Tag: Bette Midler

By on 2 Comments

A Cervical Cancer society in the UK recently made a suggestion, and it was a suggestion and not a command, to medical professionals to use the term bonus hole or front hole instead of vagina when talking to trans patients. It isn’t going to happen. One, if someone said bonus hole to me I wouldn’t have a clue what they are talking about. My mind drifted to golf for some reason but it did not go to vagina. There is also a perfectly good word already in use for vagina that would be vagina. I am not sure why it is offensive to Trans people and I am not sure why it needs to change.

But what about Trans people’s feelings? I doubt that many Trans people actually are offended by the use of the word vagina. Has anyone ever checked into this? Or are Trans activists, with nothing better to do with their time, imagining offenses where no offense is being taken. The Trans community would be better served by activists who can explain why Trans people might need medical treatment, how they are not forcing these medical options on Trans people, and helping parents make the necessary decisions regarding their children’s future. Until then, Trans Activists are acting as if they have won the day and that they are in a position to direct people’s language. They are not. Trans activists are going to lose while also alienating potential supporters of Trans rights which is something I would think they would like to avoid.

Then there is the argument that if it is important for people to be comfortable and to use language that supports this comfort, what about all the people who prefer vagina to bonus hole? Aren’t they people too? Last year, Bette Midler got entangled in another controversy because she objected to replacing the word woman with birthing people or menstruators. She wants to be called a women and I am betting that there are billions of other women who have the same preference. Billions, mind you, while Trans people being offended by the word woman is how big a group — I am guessing hundreds, maybe thousands at best. And to make it even more confusing, what about Trans women who want to be called women? Can they use women? Language is around to make life simpler. Menstruator and Bonus Hole makes life more complicated so are doomed for failure.

So in summation, this society is recommending replacing a perfectly useful and widely understood word like vagina to a different word nobody knows so nobody will understand it when used in order to prevent offending a very small group within society who may not even be offended by vagina in the first place. There is a better use for people’s energies than this losing battle.

By on

I don’t know what Liberal/Progressive people are hoping to accomplish by continuing to argue overTrans-correct language. It just is not an issue for the American public. Poll it. I am sure it won’t even appear on any list of their concerns.

Even though it is a low priority issue, it keeps coming up as a problem. First with Bette Midler, then Senator Hawley, and now Fareed Zakaria. Zakaria was making the point that there are more important issues than personal pronouns and that the Democrats should focus on those instead of Trans-correct language. But, instead of taking Zakaria’s advice, Progressives heaped criticism on him. They accuse Zakaria of taking away trans rights. How? He is saying let’s not fight an election about the use of personal pronouns which seems, at least to me, an eminently sensible way for the Democrats to proceed. Zakaria, in no way, argued to take rights away from Trans people.

They also urged him to use more inclusive language. Everybody should change. They want Trans people to feel included in the larger discussions that they may include them. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It’s the scolding of people who don’t know or don’t want to use Trans-correct language that is the problem. Midler and Zakaria are arguably more in line with Democratic Party thinking than the Republican Party. They are certainly more open to Trans people than Ron DeSantis and Ted Cruz. Yet they are lumped into the transphobic categorization with them. This is clearly wrong.

What is particularly alarming is these Progressives have absolutely no self awareness about how they are perceived among the American population who live outside of Berkeley. When Sen. Hawley and Dr. Bridges, the head of University California at Berkeley’s Law school, recently had a little dustup about Trans-correct language during a senate hearing on abortion, they think Dr. Bridges won. That isn’t what I thought. Sen. Hawley got her talking about Trans people which wasn’t even the issue under discussion and used up her time talking about something other than abortion rights. Then she said that by not using Trans inclusive phrases that Sen. Hawley was performing violence on transgender people.

She is saying that Sen. Hawley is being violent towards Trans people when he uses the word woman over Dr. Bridges’ preferred people with the capacity of pregnancy. What does she mean by violence? Her meaning of violence is different than my understanding of violence. When I think of violence, I think of a physical attack — a fist fight or a gun battle. Dr. Bridge means something different, something more subtle, and, unfortunately for her, something that the vast majority of American people won’t understand. She might as well be talking in a foreign language. As far as the term people with the capacity of pregnancy, she talks as if this term has been incorporated into every day use and that every civilized American is using it instead of woman.

