Don't say woman: The Economist against neo-language

'Bodies with vaginas' is a strange way of referring to half the human race. Yet it was the expression that The Lancet, medical journal, chose to publish on the cover of its latest issue, explaining to readers that 'historically, the anatomy and physiology' of such bodies had been neglected.
After complaints about dehumanising language, The Lancet he apologised. But he is not alone: an increasing number of officials and organisations find themselves speechless when it comes to using the word 'woman'.
Thus the weekly The Economist who has been a white fly among the big media for some time, gives voice and visibility to gender-critical positions, which are censored everywhere. 
Continue the articleA British hospital has recommended that staff in its maternity wards make themselves available to use the term "maternity". 'delivery of people'. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortezmember of the US Congress, speaks of "menstruating people".. On 18 September theAmerican Civil Liberties Union (Aclu) republished a quote from Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the anniversary of her death. The quote was a defence of a woman's right to an abortion. But in the quote the Aclu, for which it too later apologised, the word 'women' was regularly replaced by 'persons'''. 
According to The Economist these linguistic innovations can be explained "with both compassion and fear. Compassion for not wanting to be seen as excluding". And fear "because cares about attracting online ire".
"Most dictionaries continued The Economist 'defines a woman as  'adult human female'. But for some activists this is a gross provocation, because they deny that males can also be women... Doctors, leaders and politicians should think carefully before throwing out commonly used words, or using them in new and radically different ways. In their haste to appear up-to-date, they risk doing a disservice to their patients, employees and voters... Many of the new terms appear dehumanising... There is more than a whiff of misogyny in the air. It is surprising that there is no a similarly zealous campaign to abandon the word 'men' in favour of 'prostate', 'ejaculators' or 'bodies with testicles'. Almost always to women is ordered to do without a useful word that they have used all their lives".
The Economist adds a further argument for resisting neo-languageMedical advice, for example, has to be clear and understandable to all... Approximately 40% of women are not completely clear about what exactly a cervix is. This implies that asking "people with cervix'. of attending screening appointments may not be clear or understandable, especially for women who have English as a second language... Insisting on unfamiliar or alien-sounding terms will make it more difficult to discuss issues that only or disproportionately affect girls and women, such as female genital mutilation, domestic violence, early marriage or the persistence of pay gaps.
"Many countries continued The Economist 'are discussing whether security or equity should in some cases take precedence over inclusion. I male prisonersshould be housed in women's prisons, as happens in America, Great Britain, Canada and elsewhere? The women's sports should be reserved for biological women, or should any athlete who identifies as a woman be allowed to join a women's rugby team? But intimidated by the insults and nastiness that are unleashed in these discussions, many people are afraid to take part in them".
As you know, this has never been the case. 

Original article here (translation by Marina Terragni)
The article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under the title "She who must not be named".