In the beginning was the Word?
In the beginning was the Word?
The culture war over motherhood
"Every human being comes into this world through a woman, and only women have the ability to give birth to human beings."
"Every human being comes into this world through a person with uterus, and only persons with uteruses have the ability to give birth to human beings."
The two sentences above succinctly summarize the current culture war that has been sparked around the terms "woman" and "mother". This struggle has direct implications for the period of pregnancy, birth, and breastfeeding. The first sentence is considered transphobic in queer and intersectional circles. The second sentence sounds alienating to many women; to radical feminists, it is misogynistic.
The women’s fight for liberation
From the beginning of feminist movements, women struggled not to be confined to a stereotypical, sexist role. In addition to the self-sacrificing mother and housewife for her family, this included the role of the beautiful, sexually attractive playmate and trophy for her husband. It was considered "feminine" to be gentle, weak, reserved, loving, and quiet.
Feminist analysis originally referred to these limiting gender stereotypes as "gender" in distinction to innate, biological sex (English: "sex"). The goal of feminism is to overcome gender so that every person, regardless of birth sex, can find every opportunity for expression and fulfillment.
With the advent of what has been erroneously called "liberal and intersectional feminism" infiltration and queer theory, these terms have gradually been given a different meaning. Judith Butler, among others, contributed significantly to this with her 1990 work Gender Trouble. She interprets not only gender but also gender itself as a social construct and, in the tradition of Foucault's constructivism, sees material reality as defined by language.
Feminism is for everyone!
With the beginning of the 21st century, queer theory took more and more influence on what we used to define as gender or as woman and man. It also changed the understanding of what is called feminism. Feminism is now understood by many not as the liberation movement of women, but as a human rights movement that seeks to fight for equal rights for all.
Queer theory aims to break the boundaries of gender stereotypes by no longer seeing biological sex as a given binary system, but as a spectrum of infinite gender diversity. Thus, a penis is no longer a man's primary sex organ, but simply a reproductive organ without gender assignment. Gender identity determines which gender a person feels he or she belongs to. However, this is not clearly delineated in material or physical terms. Instead, it is defined purely by a sense of belonging and can also change in the form of gender fluidity.
The mind determines the body
So what we have here is a concept that no longer uses physical conditions as the basis for a categorical classification, but rather a subjective, individual sense of identity.
In 2007, an international group of experts from the fields of jurisprudence, health care and human rights drafted a guideline in Yogyakarta (Indonesia) that not only considers sexual orientation worthy of protection, but also sees the protection of gender identity as a human right. While not legally binding on UN states, the Yogyakarta Principles have nonetheless become a strong influence on governmental and academic bodies, resolutions, and legislation internationally.1
These guidelines, which are used, for example, as the basis for the planned Self-Determination Act in Germany, have implications for various areas of society and for women's rights.
Gender, language and obstetrics
The goal of gender-inclusive language was originally to make women more visible (e.g., by using the feminine and masculine forms in German: “Gynäkologinnen und Gynäkologen“ = Gynecologists). In the meantime, there has been a move to neutralize gendered terms (in German: “Lehrkräfte, Studierende“ = teachers, students) or to map gender identities via the gender star (in German: Hebammenstudent*innen = midwifery students).
For obstetrics, all these developments have led to the fact that it is increasingly common to speak of “pregnant persons” rather than “pregnant women”. This can be observed especially in English-speaking countries, where this process is already more advanced. The term “birthing women” is sometimes optionally replaced here by “birth givers, birth persons, birthers, birthing families, birthing parents, birthing people...”. For “breastfeeding”, terms such as “body feeding, chestfeeding, human milk feeding” are available.2
The alleged motivation behind these formulations is not to offend anyone and to be as inclusive as possible. However, when looked at closely, it is an ideological distortion through language. People of female gender might identify as male in the mind of gender identity ideology. This means that in the eyes of those who believe in gender identity, men could become pregnant and give birth. In turn, biological men who identify as women might feel excluded by being confronted with the reality of not being able to give birth and breastfeed. However, because they perceive themselves as complete women, they desire a change in formulations around the reality of women's physicality.
“Breast milk” would thus be better called “human milk” and women would be referred to as “people with uteruses”." These linguistic changes were quickly taken up, especially in an academic environment.
For example, in September 2021, the Lancet Medical Journal ran the cover headline “Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected.”3 (Shortly before that, by the way, the same journal wrote explicitly of men on its cover about prostate cancer).
Inclusive language
The overriding principle is therefore not to offend linguistically. It is interpreted as an aggressive attitude if the desired form of address is not complied with ("misgendering"). The fact that women, in turn, might feel violated if they are linguistically reduced to their reproductive organs is classified as acceptable.
From the perspective of queer theory, it is assumed that this development is not problematic, because it does not take anything away from women if the respective topics are linguistically focused on the decisive physical conditions.4
This sounds logical at first, because in fact ONLY people with uteruses are actually affected in pregnancy or abortion. Women who do not have a uterus are not directly affected by this issue.
