About Roe

Everybody knows who will be affected by any Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade and who won't be. So do the people who will be affected by this get to name ourselves and our bodies in clear language and organize unapologetically in our own interests or not?

The split within the left over trans 'rights' ultimately comes down to whether women are free to organize and be recognized and protected as a sex class—or not.

Trans activism says no: women’s movements must prioritize the identity claims of men over the realities of women. We need to center people in our own movement who do not share our experiences, our history, our bodies, our needs.

To those still on the sidelines, that's the conflict over sex vs. gender identity!

We can keep pretending nobody can define 'woman.' But only one type of human being, with one type of body, will suffer for this ruling: women will suffer. Will we be able to talk about it and be understood?

Is there any other way to say what we need to say that doesn't ruffle quite so many feathers? Another way of putting the question might be: by what name, under what heading, is it permissible for women to advocate for the rights of our fellow female human beings? Is there any configuration—no matter how objectionable gender-critical women might find it—that would be tolerable to and respected by trans activists? AFAB rights? Movement for the liberation of the 'transmisogyny-exempt'? Non-men of the world unite? Or is there, in fact, no heading under which The People Formerly Known as Women and Girls can gather that trans activists won't put under siege?

What's unacceptable to trans activists isn't the language we use to refer to women as a sex class. Don't be fooled by how much trans activists focus on policing our language and taking offense: What's unacceptable is acknowledging women as a sex class, no matter what words we use. It's drawing boundaries around our bodies and experiences, no matter how we refer to those bodies or experiences. The target of trans activism is any acknowledgement of sex difference. We're on the brink of losing Roe and that difference matters. We have to be able to talk about it this, as clearly as possible.

When ‘progressives’ diminish women as "birthing bodies" doesn't defend our rights. Rather, this dismembering language reinforces the attack on our autonomy: what else are "birthing bodies" good for?

Rep. Francesca Hong 홍윤정 @StateRepHong

Birthing bodies have the right to freedom. Deciding if or when to become a parent is one of the most personal, life-changing decisions. Access to abortion & reproductive care is a decision we must trust each person to make based on what’s best for their health & their future.

"Birthing bodies" don't have plans or dreams or minds and wills, even. "Birthing bodies" are functions and services. We need language that keeps women in one piece, that keeps our full humanity in the picture so that what's at stake is clear.

Every language in the world has a word for this distinct class of human beings—women, 여자들, wanawake, wahine, feminae—except for the obscure and obscuring 21st-century dialect now being pushed in the empty name of ‘inclusivity.’

If you've somehow convinced yourself that this is wonderfully and terribly progressive—not having a word everyone knows (to talk about a fact everybody knows) so that we can speak clearly about half of humanity and the issues this group faces because of what they uniquely share—think again.

Using dismembering, dehumanizing gender-neutral language to talk about sex-based realities is not neutral: it actively obscures what's happening, to whom, and why. That's a huge price to pay. We can't afford to prioritize sensitivity to male feelings over clarity about women's realities. We never could afford it and it never should have been demanded of us.