Trans-ideology has impacted language in many ways. Trans-activists have aggressively redefined the word “woman”, they have created a new lexicon of terms while other terms are being erased in the name of “inclusion”and they enforce the use of correct pronouns. Controlling language means controlling the narrative.
What is a Woman?
A woman is an Adult Human Female. Influenced by Queer Theory, trans-activists insist that a woman is whoever feels like a woman. By queering the category of woman and blurring the boundary of who can be called a woman, the word “woman” becomes meaningless – a woman is whoever says they are. Trans-ideology claims that “Transwomen are women” and they have subdivided the category of women into two: Transwomen and Ciswomen.
“Cis” is the prefix that gets attached to the words gender, woman and man to imply that the individual “identifies with the sex they were assigned at birth.” In the transgender lexicon, a “ciswoman” is a woman whose gender identity matches her birth sex (female); IE: a biological female who identifies as a woman. As you can see, the category woman has been subdivided into two categories – transwomen and ciswomen. This bizarre language creation means that women have become a subcategory of their own sex.
Ironically, the creation of cis-categories just creates another binary opposition – cisgender versus transgender – which is undesirable according to Queer theory. The whole point of transgenderism is to smash binaries, making cis-categories contrary to this purpose. Cisgender is also a problem for gender non-conforming people who don’t deny their sex but also don’t identify with gendered stereotypes. For example, a person born female who identifies as a woman and is comfortable with her sexed body but hates the gender stereotypes (ie: sex-role stereotypes) may not agree that she is a cisgender, yet she obviously isn’t transgender since she is comfortable with her sexed body and has no desire to transition. She is non-transgender but not cisgender either, since she doesn’t “identify” or “agree” with female stereotypes. This is yet another demonstration of the internal incoherence of Queer Theory currently being played out in the battleground of language. It is an unfortunate reality that transgenderism is entirely based on the performance of stereotypes, making it actually very regressive instead of progressive. Rather than breaking through stereotypes and freeing people to express their personalities as they wish, it locks us into gender-box stereotypes and creates more labels.
Female Specific Language Is Being Erased
In the name of diversity and inclusion, female-specific language is being erased. Even the word “female” itself is considered “exclusionary”, but there is a whole host of linguistic terms that have been neutered to make transgender people feel included. For example: “People who menstruate”, “menstruators”, “pregnant people”, “cervix-havers”, “chest feeding”, “birthing parent”, “host body” and “gestational carriers”. These strange linguistic creations are turning up everywhere, including government websites, medical advice campaigns, midwifery services, media articles and even legal documents.
Even the word “vagina” has been claimed by trans-activists to mean the post-surgical inverted penis (vaginoplasty), while women’s actual vaginas have been renamed “front holes”.
For many women, this neutering of language and the associated use of revolting and dehumanizing terms ominously signals the erasure of women in law and language.
Of course none of this ever applies to men. Nobody refers to men as “ejaculators” and “prostate havers.” The double standard is breathtaking.
One of the most observable ways that trans-ideology has impacted language is through the enforcement of “correct pronouns” and the invention of new ones. Trans-identified males must be referred to as she/her and trans-identified females must be referred to as he/him. Non-binary people like to use “they/them” – an odd use of pluralization to refer to a single individual. Trans-activists insist that “misgendering” a trans-person is a “micro-aggression” and “denies their existence.” People are expected to announce their pronouns and respect other people’s pronoun preferences, even when it obviously contradicts a person’s visual appearance. A male with a beard may insist to be called “she/her” and heaven help anyone who gets it wrong. Journalists now routinely comply with these language demands, referring to male rapists as “she/her” and giving readers the impression that the crime was committed by a woman. Courts of law are now enforcing “correct pronoun” usage which may have unintended consequences in a variety of ways. As Professor Bruce Pardy states in this National Post article, “to compel pronouns is to insist that people can own and control how others regard them, and to force them to reflect a particular view of reality.”