PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S double standard

submitted by fuckupaddams from (imgur.com)

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Huh? Since when has it been customary to say testicles are "internal parts of male sex anatomy"? In 99.99% of the male population, testicles are entirely external parts of male genitalia that hang from the crotch/groin between the upper thighs.

On the other hand, I'm sorta heartened that PP is saying "the internal parts of female sexual anatomy" include the vagina. Coz nowadays it's become customary amongst misogynists and purported "feminists" alike to refer to the vulva and all its component parts as "vagina." I've been told many a time by women who claim to be feminists that I'm an unreasonable stickler, nit-picker and old fuddy-duddy for pointing out the difference between the vulva and vagina.

[–]lefterfield 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Always gotta have those qualifiers for female. Was this the entire list of internal sexual parts? Might be missing a few things...

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

lefterfield, I'm confused. I was raised to think there is no such thing as "internal genitalia" coz genitals by definition are external sex organs.

I've just checked a large number of English language dictionaries and medical sites, and it seems most ascribe to the view I was taught - that "genitalia" mean external sex organs that are on the outside of the body.

[–]lefterfield 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sorry, incorrect wording. Internal sex organs.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not intentionally being provocative, goady or argumentative here. I just don't get why this IMGUR image of text from PP (shown without any context) is supposed to be more offensive to females than to males.

The male anatomy is described in a way that is completely incorrect. Coz the internal parts of male sex anatomy are NOT typically made up of testicles as the text says. The internal parts of male sex anatomy are made up of the prostate, vas deferens and other organs. The testicles in nearly 100% of males are external.

The internal parts of female sexual anatomy include the vagina and other organs such as the uterus, Fallopian tubes and ovaries.

However, due to disease, medical conditions or other reasons (such as adopting an opposite-sex "gender identity"), many grown women have the parts of their internal female sex anatomy other than their vaginas - the ovaries, Fallopian tubes and uterus - surgically removed. Moreover, some women coz of DSDs/VSCs never developed some/all of the internal female sex organs in the first place.

Therefore I can see the point of PP using the phrasing "what's typically referred to as female" in this one particular instance. Though I can't know for sure coz, again, the full context has been omitted.

[–]lefterfield 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, I agree that it's inaccurate for both and that it's missing context. I think it's odd to say 'or what's typically referred to as female', which is something that pops up often in wikipedia articles. But yes, I don't know the context. That's why I said it seemed like it was missing a few things.

[–]MezozoicGay 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Aren't they now led by a TiM? So there nothing special, they are now focusing on "women issues how transwoman see them": https://archive.is/fEBe9 - middle class white bloke with almost no experience put as lead instead of asian woman with decades of experience.

Why TiM's always taking leading positions in women organisations, universities, subreddits, facebook groups and so on? Looks like they are just MRA, who don't want to leave women to do anything without male supervision.

And how those organisations can focus on helpin women and on women issues, if they are led by men, who have different biology and has no idea of how female body works? Obviously they can't, and will focus mostly on male problems or general problems, while those structures were created specifically to focus on unique to women problems, from a women perspective.

[–]fediverseshill 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Aren't they now led by a TiM? So there nothing special, they are now focusing on "women issues how transwoman see them": https://archive.is/fEBe9 - middle class white bloke with almost no experience put as lead instead of asian woman with decades of experience.

It's like putting a cat in charge of a school for mice, he's wearing fake mouse ears so the cat will understand mice better than THEY do!!

[–]MezozoicGay 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If it was school on how to protect from cats, and cat would be telling her/his experience of hunting mice and tricks that cats are using - then it could make sense, but school is about what mices want to achieve, about their lives and experiences, so cat obviously has no idea and is leading to what cat knows about cat life and what cat saw how mice were acting in cat's presence, and thinking it is how mice always act.