An aside, how does that happen? Does a NYT reporter think "we need to get a spiritual advisor's take on this"? Or is she on a list at the office of 'people who generate interesting quotes?'
Also, I just realized that they did this:
>many people who can get pregnant
instead of
>many women
I wonder if that was deliberate?
>instead of
>>many women
>I wonder if that was deliberate
I grew up around gender queer and androgynous people and thus I am used to using they/them and people instead of classifying a group of people by their gender. So I naturally speak/write in a less gender classified way without deliberate intent and I see this writing as just that. (Though obviously that is my bias.)
- not all women can get pregnant
- not all people who can get pregnant are women
Literally no one ever is going to be mad if you say women instead of people who can be pregnant but for those who are the exceptions to the rule it’s sometimes nice to acknowledge they exist.