However, women are discriminated against in many ways simply because they are women and have the potential to become pregnant - even if individual women do not have this ability. The discrimination and violence against women is based on the gender “woman” and the potential conditions of her body - not on a gender identity.
The disappearance of women
We have only recently created a social environment that allows women to speak openly about their bodies. Much about female physicality and sexuality is still insufficiently researched or even taboo. Especially for pregnant women and mothers, actual bodily self-determination is still not guaranteed today. We know, for example, that pregnancy is a high-risk time for intimate partner violence. The "Red Roses Revolution" and books like "Violence in Childbirth" by Christina Mundlos5 provide frightening evidence of the assaults women face during this sensitive period. It becomes difficult to talk about this issue specifically and to educate when we lack the words to grasp the whole complex.
Milli Hill, a British author, feminist, and childbirth activist, faced a social media shitstorm in 2020 when she challenged terms like "birthing person" for this reason.6 7 Similarly, Harry Potter author JK Rowling faced a Twitter backlash when she made her opinions on "sex" and "gender" public. Both then faced extreme hostility.8 9
Women like Rowling and Hill are accused of using their questions to reinforce hostility against people with trans identities. They run the risk of being vilified as "TERFs" - as "trans exclusionary radical feminists." But since women are concretely affected by this development, we need to find a way to respectfully discuss with each other in order to find a balanced solution.
A current push
A recent article by international experts in the field of obstetrics explains in detail the impact that language changes can have.10
1. Lack of inclusivity:
This type of language sets new barriers to understanding for people who are not in an academic setting and cannot relate to terms like “people with cervixes” or “menstruating person.”
2. Dehumanizing women and mothers:
Gender-neutral words like “gestational carrier” instead of “pregnant woman” dehumanize women and reduce them to their reproductive organs.
3. Undermining the autonomy of women and mothers:
People are linguistically included who, with exact wording, should actually be excluded. When people speak generally of people or families in the context of birth, instead of women or mothers, people of male gender are also addressed. In truth, however, women and mothers have unique, physical and emotional needs around pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding that they do not share with men. It is important to address women correctly in order to see them as autonomous human beings.
4. Linguistic confusion and lack of precision:
This is true, for example, in statistics where the word “woman” or “mother” has been replaced by “person”. This is what happened in publications around COVID-19, where a distinction was made between “pregnant-people” and “non-pregnant-people” in the impact of the disease, when in fact the comparison was between pregnant women and non-pregnant women.
5. Disembodiment and subversion of the meaning of breastfeeding:
The English phrase “human milk feeding” instead of “breast feeding” disembodies breastfeeding and decouples it from the mother's breast. It also has implications for breastfeeding promotion when breast milk is linguistically placed on a par with any other form of milk.
6. Erosion of the meaning of the word “mother”:
“Mom” is many children's first word, has special meaning in most languages, and emphasizes the bond between mother and child. The linguistic undermining and marginalization of the mother-child dyad has unfavorable effects.
7. Imprecise legal regulations:
The example given here is that in neonatal intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic, only a single person is allowed to visit for a limited period of time. If access is imprecisely granted to "parents" here, no distinction is made between mother and father. However, for a successful breastfeeding relationship and the bond between mother and child, it is the mother who should be allowed to visit in the first instance.
8. Confusion in research and science:
Women and mothers have unique physical and health conditions and needs that cannot be accurately covered by the term "parent" or "human." In any case, there is already a "female data gap" that is exacerbated by gender-neutral terminology or confusion between gender and sex in research and science.
In summary, the text recommends a precise differentiation of gender, gender identity and sex. The focus should be on how to achieve a clear, understandable and targeted formulation without dehumanizing. In the vast majority of cases, this means differentiation via sex - in individual cases via gender and gender identity.
What diversity means
The purported goal of queer theory is a diverse, colorful society in which each person can live their individuality in a self-determined way and adapt their body to their perceived gender identity.
Nevertheless, we must keep in mind the vulnerable group of women in pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding. We should not allow them to be linguistically marginalized or interpret an advocacy for maintaining their linguistic visibility as hostility.
The UN Convention on the Rights of Women, CEDAW, requires in Article 12 (2) that “States Parties [provide] adequate and, if necessary, free care for women during pregnancy and during and after childbirth, and adequate nutrition during pregnancy and lactation.”11
The Women's Declaration International calls for ensuring that motherhood "in its legal status and as a condition concerns exclusively persons of the female sex.”12
Women's Declaration International further states:
It is discrimination against women when men who claim a female "gender identity" are considered under the legal category of mother before the law, in policy, guidelines, and in everyday life, and likewise when women who claim a male "gender identity" are considered under the category of father, as this seeks to abrogate the exclusive and gendered rights of mothers.
[...] The meaning of the term "mother" should not be changed or extended to include men.
It is mothers who bring forth each individual human life and usually also provide for them over many years. Therefore, every person benefits from respectful treatment of mothers and from their optimal position and care.
This text first appeared in 2022 in the Österreichische Hebammenzeitung. For the current publication, I have changed and expanded it somewhat.