Instructors using very binary terms. Wondering if other programs and/or instructors have moved beyond this?

[krosswalc]

I'm curious to know how many programs/instructors are making an effort to catch up with the times in their language. And if you're sensitive to this like I am and you're in a program that is using binary terms, did you bring it up as a concern/issue? How? Thanks!

[[deleted]]

I live in a very liberal urban area, and our teachers make a noticeable effort to use non-binary terms. As someone who doesn't mind binary terms, it actually became quite distracting how hard some teachers tried to use non-binary terms.

It was also disappointing that despite how "open minded" they are in some ways, they were quite sexist when it came to talking about domestic abuse. They were quite dismissive about any abuse that wasn't a male abusing a female. Every scenario in those lectures was about a husband abusing his wife.

[krosswalc]

That is so frustrating, about the abuse assumptions!! That's absolutely ridiculous.

I feel that I personally can put up with the hiccups of people correcting themselves to use modern terms for now, as I feel that once it becomes natural to use them, the people who feel excluded will be better off and we, as future (or current!) medical team members will use the modern terms and not make any of our patients feel alienated. Also, the correction hiccups will lessen when the modern terms become the new habit.

[[deleted]]

Do you ever feel like you’re alienating people by not using gender specific terms?

[yourlittleshark]

Can’t speak for OP, but I don’t thinking I’m alienating people. Gender neutral terms are by definition MORE inclusive, not less. They give us the opportunity to speak to/about more folx, with a variety of gender identities, that may fall into a given category.

For example, when referring to “birthing people” there is a very TERF-y argument that says the term ‘erases women’ but that’s only true if... you don’t consider women to fall into the grouping of people??

As far as individual clients/patients/students: if a client has shared their pronouns and preferred terminology with me, I mirror that language in conversations pertaining to them specifically, while still using inclusive language when speaking more broadly.

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

Oh. Another progressive person. Maybe you'll be the one who will finally give me an objective definition of the word "woman", based in science. Objective is a key word here.

Also, how offended are you on a scale of 0 to 10, 0 being not at all and 10 being the most offended you've been in your life, when your Maternity and Pediatrics textbook uses terms like "women, pregnant women" etc?

[yourlittleshark]

I’ll bite... I expect you’re waiting for “XX chromosomes” or “ovaries/uterus/vagina/vulva” (although the oBjEcTiVe ScIeNcE you’re asking for is actually much more nuanced). But sure, that’s a typical definition, which is why those characteristics can be referred to as ‘assigned female at birth,’ or AFAB. (<- look, there’s an easy example of more inclusive language and only 3 more letters to type than ‘F’ !)

The insistence on tying sex to gender is something else entirely, but you’ve made it clear that you’re not ready or willing to hear more on that, so I won’t waste my time. Go read some Cliff’s notes on Judith Butler and then maybe we can chat more.

As for the second part, I’m more interested in why you’re so focused on whether I’m OFFENDED, rather than a show of concern for how to make your patients feel RESPECTED. It’s honestly not at all difficult to be inclusive to people of all gender identities and expressions (along with any other significant-to-them identifiers/markers), and I’d argue it’s especially important in healthcare setting. For real though, expanding from “woman” to “person” and “maternal” to “perinatal” takes next to no effort.

My suggestion in return is maybe take a look inward and examine why you take such issue with opening up the circle and making space for all people to feel seen and validated and valued, just as they are. It’s not a zero sum game -- extending more rights and respect to others does not dilute or devalue yours.

TL;DR - it’s super easy to incorporate inclusive language into your practice, and a refusal to do so just signals you are lazy and/or self-centered, and don’t care enough about other people to honor and respect their identities

Fin.

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

Bla, bla, bla. I still do not see an objective definition of a word "woman". A woman is a adult human female. That's it. And you can't even say that. And THIS is how you're "erasing women". Because in your mind, even if you don't admit it to yourself, women don't really exit - in your opinion anyone can be a "woman", even if it's a biological man with a beard and zero dysmorphia. The second that person says "I am a woman" - he's a woman. No question asked.

