Letters to the Editor: Mother is Also a Sexed Term

Abstract

Dear Editor, I am writing in response to your editorial entitled, Enacting a Non-Binary Gender Inclusive Policy is the Ethical Choice: A Commentary. First, I would like to address two misrepresentations regarding my World Nutrition Journal commentary (Munzer, 2021). This commentary is cited as providing evidence for some having "raised objections to separating gender identity from sex." I have no objection to separating gender identity from sex; rather, I would argue that it is vital not to conflate sex and gender identity but to apply each concept if and where appropriate. However, this was not the focus of my commentary, which rather highlighted the fundamental importance of specific and sexed language, that is the use of "mother," when discussing breastfeeding. In contrast, I would argue that the Journal of Human Lactation's (JHL) policy and guidance regarding "gender inclusivity" conflates and confuses sex, gender, and gender identity and prioritizes a gendered understanding of language. Nowhere in any of JHL's policy, guidance, or opinion papers can I find an explanation as to why gendered meanings of "woman" and "mother" are being prioritized over sexed meanings. In fact, it seems that there is a total lack of acknowledgement that a sexed meaning of "mother" even exists and that this term can be used to cover all female parents irrespective of any gender identity they may have. Pregnancy, birth, and breastfeeding are inherently sexed processes, this makes it particularly puzzling as to why JHL would prioritize gendered understandings of "women" and "mothers" over sexed meanings. You also suggest that I argue that desexed language is "effectively taking the mother's rights to her domain of breastfeeding away." This is not quite correct. What I describe is how replacing the term "mother" with "parents" or "families" inappropriately includes other people, so diluting and undermining the breastfeeding rights women and children hold.

Letters to the Editor: Lively Discussions are Needed, but Not Ones That Erase Transgender People

“…Dear Editor, I am writing to you in response to the publication of Madeline Munzer's (2022) letter "Mother is also a sexed term." In your to it you stated, "the JHL Editorial Team values a diversity of opinions and seeks to publish letters from our readers that express cogent ideas and opinions different from our own" (Dodgson, 2022, p. 366).…”

“…"Sexed meanings" of "women" and "mothers" is not terminology that Munzer (2021) used in her commentary in the World Nutrition Journal. To my knowledge, the term "sexed' (as used by Munzer) has only been used in the lactation literature during the last year by a small number of authors (Bartick et al, 2021;Gribble et al, 2022;Jameson, 2021;Munzer, 2022) for the purpose of erasing transgender people, disguised as academic discourse. Munzer (2022) has stated that the "sexed meaning" of the word mother is "female parent" and, "Trans and non-binary parents who are female.…”

“…To my knowledge, the term "sexed' (as used by Munzer) has only been used in the lactation literature during the last year by a small number of authors (Bartick et al, 2021;Gribble et al, 2022;Jameson, 2021;Munzer, 2022) for the purpose of erasing transgender people, disguised as academic discourse. Munzer (2022) has stated that the "sexed meaning" of the word mother is "female parent" and, "Trans and non-binary parents who are female. .…”

“…Munzer may be surprised to know there is a body of research and writing by and about transgender people produced in those and other African and Asian counties, as well as from refugees from those world regions. Munzer (2022) attributes John Money with the invention of "gender identity," which is now being imposed on other countries "in a way that can only be understood as colonialist" (p. 364). This is in direct contrast with the conclusions of the UN mandated independent report:…”

“…I am writing to you in response to the publication of Madeline Munzer’s (2022) letter “Mother is also a sexed term.” In your response to it you stated, “the JHL Editorial Team values a diversity of opinions and seeks to publish letters from our readers that express cogent ideas and opinions different from our own” (Dodgson, 2022, p. 366). As co-author of the Journal’s Gender and Inclusive Language Policy (Bamberger et al, 2021) and associated background paper (Bamberger & Farrow, 2021), I applaud your intention of creating a “lively discussion.” I would, however, like to point out to the Journal’s readers the potential for harm towards transgender people in Munzer’s letter, as this may not be apparent to readers unfamiliar with the topic.…”