We publish in Italian translation this article by Michael Powell which appeared in the June 8 issue of New York Times. It discusses a primarily American aspect, which however is also beginning to percolate into the European debate on the issues of gender, sexuality and abortion. That's happening in the US within a few years the word "woman" has almost completely disappeared from discourses on abortion and pregnancy of medical organizations and younger progressive activists. However, the adoption of a neutral and inclusive language creates linguistic abysses that risk damaging the very cause of civil rights and women's and even non-cisgender people.
Where are the women?
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), whose civil rights advocacy is more than half a century old, recently tweeted its alarm about the precariousness of legal abortion. He wrote: “The abortion ban disproportionately harms people of color, the LGBTQ community, immigrants, young people, those working to make ends meet, people with disabilities. Protecting access to abortion is an urgent matter of economic and racial justice."
This tweet lists so many things and so many people, yet it neglected to mention the most engaged demographic: women. This was not an oversight, nor was it the particular coloring of language favored by the ACLU. The language is changing rapidly in the face of events that may unfold if the Supreme Court, as it appears, overturns the constitutional guarantee of the right to abortion.
Progressives are preparing to do battle on all fronts and take the lead in the opposition movement. And it happened that the word "woman" has almost completely disappeared in the discourses on abortion and pregnancy carried out by organizations such as Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the American Medical Association, as well as city and state health departments and especially by younger activists.
At the urging of transgender activists, medical, public, and progressive organizations have adopted gender-neutral language that avoids making distinctions between transgender women and men, as well as those who reject transgender identities altogether. .
Towards a neutral language
The speed of change is evident. In 2020, NARAL released a guide for abortion activists that emphasized the need to speak of "choice of women". Two years later, the same guide stressed the need to move to “gender-neutral language”.
Last year, the editor of The Lancet, a British medical journal, apologized for a cover that referenced "bodies with vagina” (bodies with vagina) rather than women. Today we talk about "pregnant people"and "people in childbirth“, no more than “pregnant women” or “women in labor”.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have a section dedicated to "care for people who are breastfeeding", the governor of New York has issued, during the Covid, a guide for partners who accompany "people in labor" and city and some state health departments offer "pregnant people" advice about "breastfeeding."
The Cleveland Clinic, a well-known non-profit hospital, asked this question on its website: "Who has a vagina?". The answer is: "It is AFAB (Assigned Female At Birth) people who have a vagina." The American Cancer Society website recommends cancer screening for "people with cervical cancer."
This reflects the desire of doctors to find a language that does not exclude anyone and comfort those giving birth identifying as non-binary or transgender. No agency is collecting data on transgender and non-binary pregnancies, but Australia has reported that around 0,1% of all births are to transgender men.
Dissenting feminist voices
Michael Powell of New York Times she has begun to collect various opinions from activists of the feminist movement who are beginning to show signs of impatience with this drift of inclusive language which is beginning to confuse roles and objectives.
Ti Grace Atkinson, of Cambridge Mass, considers herself a radical feminist and has been for most of her 83 years. She left the National Organization for Women in the 60s when it refused to push hard for abortion rights. She is now tired of the battles over gender and language, which she says are waged by transgender activists and progressives eager to confront right-wing politicians.
It is an approach that she sees as very distant and extraneous to the urgent needs of women, who represent 50,8% of the population. She is convinced that: “There must be concrete change. Taking away the right to abortion will make the battle harder. It's about women and our rights, it's not a language game."
Sarah Dahlen – of the editorial staff of the British Medical Journal –, mentioning the pressure exerted on doctors in Great Britain, where gender issues are no less pressing, to use terms such as "human milk" instead of "breast milk", warns of the risk of losing a wider audience by focusing on these secondary aspects.
"If the goal is to promote respect for every person, it follows that female patients who consider themselves merely women cannot be expected to 'passively conform to a language in which they do not exist,'" he said. wrote the author, criticizing proponents of gender-neutral language.
Language is politics
The shift to neutral language in gender discussions is not a secondary thing. But it is an integral part of the battle for certain rights. Louise Melling, deputy director of the ACLU, notes that not long ago masculine pronouns and terms like "man" were considered sufficient to include all women. Language is a powerful tool and also helps to shape political consciousness.
In an interview, Melling said: “Language evolves and can exclude or include. For me it is very important to talk about pregnant people. It is the truth: not only women give birth, not only women seek abortion”.
NARAL emphasized this point in a tweet last year defending the use of the term "people who give birth." He said: "We use neutral language with respect to gender when we talk about pregnancy, because it's not just cisgender women who can get pregnant and give birth".
Feminists like Atkinson and writer JK Rowling have openly stated that women are entitled to specific spaces – locker rooms, domestic abuse shelters, prisons – separate from transgender men and women.
These and other pointed criticisms have enraged transgender activists and their supporters, who have branded them as transphobic. Some also contest the language of the abortion rights movement, which speaks of a "war on women." "It's really hard," wrote one transgender activist, "to be in a movement that is so incredibly cisgender."
The world of politics
In New York, the progressive Working Families Party and the Democratic Socialists of America are a political powerhouse. When "Politico" obtained the draft opinion of the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling Roe v. Wade, who provides a constitutional right to abortion in the United States, these parties launched egregious complaints, in deliberately gender-neutral language.
The world of mainstream democratic politics voices these sentiments in more traditional language, aimed at voters rather than activists. Last year, the Biden administration released some budget documents that resented progressive gender discourse and referred to "people giving birth." Conservatives went wild.
But this month, when news of a potential Supreme Court breakthrough broke, President Biden was unequivocal and concrete in his language choices. “I believe that women's right to choose is fundamental,” she said. "The fairness and stability of our society demand that it not be undone."
Some left-leaning congressmen have adopted the language of the movement. Last year, Representative Cori Bush, a Democrat from Missouri, talked about "people who give birth."
But it's far more common to hear senators and congressmen, both men and women, refer to women. "We can't go back to a time when women had to risk their lives to terminate an unwanted pregnancy," said Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic Socialist representing Vermont.
The word "woman"
Professor Laurel Elder of Hartwick College and Professor Steven Greene of North Carolina State University have studied the growth of feminist identity across age and education. Many young activists, Professor Elder has observed, reject distinctions between men and women altogether. "But you - she specified - the reality is that society in general has not yet reached this point".
Professor Greene questioned the shrewdness of activists in insisting that Democrats abandon their basic sexual identity. Why not insist, for example, that transgender women and men also struggle when it comes to abortion?
“Activists are adopting symbols and language that are unwelcome not only to the right, but to people of the center and even liberals,” he noted. For that reason, he says he wasn't surprised when most Democratic politicians refused to adopt the language of progressive organizations. “You don't become a presidential candidate or a speaker of the House if you ignore what works in politics,” he said. "Democrats shouldn't be afraid to use the word 'women'."
From Michael Powell, A Vanishing Word in Abortion Debate: 'Women', “The New York Times,” June 8, 2022.