I hate to break it to her, but very few regular Americans have made this change. Every time I hear something like people with the capacity of pregnancy, I have to stop and think who she is talking about. Then, I realize she is talking about women, or at least, mostly talking about women. Why not use women instead? But, no, Trans people might feel marginalized, we need to be inclusive. So in order to make sure Trans people feel included, she is oblivious to the feelings of large segments of the American population. While I am glad she is trying to make Trans people welcome, how about affording this same concern to seniors, latinos, suburban voters, blue collar workers and pro-choice Republicans. There are over 300 million Americans. There are two parties and each party has to persuade enough people to vote for them to lead the country. Trans people make up less than 1% of the country, while Senior voters make up 32 %. How does telling 70 year old woman that she should be using the word menstruator instead of woman at all helpful to winning elections?

What Zakaria is warning about is simple. If you make this election about using Trans-inclusive language then you are going to lose the election. The nation is at a critical crossroads, the Democrats need to win elections in order to turn the country around. To do anything else is criminal negligence. The Democrats still may lose, but it would be better to loose over something that engages the interest of the American People and not a side issue that a small minority care about. If they do make using the correct personal pronouns a focus of their campaign, they will surely lose. And, I am afraid, they will deserve to lose.

By on

I blogged the other day that I was afraid the Democrats would go down to defeat over a peripheral issue such as the use of personal pronouns that matters to only a small section of the population. Well, ask and ye will receive. I saw a good example of what I am worried about. Bette Midler objected to the use birthing people and menstruators instead of the now forbidden word – women. Women is not inclusive of trans women or trans men or something like that. I am not exactly sure why women is non-inclusive but it is. I am sure I will be accused of being transphobic but I am honestly don’t understand what the problem is.

And that is kind of a problem for Midler’s critics. I’m still baffled on why woman or women is wrong. I read a particularly nasty piece by Alison Stine in Salon charmingly named “Language is flexible, unlike boomers Bette Midler and Jordan Peterson” Someone else must have felt the same way about the title as I did because boomer has been removed from in the current title and from the article. I think this, alone, says a lot about Stine’s article. You really shouldn’t write about the importance of being inclusive and respectful of what people want to be called with a title that is clearly condescending to older people. The whole tone of the article is that old people just need to get out of the way of this hipper and with it and obviously better generation of people. And, then, dare to say that these older people just need to learn how to be more inclusive and flexible. Doctor heal thyself first.

Midler was upset because people were using birthing people and menstruators instead of women in an article about abortion and healthcare. Again Stine fails to live up to her own standards. ( I am assuming Stine is she. I didn’t see a preferred pronoun for her in the article. My apologies if I am wrong). Her whole point is that we should respect people’s wishes and call them what they want to be called. Midler wants to be called a woman not a menstruator or a birthing person. It seems simple enough. But women isn’t inclusive enough for Stine. Birthing people and menstruators somehow is although I am not sure why. Not all women menstruate nor bear children — so they are actually excluding a lot of women here. I recommend pre-menstruators, post-menstruators and a non-birthing menstruators. If you then, toss in menstruator and birthing people I think you will have covered most of the female population. Does everyone feel included now?

When inclusive is so inclusive that you are alienating and confusing your audience, its best to rethink your approach and not scold your audience for objecting. When talking about abortion as healthcare issue, 99% of the people who need abortions identify as women. So when people use menstruator and birthing person they are meaningless to much of their audience whereas everyone understands woman and most adults knows why she might need an abortion.

How can people be confused by something so clear as menstruator and birthing person. Well, let me tell you. I was trying to explain the Midler tempest to two 70 plus gay men who are both liberal Democrats. Neither one knew what I was talking about and couldn’t understand why anyone would use menstruators or birthing people instead of women. I always thought one of the main tools of persuasive communication was making yourself understood to the other person. So, if you want to be inclusive, then stopping using the language of the academic elite (I swear every time I see CIS gendered, I have to look it up to make sure I understand what they are talking about) and use terms that can be found in the language of every day Americans. Terms like woman for instance.

Stine talks about the need to be flexible because language changes all of the time. Great, I agree with that. But birthing people and menstruators are new words. Menstruators is so new that it isn’t even in spell check. Contrary to what Stine thinks, the society as a whole has not adopted these words. Scolding people for not incorporating these terms immediately into their daily language is a terrible way to get people to change. Particularly a person like Midler who is more often than not an ally for liberal causes. She also is sympathetic to trans people in a way that most people her age will never be. But calling her, and people like Macy Gray, J.K. Rowling and Martina Navratilova, as transphobic is a losing battle. They are not Ted Cruz or Sean Hannity or Donald Trump. If transphobic is so broad to include all of these people, the term ceases to have meaning. Midler is on the right side and we need to keep her there for the difficult elections ahead.