Women’s Health magazine recently posted
a piece by Nick Lloyd (as told to Kristin Canning, the magazine’s features
director), a non-binary transgender person who believes abortion
clinics should use gender-neutral language in all their communication. Lloyd,
who has previously had an abortion, was upset that the experience was too
“gendered.”
Lloyd averred, "Trans
and non-binary people get pregnant and have abortions—and that doesn't
invalidate their gender. And they're deserving of care that affirms their
gender.” It should be noted that abortion does, however, invalidate
their babies, who might be deserving of care that affirms their…existence.
Lloyd noted, "I didn't feel ashamed about having an
abortion. It was an easy decision for me. But, as a non-binary, transgender
person, my abortion experience led to a lot of gender dysphoria. Every clinic
had the word women’s in the name, all the pamphlets used gendered language and
featured images of gender-conforming people, and clinicians were kind but
didn't understand trans and non-binary experiences. It felt dehumanizing. I had
to emotionally disconnect from the experience entirely because of how gendered
it was.” Well, it was certainly, literally, dehumanizing for the baby. It is preposterously,
monstrously self-centered for anyone to say she he they had to
disconnect from their abortion experience because it was too gendered, but not
because they were extinguishing the life inside of them.
Lloyd added, "There is so much clinics can do to become
more inclusive of all genders. They could also take a look at the clinic decor
and make sure that feels inclusive as well.” (But not inclusive of the baby,
I’m guessing.)
It is simply insane to say that men—or “all genders”-- can have
abortions.
The Left already employs morality-neutral language. Speaking
of gender-neutral language-- and considering how upset Lloyd is at the gendered,
non-inclusive term “women’s” being used-- it is amazingly ironic that Lloyd’s piece
appeared in…Women’s Health.
No comments:
Post a Comment