LogFAQs > #940412473

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, Database 6 ( 01.01.2020-07.18.2020 ), DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Is JK Rowling catching heat for saying something about trans women?
adjl 06/09/20 4:22:21 PM #42:	Clench281 posted... The phrase "people who menstruate" is the shortest way to express that specific subset of people. It's not politically correct, it's biologically correct. "Menstruating people" would be slightly shorter, but does create some ambiguity because it sounds more like it's referring to people who are currently menstruating, not simply those that do so periodically. "Menstruaters" would be both shorter and less ambiguous, but it's not actually a word (though its morphology makes obvious what it's supposed to mean). But yeah, within the constraints of extant, unambiguous language, I don't think it's possible to say it any less cumbersomely. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:940412473] in Is JK Rowl... [t:78756924]...</cite> <quote>Clench281 posted... </cite> <quote>The phrase "people who menstruate" is the shortest way to express that specific subset of people. It's not politically correct, it's biologically correct.</quote> "Menstruating people" would be slightly shorter, but does create some ambiguity because it sounds more like it's referring to people who are currently menstruating, not simply those that do so periodically. "Menstruaters" would be both shorter and less ambiguous, but it's not actually a word (though its morphology makes obvious what it's supposed to mean). But yeah, within the constraints of extant, unambiguous language, I don't think it's possible to say it any less cumbersomely. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1