Evan Urquhart

This trick only works because trans men are so invisible as to be outside the picture frame of ordinary somewhat transphobic but not that informed people's minds. If you picture a trans man giving birth, him saying "chestfeeding" might be a little awkward, but it's not scary.

But if you're unable to conjure the imagine of a trans man to your mind, because of transmasc invisibility, you make trans women the culprits (as always) and ascribe some sort of evil motives of jealousy and hatred of cis women to them.

But they are breasts? There's no logic to changing the word. It's appeasement to someone who couldn't explain why they need it and will want something else tomorrow. They are breasts and it hurts no one to say so. You can't take femaleness out of breastfeeding.

Hmm. Interesting. Let's test this. Would there be any logic to using the word for breasts in the native language of a non-English speaking patient? And, would using that word hurt English speakers in any way?

If not, explain to me the difference between using a Spanish word for a Spanish speaker's mammary organs and using the word a trans man prefers for his?

I'm too tired for your ridiculous word games. The language we speak in this country is English, in English mammary glands are called breasts, females use them to feed the babies they have given birth to. There's no sane argument to change it, it serves only to dehumanise women.

I genuinely object to being called insane for asking a question you can't answer. It's not polite, and makes me suspect you're not coming to this discussion with an open mind or a willingness to be rational about things.

You're clever word game has no relevance to the offensive nature of trying to take the female-acknowledging language out of gestating and feeding a baby, a uniquely female process. If a transman grows a baby in their actual womb and they still have functioning breasts then