“Birthing People”
By Hope Harvard
To anyone confused: only females can give birth. Those who do are honored as Mothers.
The Left, following its time-honored traditions, is distorting basic biology again. Big Tech giant, Twitter, suspended Spanish politician Francisco José Contreras for tweeting "a man can't get pregnant." It seems like a normal statement; some in the scientific community might even call it a fact. So why did Twitter suspend José Contreras? Because Twitter denounced the tweet as "hate speech" that violated their policies.
Contreras rebutted, stating, "The hateful tweet (which I was forced to delete) was one that said: A man cannot get pregnant. A man has no womb or eggs. You can see this is already fascist biology. Next time I’ll try 2 + 2 = 4."
Big Tech, progressives, and trans activists have joined hands in fighting for "inclusive language" that does away with traditional gendered words. Titles such as Chairman and Chairwoman have been replaced by Chairperson, policeman replaced by police officer, and even husband and wife replaced by the monotonous "spouse."
Testifying before Congress the week before Mother's Day, Missouri Congresswoman Cori Bush referred to mothers as "birthing people." She told her fellow representatives that she is "committed to doing the absolute most to protect black mothers, to protect black babies, to protect black birthing people, and to save lives." Yet, Democrats are depriving mothers of the dignity of their title that honors them for their crucial and sacred ability to bring life into the world.
It's this dangerous rhetoric that threatens to destroy womanhood altogether. Democrats are denying women a part of their unique existence and lived reality. It is insulting to the female experience to try to conflate it with the male in the name of “inclusivity.”
Congresswoman Nancy Mace agrees. She took to Twitter to stand up for her fellow women stating, "'Birthing people' – you mean women or moms? The left is so woke they're stripping from women the one thing that only we can do." By undermining women's gender-unique power to create new life, Democrats further diminish the female identity.
Bush doubled down on Twitter writing, "Every day, Black birthing people and our babies die because our doctors don't believe our pain." NARAL, an abortion advocacy group, defended the congresswoman with this explanation:
"When we talk about birthing people, we're being inclusive. It's that simple. We use gender-neutral language when talking about pregnancy, because it's not just cis-gender women that can get pregnant and give birth. Reproductive freedom is for *every* body."
Bush’s comments echo an increasingly large bloc on the far Left who believe that "people of all genders can get pregnant and give birth."
Rather than focus on her testimony to help save the lives of premature babies, Bush's extremist language degraded her credibility. Who would listen to the medical testimony of someone who refuses to acknowledge basic anatomy? I wouldn't.
By referring to mothers as "birthing people," the Left has reduced women to breeding machines defined by their sexual function alone. Mothers do more than get pregnant and deliver a baby nine months later. Being a mother is a lifelong commitment that starts by giving birth but continues for decades afterward.
Being a mother isn't about birthing a child- it's about raising that baby in love and guiding the child towards success. "Birthing person," apart from being a sterile, scientific word that cheapens the inexplicable beauty of mothering, is not particularly inclusive for those who can't bear children. I know plenty of women who adopted and raised incredible children. They're not technically "birthing people," does that not make them mothers?
No, they are, and they always will be. This redefinition of "mother" as a corollary to a woman's birthing ability is a medieval regression to the Dark Ages when women were defined by their childbearing skills alone. An ironic twist in the feminist tale.
The Left's attack on the word mother is in line with their current mission of erasing gender in the pursuit of "sexual equity." Apart from denigrating women as "birthing people," the Left continues to campaign against motherhood and traditional gender roles.
They say they support women's choice but then can't believe some women voluntarily forfeit a 'glamorous' career to become mothers and homemakers! The Left says they "support women," but that support only extends to abortion, "kitschy" progressive opinions, and the moral relativism that accompanies third-wave feminism.
Want to get married at 21 and have kids at 23? You're brainwashed. Want to settle down in your early thirties and selflessly dedicate twenty years of your life to building a family that contributes to a strong society? A Handmaid’s Tale nightmare!
This most recent campaign is nothing new, and I'm not surprised by it. This strange marriage of third-wave feminism and gender equity can’t decide whether it wants to uplift women’s womanly-ness or repudiate the biology that makes them women in the first place. If gender is a construct, and motherhood is nothing more than the physical ability to give birth, what even defines womanhood? What are the feminists actually celebrating?
The argument collapses on itself.
I believe that women should embrace the wonderful gift of their femininity, womanhood, and motherhood. Our unique abilities give us unparalleled insight into issues that only we can solve. Whether you decide to have kids or not, it’s your experience as a woman, alone. There is no such thing as a "birthing person.” They're called mothers.
Photo via Kennedy Camelot
