this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
52 points (100.0% liked)

Entertainment

4594 readers
18 users here now

Movies, television and Broadway.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Carlos Santana, Alice Cooper, Róisín Murphy, Dave Chappelle, J.K. Rowling, Harry Jowsey, Bette Midler, Macy Gray, Kevin Hart, John Cleese

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gowan@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Midler came up playing the NYC bathhouses which were essentially fuck clubs for gay men before AIDS shuttered them all. I have a difficult time seeing her being anti-LGBT given how gay her fan base traditionally was.

[–] nicktron@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

She’s not anti-gay, she’s anti-trans.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Her comment sounds like she isn't anti trans but more has a problem with terms like birthing person instead of cis-woman or woman depending on context.

It's not anti-trans to suggest we use the term women rather than birthing person when discussing pregnancy fir example.

[–] Adramis@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Except that it is, because it erases entire swaths of people who are able to give birth but who aren't women. Birthing person is inclusive of women and everyone else. I don't understand the problem.

[–] Leshoyadut@fedia.io 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It also doesn’t refer to cis women who are unable to give birth for any variety of reasons. It’s specifically not referring to a pretty sizable group of cis women while also including people who aren’t cis women, because cis women aren’t the ones being referred to; birthing people are.

[–] Adramis@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Didn't even think about that, that's a valid point. Thank you for bringing that up.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is it ok to force a descriptor on a group of people that do not identify with said term?

[–] Vodulas@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Because it is meant to be used in healthcare care settings in reference to groups of people. It is a way more accurate and complete description of the cohort. Nobody is going around calling individual women "birthing people." Midler took a term out of context and tried to claim people are trying to erase women, which is classic TERF behavior

[–] Chetzemoka@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh, I'm sure she's still very pro-LGB. Most TERFs are (for now at least). It's the T part of the equation that they think it's acceptable to hate

[–] gk99@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

TERFs may be the dumbest people alive. How are you going to be all about equality and acceptance after literally thousands of years of women being mistreated, only to turn around and do that to a different group and see no problem with it? Absolutely mindless.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sounds like her issue is with terms like birthing person rather than cis-woman.

[–] Chetzemoka@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Those complaints originated in TERF circles

[–] elfpie@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But they are not equivalent. People that erase trans people read it like that and project. In a medical setting, the biology is important and the language makes sure all parts involved are included in the conversation.

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This begs the question why is it acceptable to assign terms to people they do not identify as? Your comment would make sense in medical discussions about people giving birth but that's not how it is being used.

[–] Vodulas@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It does not beg that question because that is literally how it is being used. Your continued hammering of that point is simply untrue and feels incredibly disingenuous since multiple people have told you that is how it is being used

[–] gowan@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It is being used to describe someone in a way they would prefer not to be used for them. Is this really that hard to see the overt hypocrisy in?

[–] Gaywallet@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

There's a distinct difference between complaining that you were labeled a certain way and being a celebrity and writing a rant apropos of nothing on Twitter about how an amorphous "they" are not calling us women anymore.

You're right that no one should be referred to in a way they don't want to be, but that only applies when they're not being intolerant. Punch Nazis and call them assholes and Nazis. It's good and cool.

[–] Vodulas@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago

Way to be purposely obtuse. I'm sure that is working well for you