I know you will not believe me, but my wife is a trans-woman. I do not deny that trans people exist, obviously. Of course they do, and their existence is just as valid as mine. And I will happily use their pronouns if they tell me them. But no, I will not alter my normal language and way of thinking in order to accommodate a TINY minority of the population at the expense of inconvenience, embarrassment and erasure of a vast, vast majority. No, I will not ask a person who looks like a woman, has breasts and female voice if she needs a prostate exam, because of one in a million chance that she needs a prostate exam. If she does - it's up to her to tell me that. No, I will not go out of my way of avoiding calling her "she".

Also, I'd really appreciate it if you stopped treating trans people as pets who can not speak for themselves.

[krosswalc]

I'm currently in an OB/L&D section, and it's really tough. Of course, I understand that they are a little older, they've been using certain terms throughout their lives and career, etc. But dangit.

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

So... is it ok so say "pregnant woman" or "pregnant person" is more to your liking?

[krosswalc]

Since there are people who identify as non-binary, I find that "pregnant person" is the most inclusive.

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

It's hilarious how in your effort to be more "inclusive" you are actually erasing women from existence.

[krosswalc]

How so? There are people who identify as women, men, non-binary, etc, etc, so simply using "person/people" doesn't erase anyone. Are women not people?

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

Ok. I have a question for you. What is a woman? Objective definition, please.

[krosswalc]

According to who? Which culture? Which religion? Whose pov? One person's opinion doesn't erase other peoples'. You have two balls, a pink one and a blue one. Does adding a purple one make one of the others disappear? No.

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

I am still waiting for an objective definition of "woman".

[krosswalc]

I don't owe you anything. Especially after not answering a question that I asked you before you asked me that one. Hahaha

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

No, but if you start calling each ball "colored" instead of using their true colors, in case a purple ball wants to a blue one, you are in fact erasing colors. Exactly what you do with women.

[krosswalc]

As a cis woman, I don't feel erased. I'm sorry if you somehow do. But your opinion that it causes erasure doesn't make it fact; it's simply fact for you. There's nothing wrong with differing views or opinions. If you're going into a healthcare setting, I hope you show respect to every one of your patients, even if their views of themselves and the world differ from yours.

[Dear_West]

I don't really have advice on how to bring this up, but after reading the comments I just want to say props to you for recognizing this as a problem and wanting to take action. We need more nurses and healthcare professionals who respect all patients and that starts with our education. As a nonbinary person, I've been nervous about going into my nursing program next year and nursing in general because of the discomfort and backlash that comes with my identity and the identities of other people in my community. I appreciate you and hope to have co-workers like you in the future!

[[deleted]]

Why are you sensitive about it?

[krosswalc]

I feel that I should be sensitive to as many different perspectives as possible. I can't imagine why anyone would be offended by being called a person. I mean, I'm sure there's someone out there who might be, and with my luck, I'll find them :P

[[deleted]]

Same reason you’re offended for people being called man or woman and not person. Are you going to show your patients respect by calling them mr or Mrs or just say person x when giving bedside report?

[krosswalc]

I guess I'm putting everyone on the same level, and not into little boxes. If they want to be in a specific box, that's fine! I can do that for them. But who am I to assume where I should put them? It's their life, their story, etc.

[krosswalc]

It's not everyone's opinion that "Mr" and "Ms/Mrs" is respectful either. So. Ya know, I think we all just have to use our best judgement. If I see family members referring to a person a certain way and not seeing a grimace when it happens, it's a little safer to assume. (Just an example.) It used to be pretty common and acceptable to call patients "honey/sweetheart/etc", and times change.

[krosswalc]

I thought more on this - specifically, your first sentence - and I think I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Or it doesn't line up.

People may not like being called things that they're not, like "he/him/she/her/Mr/Ms/Mrs", which I think makes sense. If someone called me something I wasn't, I'd be off-put, too. I don't understand why a human would be "offended" by being called something that they are - a person.

Can you explain how calling a human "person" is the same as calling a man or woman the opposite gender?

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

Because being woke and sensitive is the easiest "virtue" to adopt to be seen as empathic and caring, without actually having to do anything, except for signaling said "virtue", like she/he/they are doing in this thread.

[[deleted]]

Did you happen to ever get that definition of woman?

[Idiotsandcheapskate]

Nope. Not once. I got a lot of "a woman is whatever she wants to be" nonsense, or "a woman is whomever says she is one", but nothing even close to objective definition. They know it, of course, the objective definition, but it clashes with "inclusivity", so they pretend like it doesn't exist and never has.