Now Playing Tracks

idon-tevenwantoknow:

THERE’S TIMES WHEN I WANT A RUSTIC CABIN IN THE WOODS AWAY FROM ALL SOCIETYimage

THEN THERE’S TIMES WHEN I WANT A MODERN ASS HOUSE image

THEN I’M LIKE I’LL ACCEPT NOTHING MORE THAN A VICTORIAN MANOR
image

THEN I WANT A PENTHOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF NEW YORK
image

THEN I WANT ONE OF THOSE HOUSE MADE OUT SHIPPING CONTAINERSimage

THEN I WANT A FRENCH CHATEAUimage

BUT I ALSO WANT A TREE HOUSEimage

AND FALLINGWATER image

AND A LITTLE COTTAGE ON THE OCEANimage

HOUSES ARE SO COOL

Not all women are the owners of a uterus, and not all owners of a uterus are women. A transgender man—that is, a man who was assigned female at birth—may very well have a uterus, may become pregnant, and may very well need the same access to reproductive health options as your average cisgender woman. The same can be said for non-binary individuals who were assigned female at birth. As people who don’t identify as a woman or a man (though they may identify themselves as both, neither, or a combination of the two), some may feel that this language erases their identity or leaves them out. Yes, these people may have a uterus—but it’s not a “lady part.”

While there’s little doubt that women make up the largest segment of uterus-owning individuals, this name further ostracizes oft-overlooked members of society like trans men and non-binary individuals who were assigned female at birth. To exclude them in this, an organization aimed at educating the public on the issue of reproductive health, would seem to negate the organization’s stated goals by erasing identities and perpetuating the already stressful and exclusionary culture these individuals are forced to inhabit.

The Trouble With “Lady Parts” | Parker Marie Molloy for Slate (via lgbtqblogs)

(Source: gaywrites)

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union