How wonderful

Expectant mothers should be called “pregnant people”, the Government has suggested in a submission to amend a UN treaty.

The proposed amendment is to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the UK has been a signatory of since 1976.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s submission suggests the term “pregnant people” to avoid excluding “transgender people who have given birth”, The Sunday Times reported.

An FCO spokesman said: “The UK does not object to the use of the term ‘pregnant woman’. We strongly support the right to life of pregnant women, and we have requested that the Human Rights Committee does not exclude pregnant transgender people from that right to life.”

But one feminist said the change made gender “unmentionable”.

While appeasing one part of the SJW monster they offend another part of it.

What we should all really be talking about of course is that any of our money gets spent on such treaties and nonsenses in the first place.

34 thoughts on “How wonderful”

  1. I am enjoying how the Trans activists are alienating feminists. It is the time honoured move to Conservatism. As radical ideas age they get accepted so b come Conservative while new more radical ones challenge then, pushed my former leftists to the now welcoming arms of the Tories. I wouldn’t bet against Germane Greer as a Tory peer before too long.

  2. Orwell would be proud.

    I like the trans activists they way they have convinced polite society to pretend men can be women etc.

    Its great. I worked with them professionally (Ambulance and Prisons). Obviously these people haven’t met actually trans-sexuals.Cause they seem to have missed the point that most a fucken’ paint licking insane.

  3. Expectant mothers should be called “pregnant people”, the Government has suggested in a submission to amend a UN treaty.
    The proposed amendment is to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the UK has been a signatory of since 1976.

    Another route for imposing cultural Marxism on people who don’t vote for it. The EU, UN treaties…although Corbyn now is within reach of Number 10, so perhaps they won’t have to bother with this route for much longer.

  4. If some loon decided she was a hamster and subsequently got up the duff, would we need to expand the terminology once more?

    It would be a far better use of taxpayers money if everyone at the FCO who has been involved in this nonsense was shot in the face and boiled down for glue.

  5. So Much For Subtlety

    MC – “It would be a far better use of taxpayers money if everyone at the FCO who has been involved in this nonsense was shot in the face and boiled down for glue.”

    I like the cut of your jib, sir. Although perhaps leaning a little towards moderation and euphemism for my liking.

    I think it is time to insist that the UN demands we all call those suffering from anorexia fatties.

  6. The Unused Testicle

    Shurely, “persons”?

    “Come this way, sir, I understand you are a pregnant people”

    You can tell the FCO is full of public schoolboys who never went to grammar schools…

    If we want to be lunatics, let us be educated lunatics.

  7. Quite how this relates to Britain’s interests abroad is a mystery.

    Then again, I expect the FCO hasn’t been interested in that for quite some time.

  8. Quite how this relates to Britain’s interests abroad is a mystery.

    I suppose one might argue that wasting FCO resources in this manner prevents it from fucking up something that matters.

  9. Can we hold this up as proof that all the real problems have been solved then? And don’t need any more taxpayers money throwing at them?

  10. Bloke in North Dorset

    “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the UK has been a signatory of since 1976.”

    Never heard of that one before, which is surprising because it sounds like a CM’s wet dream.

  11. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s submission suggests the term “pregnant people” to avoid excluding “transgender people who have given birth”

    Transgender people who have given birth are NO LONGER pregnant so by definition cannot be excluded from a group of pregnant [anything].

    A woman turning into a man while pregnant is the only beneficiary of this semantic nonsense and her (/his) unborn child is at rather greater risk of harm.

  12. So Much For Subtlety

    This is how you get Trump. It can only be a matter of time before we elect our own.

    I nominate Ecks! And I suggest the slogan “As humanely as possible”.

  13. Philip Scott Thomas

    It would be a far better use of taxpayers money if everyone at the FCO who has been involved in this nonsense was shot in the face and boiled down for glue.

    Indeed. The FCO has been rotten with occidentalists for decades.

  14. DeovnChap: Would be nice to think, but if you read up on these radfem types, they aren’t exactly conservative. They just want to be able to dyke out without the mentally ill freaks who think they’re women showing up.

    A reasonable enough position, but they still need some correction.

  15. Benaud
    Well actually Orwell would be rolling in his grave, 1984 wasn’t meant to be an instruction manual.

    Well actually as distopian futures goes it was his old teacher Huxley’s one that had the solution down pat.
    Everyone born in test tubes and drugged to their eyeballs the moment they become a little ticked off.

  16. ‘While appeasing one part of the SJW monster they offend another part of it.’

    The Democrat Party: an alliance of homos and Muslims.

  17. > The Democrat Party: an alliance of homos and Muslims.

    After gays and trans, the next political battle will be over polygamy. After all, if a man wants to marry several women, what does it matter what consenting adults get up to?

    I’m honestly don’t know whether the current batch of feminists and SJWs will welcome polygamy.

  18. I’m honestly don’t know whether the current batch of feminists and SJWs will welcome polygamy.

    Given that the Islamists will be gung ho for it, my prediction is “Yes, they will”.

  19. “made gender unmentionable”.

    But pregnancy isn’t about gender, it’s a biological process, so it’s about sex. It’s irrelevent what your gender is, you can only get pregnant if your sex is female.

  20. That’s it. I’m standing against the Conservatives at the next local or national elections.

    They had an opportunity after Brexit to realise that they were out of fucking line with current thinking, a bit too Guardian for the country, but no, they’re still doing more pointless shit instead of cutting pointless shit that was already there.

    Current thinking is under “Saving Your Money” party, but any other suggestions welcome.

  21. NiV, reminds me, LPGA golf tournament this weekend is listed on my local cable as “Slime Darby.”

    Can’t stop giggling.

  22. Young me: Why do we call a group of people _____men when the group includes women?

    Mom: Because English doesn’t include a good gender neutral word and it isn’t worth the effort to make one up, then rewrite everything to reflect the changes.

  23. “Mom: Because English doesn’t include a good gender neutral word and it isn’t worth the effort to make one up”

    I think it comes from the Anglo-Saxon terms “wif man” = female-person and “wer man” = male-person, where “man” = person (gender neutral).

    wifman dropped the ‘f’ and shifted pronunciation becoming ‘woman’ (‘women’ is still pronounced ‘wimmen’ though), and “wer man” got dropped with “man” taking over to identify male men.

    It was similar in Latin. ‘Homo’ meant person (gender neutral), ‘vir’ meant male adult. (‘vir’ and ‘wer’ being related – the Romans pronounced ‘v’ as we pronounce ‘w’.).

    So actually we did have a good gender-neutral word, but then a bunch of modern trendy young people (a thousand years ago) started mucking about with the terms, making new words up…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *