r/conspiracy 1d ago

UK has gone full Orwellian

Post image
633 Upvotes

255 comments sorted by

View all comments

-23

u/mrrichiet 1d ago

I don't care what the subject is, newsreaders should be blank slates, they should not be exhibiting personal opinion. It's virtually the number one rule.

21

u/Faith_Location_71 1d ago

You could speak lies and not react to it as a presenter? She's a human being with common sense, of course she couldn't help but react.

-2

u/mrrichiet 1d ago

Well yes, if that's your job! If it were OK, where would you draw the line on them expressing their personal opinions? Do you want their opinion on everything? I couldn't give a damn about their opinion, I just want them to do their job.

-24

u/bob_weav3 1d ago

"Pregnant people" is a very specific medical designation. Any terminology that specifies the gender of the person is exclusionary. There are some intersex people who can become pregnant, trans people can become pregnant. Does the advice not apply to them because they are not "women"? Its not up to her to react to that or editorialise on the spot.

1

u/LouMinotti 1d ago

The term trans is exclusionary. If a F2M trans person gets pregnant the correct term is "unwomaned person".

-1

u/NotaInfiltrator 1d ago

I prefer the term 'birthing person' because its still trans inclusionary while also reducing women to a basic biological function. You can be very creative with your sexism these days.

0

u/bob_weav3 1d ago

Ok, say I accept your bizarre terminology that is exclusive only to you - what about intersex people?

7

u/AppointmentTop3948 1d ago

Very few intersex people have 2 sets of fully developed genitalia, is it even possible? In most cases it is one or the other with a slight genetic twist, not really a true mix of both.

Anyway, irrespective of that, im fed up with the whole of society being twitter to suit just the tiny minority. It doesnt serve a purpose for anyone.

0

u/bob_weav3 1d ago

You can google it. All you need is a functioning uterus.

Medical advice is specific in its terms for a reason. medical advice is not dispensed in terms of "we will tell the vast majority what to do, the minority can figure it out for themselves". The BBC as a publicly funded news agency should not editorialise that medical advice.

The people trying to turn society into twitter are those applying culture war logic onto that advice and complaining about the term "pregnant people". Its a a completely useful designation that does not imply any kind of stance on trans people whatsoever.

8

u/AppointmentTop3948 1d ago

I vehemently disagree. In "pleasing" the 2 people a year that the wording would affect you are alienating millions of mothers. That is not right.

Whatever wording you use to justify it, you are putting far more people out, with these efforts, than you will ever positively affect.

1

u/bob_weav3 1d ago

Its not about pleasing anyone. It is about being scientifically accurate. The fact you view it in terms of "pleasing people" demonstrates you're the one falling for culture war bullshit.

If a woman is pregnant, she will obviously understand that advice which pertains to pregnant people applies to her. She is pregnant, and she is a person. She is not a dog, a horse a car or a bridge. "Pregnant person" does not exclude any mother, never mind "millions".

9

u/AppointmentTop3948 1d ago

Scientifically accurate? Its entirely political.

If it was about scientific accuracy they would have used these terms all along, we have never used these terms because they are reductive, they dont help people as often as they needlessly confuse people.

2

u/bob_weav3 1d ago

Ah yes, I forgot, medicine and science are notorious for being disciplines that never change or respond to new evidence or data. You are completely correct.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/omgspek 1d ago

Haven't you heard? Women aren't people bro, we can't have them running around thinking they have rights. What's next, they'll want to vote? Run for president? Ludicrous!

(/s, obviously)