People with ovaries

Meanwhile, in Bristol:

A council has become embroiled in a transgender row after insisting that women should be called “people with ovaries”.

Bristol city council has been accused of offending women with “virtue-signalling madness” after claiming that legally defining sex as biological “misgenders trans people” and could lead to discrimination.

Officials also argued that the term “maternity” should be scrapped and replaced with “paternity” to avoid offending trans people, despite the latter meaning “the fact of being a father”.

They also demanded support for biological men who wanted to “chest-feed” babies, despite questions about whether the practice is harmful.

Oh ffs. Of course it's harmful. A tiny baby forced to drink some chemically-induced gunge to satisfy a man's fetish…

And if women are “people with ovaries”, why aren't men “people with testicles”? Somehow it never works that way.

Bristol city council, whose Green Party leader Tony Dyer has criticised the Supreme Court ruling, raised a number of objections, including urging the EHRC to drop gendered language when referring to pregnancy, maternity and breastfeeding.

It wrote that “not all pregnant individuals would use the pronouns ‘she/her’” so it could lead to “emotional and psychological distress” for “trans men, non-binary, gender diverse or intersex individuals”.

“We strongly advise the use of more inclusive language such as using ‘they/them’ to refer to all individuals, or include other identities to reflect the diversity of individuals who access maternity or paternity services,” officials said.

“This could include ‘people with ovaries’ or the term ‘people who use paternity services’. We also recognise that individuals may not identify with the word maternity and prefer paternity as it is gender neutral.

Eh? Does he even know what paternity means? The man's an idiot.

The consultation response, signed off by Mr Dyer and his deputy, also took issue with a new definition of sexual orientation, which states that a lesbian woman or a gay man is someone attracted to someone of the same sex.

The council complained that this means that two biological men in a relationship would be “wrongly” categorised as gay.

“The revised wording of this section introduces confusion by defining sexual orientation only in relation to biological sex, rather than the affirmed gender of a partner,” Bristol council wrote.

“For instance, under this framing, a heterosexual man in a relationship with a trans woman could be wrongly categorised as gay, solely because of his partner’s sex assigned at birth.

“This erases the affirmed gender of trans people and mischaracterises the orientation of their partners. Sexual orientation is about patterns of attraction, including attraction to people of a particular gender – not just anatomy or birth sex.”

They've really drunk the KoolAid, this lot.