“In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don't.”
This past week, congresswoman Cori Bush along with others in the media and "woke" leftists referred to mothers as "Birthing People". The fact that this was done as mother's day approached was no accident to be sure. They say it is an attempt to be inclusive. The question is, who does "Birthing People" include that the term "Mothers" did not? The short answer is no one, in fact it actually excludes many that fall under the category of mothers that would not fall under the category of birthing people.
It is a scientific fact that biological women are the only ones capable of giving birth. This isn't in question and it never has been. Even if you believe that a transgender man can give birth, it is the ultimate self-deception to think that a trans-man is anything but a biological woman in man's clothing. I don't say that to be offensive, but to be accurate. There is no way around this reality. So even a trans-man who gives birth is, in fact, a mother if we define mother as the parent who is also a female. So the term mother doesn't include anyone that wasn't already included. But let's just say you take objection to this point, let's consider two addition groups of people that birthing persons actually excludes.
The first group of people that would fall under the category of mothers that would not fall under the category of birthing people is those people who were not able to get pregnant but decided to adopt. Are these not mothers? They are raising and parenting children they have gone to great lengths to provide a home for, are we going to exclude them because they didn't give birth? One of my friends posted this on her Facebook:
It would be unconscionable to exclude people like this!!
There is another group of mothers that are excluded by this term birthing person. There are mothers who have gotten pregnant and carried a child, but that child did not make it to birth. They had a miscarriage or possibly an abortion, but they were mothers nonetheless. Are we to exclude this group of mothers?
It seems this term, like many others, that is intended to be "inclusive" is actually more exclusive than inclusive. The redefinition of terms that have had good and positive meaning in our language and culture rarely has a positive influence on culture or the broader conversation. Women, specifically women, have been given a beautiful gift by God that does not belong to men. To blur lines that are part of God's good creation is an outright offense to the character of God.
10/11/2021 12:20:31 am
Birthing people is a word used to refer to people who give birth. Not moms. The difference is important, especially in the context of the conversation the post was about. Birthing people experience lots of issues with doctors, especially when they are people of color. The issues with doctors concern the pregnancy and birthing process, which is why they are referred to as birthing people. Moms experience it as well, often being brushed off when they have a concern about their baby, but the conversation was about pregnancy, which not all mom's experience. You also made it seem like people everywhere want to replace Mothers Day with Birthing Peoples Day. That's ridiculous and untrue, and is exactly why I read these posts. Birthing people is a term with a use. Mom includes people who don't give birth, and excludes those who do and aren't mothers. That could be people who give the kid up for adoption and don't consider it theirs, surrogates, or trans men. The utility for the phrase is there. I'm sorry if this offends you, lol.
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.
John Byrne is a pastor who has been spouting off his opinions his entire life (just ask his mom). This little blog is his venue for continuing in this tradition.