Sign up to Gransnet Daily
Our free daily newsletter full of hot threads, competitions and discounts
Subscribe
From a Woman's charity, dedicated to women's health,
What a revolting name, for a vagina. Who thinks up this nonsense?🙄
Julie Bindell has written an article for the DM:
"As holes go, they are arguably the most important in the world. Every man and woman ever to have lived – except those born by caesarean section – has sprung forth into this world from one.
And yet a charity dedicated to women's health, Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust, is suggesting that the word 'vagina' could be referred to as the 'bonus hole' to avoid offending or excluding trans men or 'non-binary' people.
As a feminist campaigner, I am appalled. I've spent time over the decades trying to raise awareness among women about our bodies.
I've encouraged women to unlearn the shame associated with our biology.
So the idea that we should stop referring to the vagina by its name is grossly offensive.
I grew up absorbing the message that our bodies were dirty.
We would use euphemisms to describe its parts, because 'vagina' and even 'breast' were considered unpleasant.
I recall, back in the Eighties, buying tampons only to have the shopkeeper quickly put the box in a brown paper bag as if it were a porn magazine. But we feminists learned to take pride in our physical form.
I would shake the tampons out of the bag to make the point that I was not ashamed of menstruating. After all, it's a reality for half the population.
It's worth noting that this form of McCarthyite censorship is reserved for descriptions of female anatomy only. That's why this is nothing short of misogyny.
There is no such suggestion, of course, to swap words that men use to describe their biology.
Perhaps, to be fair, we should change 'penis' to 'flesh roll' to avoid offending trans women? I'm sure men won't object. Just a thought."
www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-12278639/JULIE-BINDEL-says-womens-health-charity-guilty-short-misogyny-again.html
DiamondLily
Good. Inciting violence helps nothing. 🙄
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12294651/Trans-activist-told-crowd-punch-TERFs-face-arrested-incitement-violence.html
I think you'll find trans violence is a 2 way street. Both ways are completely wrong and both should be considered equally seriously with charges being pressed against the offender. However, that has nothing to do with the original post on this thread.
Good news about his arrest.
Trans violence isn’t a two way street. Violence against women continues to increase. Feminists have never, so far as I’m aware, threatened to ‘rape you to death with my lady penis’. This threat was made to friends of mine who attended a women’s conference and attended a workshop on safe spaces.
Trans people are subject to threats and abuse - usually by men
Well, I was an old fashioned feminist (back in the day). and campaigned for equal rights for women, both in their personal life and at work.
I didn't ever think all men were evil (some did), nor did I ever feel violence towards anyone.🙄
icanhandthemback have you seen or heard instances of similar declarations & support for violent intent from GC people towards trans people or their allies?
I was talking generally and trans people are disproportionately targeted. However, as I said in my post, that is an entirely different thread to this one.
Do you have any evidence that trans people are disproportionately targeted? It’s a mantra but I don’t believe the figures bear that out.
Two articles Lathyrus
www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/17/trans-people-twice-as-likely-to-be-victims-of-in-england-and-wales
www.surrey.ac.uk/news/trans-people-and-cisgender-gay-men-uk-are-most-likely-experience-violence
This is the last answer from me about violence and transgender because this thread is not about that. It is about terminology used to describe the vagina!
It’s a joke!!! It makes vagina sound real classy. Sounds like the thing that a load of drunk blokes might cook up for a so called laugh. The world has not only gone mad it is twisting itself into a mental destruction of common sense.
The trouble with those figures icanhandthemback is that they are figures for gay and transgender. The LGBT+ conflation that doesn’t actually then tell what is happening.
We can’t tell from those figures whether it is actually trans people who are disproportionately attacked or whether it is mostly GLB. And actually a number of those incidents will actually be Gay and Lesbians who have been attacked by trans people. It’s ironic that those incidents are then included.
It’s easy to make a mantra and if you say it often enough people start to accept it as fact but this particular one hasn’t any reliable data to back it up.
Yet another reason to try to improve the accurate recording of crime statistics - on victims as well as perpetrators.
Lovetopaint037 - it's not a joke
If you read the thread you will see it's from a document for professionals dealing with a particular section of the trans community.
Why cannot doctors come up with an anatomical description of the aperture? Then this term, and any others can simply be a colloquial term used by those who want to.
