[0xcafecafe]

IMO I felt that battle was lost couple of years back when my wife was pregnant with our youngest. We were looking for CDC guidelines on covid booster for expectant mothers. The website mentions "pregnant people". That's when I felt discourse is evolving to cater to the edge cases.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommend...

[WindyMiller]

I don't think 'people' is really an edge case.

[ralfd]

It is newspeak to avoid saying „pregnant women“.

[WindyMiller]

Personally I think women are people.

[hnbad]

So you're saying the CDC should not cater to the edge cases? Where are we drawing the line? 10% of the population? 1%? 0.1%? 0.01%? 0.001%? That last one is still thousands of people. Does your opinion hold for all edge cases or just those involving gender identities?

If there is a place I'd expect to "cater to edge cases" including those that only make up a fraction of a permille of the population, it'd be the CDC because they have to address hundreds of millions of people so even a one-in-a-million edge case still represents hundreds of people.

[TheCoelacanth]

What an absurd complaint. "Expectant mothers" is much less direct and more euphemistic than "pregnant people".

That's not catering to edge cases; it's just clear, easy to understand communication.