Academy of Breastfeeding stirring up triggers!
For people who don’t fully read.
“I have breasts, and if I lactate, they will be feeding. That’s it. I am happy that I have breasts that can do such things. To each their own, and to my own, I have breasts.” This was my caption when I reposted the image below. My inital comments on this inflammatory screengrab of a report were met with many, weeks-long-lasting comment threads. Some seen below — and mine fleshed out in this article.
This being called “gender inclusive” when it is moving away from the gender binary doesn’t make sense to me. This is more of an exclusion of gender, in my eyes. Be anyone self-identifying in any capacity, there are specific biological functions that allow for birth, lactation, and more. Why is this something that needs to be denied to make space, acceptance, and inclusion of anyone? This was my questioning.
As a female who identifies with my femaleness, it is enhanced, pronounced, catered to, and even targeted in the process of pregnancy. For an anatomically-female-person who experiences dysphoria regarding their femaleness, of course those same experiences could stimulate emotional triggers, stratifying the struggle of pregnancy with each physical and conversational reminder.
On people who say “If you want to advocate for marginalized people, as a cis-gendered person with privilege over transgender people, sit down, shut up, and listen!” … It is true, I am what some refer to as “cis” gendered. I myself do not refer to myself as so, and I would hope that anyone else who takes care to utilize preferred language would respect this in conversation with me. I have to add that the few people I know personally and listen to (who are of trans identities) have a variety of thoughts on this. I listen, and I ask a lot of questions so I can track people’s thinking and attempt to understand. That’s a listening that doesn’t include shutting up. Of those I’ve listened to, there hasn’t been just one school of thought based on their identity. There is no monolithic right way to engage in understanding what it is for people — and everyone has an entry point into the conversation of “gender identity” that comes into play. This includes the discussion on an essential function of the female sex — as we all have been born and all have a “mother” who we share that birth story with. As a thinker, and as an educator to young people, I am never going to be of the mind that the best thing to do with questions is stuff them. Redirect, rephrase, reframe, sure. But never stuff.
There is a widely held belief that gender identities that differentiate from the fe/male binary is tied to a mental disorder known as gender dysphoria. On its face, some variously-identified-people reject its very existence in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), on the grounds that they deem it transphobic. There is an entire section in the DSM with that title. Other people-of-various-identities completely agree with the explanation and find it a legitimate diagnosis. Identity politics is no help to me here. Whether the psychological term is accepted or not, tending to a pregnant patient should include care for their mental health and any mental diagnoses they have. This reframing around mental health next to physical health rather than gender/sex identification helped me to think further on behalf of diverse pregnant people.
The people who can hurt me the most are people who have something to do with my life… (IE: my doctor, my housing manager, my teacher, etc). If you don’t belong in my business in a material and immediate sense, then what you say or think about it is none of my business.
I agree with the scientific consensus that birth and pregnancy are anatomically-female-specific realities. As a female who identifies with my femaleness, it is enhanced, pronounced, catered to, and even targeted in the process of pregnancy. For an anatomically-female-person who experiences dysphoria regarding their femaleness, of course those same experiences could stimulate emotional triggers, stratifying the struggle of pregnancy with each physical and conversational reminder. Both people should receive caring, considerate, and personalized care. Using “inclusive” language to be a catch all is an approach that would trade ones consideration for another. Adding “desexed” language to include and account for everyone in this unique experience is much more considerate approach that medical care teams should absolutley have.
Having experienced preganancy while having a love for my femaleness, I completely understand feeling triggered by invisibilising or taking the femaleness out of pregnancy and birth. But I am but another possible patient, and not on anyone’s medical care team (professionally or personally). If anyone who thinks the option for desexed language is a good idea, the fight is best framed as a win-win. Keeping language that is affirmative and helps care more completely for some has no impact on added language that cares completely for someone else. It certainly should not. Everyone should get to have the considerate language that supports them in their process. A win-lose strategy would be to advocate for one without regard for the other. FOX News writers are, I am sure, aware of this tactic. Fox News set it up like “replace these words” when the context is “replace these words for patients who would benefit”. Beware becoming a SJW on social media who’s argument is made in Fox’s image — on the basis that you deem another “marginalized” group “more privileged”.
For those who would say “you aren’t centering people who…” you are right. Many of us would naturally center ourselves, and in the context of the initiative, we would be missing the point. However, centering ones self and how you relate to it is not an inherently malicious thing at all. You can find the point if you’re willing and able to follow the thinking someone offers you, if you so choose. Comment threads where ones own point is positioned on their personal pedestal so much so that they refuse to acknowledge alternative points is where the potential hurt lives. (By the way, does hurtful equate to harmful? I wouldn’t assume so).
This brings me back to this larger thing that keeps happening in these kind of internet convos. So many of us want to hold one another accountable for things none of us have anything to do with. We react to eachother on a micro scale with the responsibility of the macro scale weighed against us. Let me explain with what I like to call “Old Black Wisdom” intertwined. The people who can hurt me the most are people who have something to do with my life, whether that be personal or as gatekeepers in other settings (IE: my doctor, my housing manager, my teacher, etc). If you don’t belong in my business in a material and immediate sense, then what you say or think about it is none of my business.
For people who draw a comparison to Blackness for me so that I can “think about people who…” — I can think of these people who are different without this unhelpful comparison, which I find totally misguided. I don’t equate racial politics with gender identity politics, especially when they coexist. I really wish people would stop attempting to “help me understand” by using my perceived blackness as a talking point and teaching tool against me. (I also abhor the continual glossing over of females as an oppressed class, but go off academics).
Something I know based on intersectionality is that working to fortify our own fragility will allow us to prosper — and not doing so is a trap. Victimhood is a double edged sword, and I’m of the mind that no weapon formed with or without intention shall prosper. Least not one I form against myself because society encourages me to see myself as a victim. If I am a vulnerable marginalized person on the macro, let me and all those who fit that “community” continuously prioritizing our mental health and well being, so as to not become more vulnerable than we already are.
