It’s really important for pregnant women to be aware of environmental risks to their unborn children so that they can do what they can to protect their little one.

And it’s good for outlets like The Hill to help shine a spotlight on some of those environmental risks.

Unfortunately, in doing so in this particular case, The Hill has also shone a spotlight on its own embarrassing mission to placate the Wokeness Mob:

Pregnant what, now?

Pregnant people.

Pregnant people.

Pregnant people.

Pregnant people. That phrase actually appears multiple times in that article. That article, which was written by someone named Sharon, who is presumably a female woman (forgive us, Sharon, if we’re jumping to conclusions based on the fact that you have a woman’s name).

As a person who’s been pregnant a few times, I can honestly say that I appreciated people recognizing that I was — and actually still am, for what it’s worth — a woman. My husband, as much as he might’ve liked to try it, was unable to carry any of our kids. Because, you know, he’s a man. And men have not yet figured out how to be pregnant. Not that they’re in any rush, heh.

Needless to say, this “pregnant person” BS really pisses me off. Sometimes it can be difficult being a woman, but this is who I am. And if someone had referred to me when I was pregnant as a “pregnant person,” I would’ve given them my death glare. And maybe a smack or two upside the head.

It’s easy if you try, The Hill. Really. Go on. Try it.

This is what scientists call “the erasure of credibility.”



AP updates its style guidelines on when to use ‘pregnant people’ versus ‘women’


Help us keep owning the libs! Join Twitchy VIP and use promo code AMERICAFIRST to receive a 25% discount off your membership!