Language changes. There's been lots of inclusive changes that people have adopted without even knowing.
Police officer and firefighter are pretty ingrained now, but those weren't the dominant terms just 30 years ago
Police officer and firefighter are pretty ingrained now, but those weren't the dominant terms just 30 years ago
By contrast, pregnancy is a state of being that is by its very nature female-only. Males cannot become pregnant, as by definition they lack a female reproductive system.
The "pregnant people" terminology implies that pregnancy is something that affects all people, male and female alike. But this is of course not true at all.
It's also not inclusive - consider that much of the sex-based oppression women experience goes back to the ability to conceive children. "Pregnant people" discards and downplays all of that.
Another point against using the phrase "pregnant people" instead of "pregnant women" is that it leaves no way to talk about women who aren't pregnant. "Non-pregnant people" includes every man and every prepubescent child.
That is _your_ definition, and it is very debatable.
Nature disagrees with you. There are many animals out there that can change sex. Sex, gender, etc etc don't have a perfect universal definition because nature doesn't work that way. The scientific literature is trying to capture the observed variety we see in humans and it will continue to evolve as our understanding evolves.
This whole line of argument reminds me of the history of pi and the governments that tried to legislate it to fixed values. Just because you want things to be simple doesn't mean that reality backs you up.