menstruating makes them uncomfortable because, as you say, it is so defining of being a woman. The very fact that trans gendered people is a thing that happens is because there is a difference between men and women. We will never live in complete neutrality. And imposing complete neutrality also denies the experience of many people. There is no language that will never hurt anyone.

Women need to talk about being women because women still need advocacy. I, and I think a lot of other posters, are happy to include trans women in that advocacy. But not by forgoing the word woman in favor of the word 'person' because men are the group that has control over women. Men are the people who have prioritized their rights over women. So women need to advocate FOR WOMEN. Include trans women and men who are transitioning in that, that is fine. No problem. But I will not start saying pregnant person instead of pregnant woman because pregnancy has been both the gift and the curse of women. You want to erase the distinction that is central to women's rights advocacy. I would have less of an issue with saying 'pregnant men and women' than I do with the idea of saying 'pregnant people'.

I agree with your last line. "Pregnant men and women." Go for it. As well as menstrual products branded with the Mars symbol. Why not?

What about non-binary people who menstruate?

Why not be more inclusive? It doesn’t really “erase women”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s amazing how people fall for this all right propaganda. They got the formula down create fear tell people their rights are being Taken away,create hysteria. Congratulations you fell for it.

Eh, not quite.

Personally, my concern isn’t with right wing hysteria. Rather, it with a select few PC police making everything a crusade coupled with the cancel culture that wields far too much power.

Gentle tip: turning everything into Us vs Them//Liberal vs Conservative isn’t helpful; in fact, it’s quite dangerous. We’ve devolved to a place where bipartisan consensus no longer exists on the Hill or in the media (and certainly not in social media). IRL, I suspect many Dems feel like sometimes we go too far. Pelosi and liberal comedians are starting to call this nonsense out (thank goodness).

Well when you use the same talking points as RWNJs it’s hard to see you as anything other than anti-trans.

Sorry, tarring people doesn't work anymore. It's been overused. If you can't counter the argument, chanting "RWNJ" doesn't actually do the job for you. It makes you seem foolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Please provide me with evidence they asked women.

Being offended about erasure is not bigoted. Erasure is bigoted.

If you feel erased because a company that sells menstrual products took the Venus symbol off their packaging, I don't know what to say.

Since you're incapable of reading this thread and seeing all the other ways in which biological women have experienced being discounted, made invisible, had their importance or opinions minimized, been discriminated against, I don't know what to say. Except, perhaps a message board isn't the medium for you.