Breitbart:
The editor of a top British medical journal has apologised after it described women as “bodies with vaginas” on the cover of its latest issue.
The editor-in-chief of The Lancet, Richard Horton issued an apology on Monday in response to controversy over the journal’s September cover, which featured an excerpt from an article titled ‘Periods on display’, which stated: “Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected.”
“I would like to thank all those who have responded to the words on this week’s Lancet cover and understand the strength of feeling it has provoked. The Lancet strives for maximum inclusivity of all people in its vision for advancing health,” Horton said in a statement.
“In this instance, we have conveyed the impression that we have dehumanised and marginalised women. Those who read The Lancet regularly will understand that this would never have been our intention. I apologise to our readers who were offended by the cover quote and the use of those same words in the review.”
Horton, who has served as the editor-in-chief of The Lancet for over 25 years, went on to defend the message the journal was trying to convey however, saying that “transgender health is an important dimension of modern health care, but one that remains neglected. Trans people regularly face stigma, discrimination, exclusion, and poor health, often experiencing difficulties accessing appropriate health care.”
“The exhibition review from which The Lancet cover quote was taken is a compelling call to empower women, together with non-binary, trans, and intersex people who have experienced menstruation, and to address the myths and taboos that surround menstruation,” he added. read more
I always preferred the term “front hole” myself…
Dang. I kind of liked the idea for replacing the “Woman’s Room” signs with “Bodies With Vaginas” signs. Cuts right through all the bullshit and makes it crystal clear who is and isn’t supposed to be in there.
@Not Sure — except the Lancet issue was all about trans, blah, blah, blah. Those are the bodies to which they were referring. They can stay in the Men’s Room, please.
“Those who read The Lancet regularly will understand that this would never have been our intention.”
But those who are looking for a hook on which to hang their Wymyns’ Studies doctoral dissertation don’t care about your intentions, Body with a Dick Horton. You and your ilk are making it harder and harder to “believe the science”. Man up, fella, and state firmly that woke claptrap has no place in a serious scientific periodical, instead of groveling and whingeing about how misunderstood you are by people who will bitch and moan no matter what you say.
How about “those who douche?”
“Pap smeared individuals”
“Massengillites”
AbigailAdams
SEPTEMBER 29, 2021 AT 12:01 PM
“@Not Sure — except the Lancet issue was all about trans, blah, blah, blah. ”
Definitionally, NOT a vagina. Just a plastic surgical wound that will close if a dilator is not installed every night. Make the word mean what it means, and we’re set.
“Trans people regularly face stigma, discrimination, exclusion…”
Yes, and that’s as it should be.
@Thirdtwin: “Body with a Dick Horton.”
HAHAHAHAAAHAAAHAAAHAHAHA!
Great play on his own words!
Uncle Al ʘ
SEPTEMBER 29, 2021 AT 12:29 PM
“@Thirdtwin: “Body with a Dick Horton.””
Adds a new dimension to “Horton Hears A Who”, no?
Don’t worry. These morons will do the same fuck up next International People with Cervixes Day.
Just make it “bodies With Clitoreses”. That will weed out the poseres since no man ever seems to be able to find one, let alone know what to DO with it.
Listen to this virtue-signaling rubbish –
“The Lancet strives for maximum inclusivity of all people in its vision for advancing health,…”
Do you (Lancet) deal with health-related issued of Human Men and Women? Yes? Then everyone would be included, correct? No one would be excluded from this.
It’s only when you operate on the terms of Progressivism’s Worldview, and its brand-new, arbitrary, ever-changing, theoretical categories that people start to be EXCLUDED.
How ironic.
Are we allowed to reuse the word squaw now? Or is that still so politically incorrect as to be never used again in public. And what about squaw fish.
Degenerate male faggots are the reason a women can’t be called “women” anymore.
This is totally in line with the philosophical worldview known as materialism. The doctrine that nothing exists except matter and its movements and modifications. It is the worldview of Marx et all and it is 100% consistent with the political philosophy being advanced by that rag.
It is a worldview diametrically opposed to the Christian worldview. It is what I would expect from them and his apologies are abject bullshit. He isn’t one fucking bit remorseful and his only regrets revolve around being called out on it.
Where they screwed up is they thought that the reduction of man to a materialistic object had advanced beyond where they have taken man’s understanding of the nature of man. They have reduced those who buy into that reduction of man reduced to being created in the image of God to more or less soulless matter. They will not take me there and it is refreshing that enough feel the same way.
Sort of de-personalizes everyone, doesn’t it?
Identity based on orifice?
But that’s probably the intent.
izlamo delenda est …
I’m so done with this shit.
Mock people who support this. Mock them mercilessly.
Wasn’t the old term “CUNT”?
@Tim
Good point. Lancet is run by ass-holes as are all wokesters.