No, actually language which deprives…

A Twitter thread by @radicalhag

No, actually language which deprives women of a name for our class of *person* results in exactly the reduction to body parts that you claim to be against. We’re not the ones referring to women as ‘uterus-havers’ and menstruators here. And they’re dehumanising, not inclusive.

The cognitive dissonance here is breathtaking. ‘Woman =/= uterus’ as a justification for calling us menstruators? Seriously? Hello! The POINT of defining women as adult human females is that we are PEOPLE – grownup humans – who happen to have female bodies.

Take the word away from us, say we are so unimportant and poorly defined that we don’t even get to have language about ourselves, and a dehumanising list of body parts and functions is the completely predictable result. It’s virulent misogyny.