Do you see any validity in this woman’s poem? Or is she missing the mark on how to be inclusive?
Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
- MonarchMom
- Princess Royal
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 8:52 pm
I see a point, and the point I see is to create hostility toward transgender people.
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1776
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
Do you think there’s any validity behind women not wanting to be defined by words like “chestfeeders, birthing units, or breeders”?MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:10 pm I see a point, and the point I see is to create hostility toward transgender people.
- MonarchMom
- Princess Royal
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 8:52 pm
Sure - the same validity as not wanting to be defined as sluts, hags, dogs, etc. etc., Nor should men be defined by body parts or stereotypes. All of that is dehumanizing.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:15 pmDo you think there’s any validity behind women not wanting to be defined by words like “chestfeeders, birthing units, or breeders”?MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:10 pm I see a point, and the point I see is to create hostility toward transgender people.
I also find words like "help meet" and "compliment" dehumanizing.
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1776
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
The word compliment is dehumanizing?MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:25 pmSure - the same validity as not wanting to be defined as sluts, hags, dogs, etc. etc., Nor should men be defined by body parts or stereotypes. All of that is dehumanizing.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:15 pmDo you think there’s any validity behind women not wanting to be defined by words like “chestfeeders, birthing units, or breeders”?MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:10 pm I see a point, and the point I see is to create hostility toward transgender people.
I also find words like "help meet" and "compliment" dehumanizing.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 2369
- Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:42 pm
I guess I don't care that much. Being referred to as a "chestfeeder" doesn't really take anything away from me or my identity or how I feel about myself.
- MonarchMom
- Princess Royal
- Posts: 5820
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 8:52 pm
In the sense of "Complementarianism" as defining the role of women to be the "compliment" to a husband, who has the role of "head" and leader in a family. In this view the woman is a "compliment" to the husband, but not a fully realized and autonomous being.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:29 pmThe word compliment is dehumanizing?MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:25 pmSure - the same validity as not wanting to be defined as sluts, hags, dogs, etc. etc., Nor should men be defined by body parts or stereotypes. All of that is dehumanizing.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:15 pm
Do you think there’s any validity behind women not wanting to be defined by words like “chestfeeders, birthing units, or breeders”?
I also find words like "help meet" and "compliment" dehumanizing.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 2369
- Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:42 pm
And what rights are being "obliterated"?
-
- Countess
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2023 12:49 pm
There's quite a bit of validity, IMO, to the words in the poem.
I'm a Mom and have been for nearly 38 years. New titles are offensive and don't redefine me.
I'm a Mom and have been for nearly 38 years. New titles are offensive and don't redefine me.
just an old coot ![😉](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/emojione/assets/svg/1f609.svg)
![🌵](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/emojione/assets/svg/1f335.svg)
-
- Duchess
- Posts: 1776
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:30 am
I guess I haven’t heard it used like that other than movies in the 50’s or super religious people..MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:38 pmIn the sense of "Complementarianism" as defining the role of women to be the "compliment" to a husband, who has the role of "head" and leader in a family. In this view the woman is a "compliment" to the husband, but not a fully realized and autonomous being.Slimshandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:29 pmThe word compliment is dehumanizing?MonarchMom wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:25 pm
Sure - the same validity as not wanting to be defined as sluts, hags, dogs, etc. etc., Nor should men be defined by body parts or stereotypes. All of that is dehumanizing.
I also find words like "help meet" and "compliment" dehumanizing.
But do you think that’s along the same lines as a woman being called a pregnant woman? As far as I know, most pregnant women didn’t have a problem being called a pregnant woman. Although some are feeling dehumanized by being called Breeders.