Transgender inclusive language is not at the detriment of biological women
To support student journalism and the content you love, become a member of The Daily Orange today.
Social movements throughout history have faced internal disputes about inclusivity. Some have argued that it can set back a movement, but such exclusion is contradictory to the goal of movements themselves, which work toward equality. Recently, there has been more work to make women’s rights movements more inclusive.
As we move to recognize LGBTQ+ rights, allies must understand that language is at the center of the battle. The definition of what it means to be a woman can often exclude trans women, trans men and nonbinary people. The experience of womanhood is not the same for all, and these binary labels can be damaging to marginalized groups.
There is a double-edged sword when it comes to many women’s rights movements that may only encapsulate the experience of cisgender women. There are even groups who are outspoken about removing transgender people from feminist movements, such as trans-exclusionary radical feminist groups, or TERFs, who feel threatened by the inclusion of a new group: transwomen. TERFs believe that trans women are really men, making them oppressors of women and not welcome in women-led spaces. TERFs refer to themselves as “gender critical” and treat transwomen as a risk to women’s safety and a threat to the feminist movement.
In the fight for reproductive rights, trans men and nonbinary people are often excluded when the fight is labeled for “women.” Instead, language such as “cisgender” or “people with uteruses” can be more accurate towards those affected, especially as such open terminology also includes biological women.
It is also important to recognize that not all women menstruate. In addition to some cisgender women who don’t get their periods, many trans women do not have uteruses. If we define womanhood around biological processes such as menstruation, it excludes an entire group of people. Cisgender women who may have been born without certain body parts are reduced to their body parts, which seems counterintuitive to the fight for women’s bodily autonomy. There shouldn’t be bodily restrictions determining who can be considered a woman.
In the overturning of Roe v. Wade, efforts to include people who suffer from losing access to abortions is important more than ever. With the fight for abortion access being labeled a “women’s issue,” a large demographic is overlooked. The ACLU details why it is important to use inclusive language to include all of those being stripped of their rights.
“Anyone who can become pregnant needs to be able to get an abortion if they need or want one, including many cisgender women, some non-binary people, some intersex people, some Two Spirit people and some trans men,” writes AC Facci.
Especially in social movements fighting to protect human rights, it is important to use specific terms and avoid binary labels that can alienate whole groups.
Both social and biological definitions of “womanhood” invalidate and isolate the identities of many groups. Being a woman has different meanings to varying people and many of those definitions and experiences are not exclusive to biological women. For some women, being able to give birth is part of their identity, and for others, their reproductive organs are not at the center of their identity.
Throughout history, society has defined women as homemakers and mothers, and otherwise in relation to their husbands. Women have been called dramatic or delicate. Different groups of women have been stereotyped and sexualized in many ways, whether you are a Black woman, a trans woman or within any other identity. And all the while, they have been excluded from the label of “woman.”
“During Jim Crow, there would be bathrooms labeled “men,” “women” and “colored,” wrote Alia Dastagir for USA Today. “The longstanding view of white supremacy denied recognition as women to Black women and women of color.”
Based on recent opinion, people would have you think that such language is threatening to women. But it is quite the opposite. In an attempt to define women, some people will always be excluded. Not all women have long hair. Not all women wear heels. Not all women have uteruses. If any of these are required in your definition of a woman, it isn’t complete.
“Failing to use inclusive language erases the stories, struggles, and experiences of gender-diverse people from public knowledge and understanding, leading to stigma and a culture of violence,” wrote BSK for Assembly. Exclusionary movements lead to exclusionary policies, putting members of the LGBTQ+ community at risk. This violence comes in many forms, including a lack of healthcare and representation.
These binaries also force people to choose one or the other. Those who are gender non-conforming may feel like they are not supported by certain groups and welcomed in spaces depending on whether they have a uterus or not.
When we participate in these movements and advocate for marginalized groups of people, we need to do the work and make sure that we are including all people and those who identify with that group. Inclusive language is the first step to providing spaces for all to share their voices. These movements are not about a narrow scope but supporting marginalized groups to attain and keep their rights.
Emilie (Lily) Newman is a sophomore Political Science and Magazine, News, and Digital Journalism major. Her column appears biweekly. She can be reached at emnewman@syr.edu.
