245 Comments

Regarding the use of the word "women." I am with you, Charlie. I wonder if seeking gender neutrality does anything at all to affirm the uniqueness of the individual. Will it rid us of inequality, or discrimination?

Expand full comment

I do know of a "man" who recently gave birth. It's none of my business and doesn't affect me, so I don't care. I do hope, though, that people in that situation realize that the vast majority of people who say "pregnant women" mean no disrespect to outliers.

Expand full comment

The Bulwark is my go to place for staying touch with the most important political issues! Thanks.

About using the word "Women": I think American culture is confusing itself as it seeks to understand by adding categories, subcategories to nouns and verbs--mistakenly believing it's making better sense of things. So we get LGBTQixoeiut and her/she she/her. Modern language is full of obfuscations and pejorative works like "woke." The Quaker book Plain Living by Whitmire has chapter about "Plain Speech." Turns out the Quakers put a lot of emphasis on forthright communication.

Expand full comment

Brad Raffensberger also stood up to the illegal action requested by Trump - but he also chose to make the machinations public. Pence deserves credit for ultimately listening to advisors who told him he did not have the right to refuse to count the votes and also for refusing to leave the capitol building so grassley could take over and do what trump wanted - but he had some idea of what was coming (per his security concerns) and he said nothing ahead of time. Had he publicly expressed concerns might there have been stronger barriers and more of a police force in place?

Expand full comment

Did you also write about how Justice Sotomayor was targeted? Targeting any judge is out of bounds and one who does should face significant legal consequences.

Expand full comment

The Madison (Wis.) paper just did a feature story on a teen trans boy who entered a drag contest—without ever mentioning the obvious. Victor, Victoria in real life. Without the laughs.

Expand full comment

I'm going to go right past what I see as the idiocy of torturing language for political purpose -- not to mention its counter productiveness -- and focus on eliminating "women" from the debate on choice, who is really the pro-life group, and how this fight is actually against WOMEN, all of us, to push us back into the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant (which is shorthand for oppressed and abused and dismissed)!

Roe v Wade is about WHO gets to control women's bodies. (LGBTQ will be next but not now.) Who controls women's health choices extends to who controls women's lives, careers and futures. And Old White Men want to do it. They also want to rape and pillage without consequence, let's face it. I survived more than one attempted assault as a teenager and young adult but not by my peers.

So this is a hill for women to die on. Because it rolls back women's rights, which rolls back civil rights, which rolls back human rights, which gives us the Handmaid's Tale America, the wet dream of today's Republicans from Mitch on through.

Expand full comment

I read your column daily and watch you on MSNBC. I do not tweet or have apps on my phone. (Hacked twice and I am over 70 and from Fond du Lac!). I have learned quite a bit from my trans stepdaughter and her friends. (Yes, I have been a serious feminist since I was about 5. Growing up in FDL in the 50's will do that to a girl.) "Pregnant people" is the language that I feel most comfortable with and believe is critical to our understanding of what is often vital to trans people and LGBTQ people. Here is an article that I found interesting. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/20/the-dad-who-gave-birth-pregnant-trans-freddy-mcconnell Thanks to whoever is reading this.

Expand full comment

About the disappearing word “woman” - sometimes things change. For those of us north of 60, sometimes things that younger people treat as very important might seem incongruous. We boomers have been dominant for a long time, like it or not. But our demographic is shrinking in numbers as time marches on. We might already be some kind of minority. Obviously, being gender-neutral sensitive is important to enough people that it is starting to show up in institutions, organizations and media platforms. Just maybe we should let it happen without our approval. In such existential times, there are more important issues.

Expand full comment

Every time I hear “vagina owner” I’m reminded of the Wanda Sykes joke about how nice it would be to have a detachable you-know-what because women live with the risk of sexual violence. Unfortunately our privates are not removable nor are they all that we are. Reducing us to body parts and functions is offensive. It’s no better than a Republican calling a woman a vessel for a baby.

Expand full comment

I'm sorry the existence of gender nonconforming people is such an inconvenience for you, but trans men do in fact get pregnant and give birth. A doula friend (down here in Texas, no less) has helped several through their pregnancies. To say nothing of people who, while biologically female, do not identify as either gender. Even certain intersex people (which is itself a biological condition, not a chosen identifier) can have healthy pregnancies.

And trust me, I get that anti-abortion legislation is both targeted at and directly harmful of women, in particular, in a way that it behooves advocates to actually name and address. But the phrase "only women get pregnant. Only women give birth to babies," is factually untrue. Biological sex ≠ gender. Gender is a social construct. Please schedule a meeting about it with Tim if you're still confused.

Expand full comment

I think Charlie is in an extreme hate-the Dems, hate-the-libs mood just before the J6 televised hearing tonight. The extreme viewpoints are ridiculous, Charlie. No, SF hasn’t been destroyed - in fact I’d say the Dem voters did their job recalling. But of course you had to find the extreme right-wing view on it.

Expand full comment

That video is ape supremacy.

Expand full comment

“ partisan duopoly ”. I think Charlie’s looking for another word for bothsideism.

Expand full comment

I do not plan to watch any of the 1/6 committee stuff. I am not a member of their target audience. I do not plan to ever vote for another Republican unless circumstances undergo a sea change of some sort. I already know hat pieces of shit they are--either actively or by enabling others.

I am already angry and depressed enough that I do not need more of that.

It will be interesting to look at tomorrows comments.

Expand full comment

Sorry, Charlie, but you’re just not going to get me to bite on your “women” complaint.

‘As the NYT notes: “This tweet encompassed so much and so many and yet neglected to mention a relevant demographic: women.”’ Just May that’s because “women” seems to get the far right so triggered that they deny anything that involves them, if it’s brought to their attention by sheer use of the word?

Seriously, Charlie, with everything else going on you make a point of something NOT mainstream among the Ds?

Expand full comment