Think about all the colloquial terms used to name the penix and other genital organs, not to mention other parts in the body.
My understanding is that it is an actual vagina that a female wishing to live as a man has retained. Just like a man wishing to live as a woman might retain his penis and testes.
In which case vagina, penis and testes are all the anatomical words needed.
Adults needing coy baby words for organs of sexual development just leads to confusion.
I should imagine there is a huge number of people who don't use the anatomical words out there. Along with the people who are embarrassed by them, regardless of gender, there are people who just don't use those terms because of a lack of education/decorum, etc, and that is fine if the medics understand them. I can see why a biological woman living as a man may find a "feminine" anatomical word an anathema (similarly gender neutral people) but I am sure there must be a more suitable "medical" word which could be used for those who have such difficulty over the parts they were born with. It is about being respectful to women and respectful to those who don't feel they are women.
Well there isn’t a different anatomical word. Anatomy is precise if you are dealing with medical matters.
Privately people use all kinds of very non-specific terms and actually quite often ( especially with female anatomy) don’t really understand which bit they are referring to vagina, labia, cervix etc The ignorance of the female body and the shame that leads to it being called by twee euphemisms is known to lead misdiagnosis and dismissal of symptytgst are expressed in inaccurate terms.
Redressing that is an enormous issue, so for a Charity that purports to be promoting women’s health to use made up words is - actually I can’t think of the right word. Unhelpful. Ridiculous. Dangerous.
Misogynistic?
That would work👍
Lathyrus all words start somewhere.
As I said in thread "bonus hole" has been used for ages in this community.
It's not a term to displace vagina.
I really thought this had also been explained.
We’ll have to disagree on this one. I don’t think anyone should be encouraged to use made up words for body parts when consulting medically.
I think it’s important for people to understand their bodies and be able to explain to medical staff exactly where the problem is and to understand exactly what bit of their body is being referred to and assessed for treatment.
A problem with vaginal bacteria is just that. It’s bacteria that only exist in the vagina and requires specific treatment.
Cancer if the cervix is a cancer that requires precise treatment. Cancer of a bonus hole? What would that mean?
And I do think, trans or natal, that using coy words for vagina etc contains within it an element of shame.
I think the description 'bonus hole' is deeply offensive IMHO. An alternative to the perfectly acceptable word 'vagina' is not necessary at all.
lovebc Couldn’t agree more. Well said
I don't think it's necessary either - but if I was a health professional I might like to know what someone was referring to! 
A health professional wouldn’t know what someone was referring to, that’s the point. Even if a lot of people used a term to mean one thing, it wouldn’t mean that the next person you saw meant that
My bonus hole could mean several different things to different people, especially if they weren’t sure if their own anatomy. As a professional you’d have to clarify exactly what bit they were referring to. It’s not unknown for women to believe the discomfort of a urinary infection is a problem in their vagina and complain of irritation there.
Other problems are the misconceptions that arise when euphemistic words are used. Hole for instance. It’s not a hole in any sense of the word. It’s not a gap in anything as in a hole in my stocking or an space with a closed end. You can’t stitch it up without consequences to the your health. It leads to other organs and you can’t rely on being able to take out anything that you might put in.
A medical organisation really, really shouldn’t be promoting terms like these.
Lathyrus
A health professional wouldn’t know what someone was referring to, that’s the point. Even if a lot of people used a term to mean one thing, it wouldn’t mean that the next person you saw meant that
My bonus hole could mean several different things to different people, especially if they weren’t sure if their own anatomy. As a professional you’d have to clarify exactly what bit they were referring to. It’s not unknown for women to believe the discomfort of a urinary infection is a problem in their vagina and complain of irritation there.
Other problems are the misconceptions that arise when euphemistic words are used. Hole for instance. It’s not a hole in any sense of the word. It’s not a gap in anything as in a hole in my stocking or an space with a closed end. You can’t stitch it up without consequences to the your health. It leads to other organs and you can’t rely on being able to take out anything that you might put in.
A medical organisation really, really shouldn’t be promoting terms like these.
A health professional wouldn’t know what someone was referring to, that’s the point. Even if a lot of people used a term to mean one thing, it wouldn’t mean that the next person you saw meant that.
👏👏👏
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
