Why Terms Like “Birthing People” Are Becoming More Common

Across healthcare, education, government and social media, a noticeable shift in language has been taking place. Terms that traditionally referred directly to men or women are increasingly being replaced or supplemented with broader, gender-neutral alternatives.

Phrases such as “birthing people”, “people with a cervix”, “people who menstruate” and “chestfeeding” are now appearing in healthcare guidance, university policies, charity campaigns and online discussions.

For many people, the terminology feels unfamiliar or surprising. Others see it as a natural evolution of language designed to make communication more inclusive.

The rise of desexed language has become one of the most talked-about changes in modern public communication. While supporters view it as an important way to recognise transgender and non-binary individuals, critics often question whether the language creates confusion or weakens clarity.

Regardless of opinion, the use of gender-neutral terminology is becoming increasingly common across Britain and much of the Western world.

What desexed language actually means.

Desexed language generally refers to terminology that reduces or removes direct references to biological sex.

Instead of using words such as “women”, “men”, “mothers” or “fathers”, organisations sometimes adopt language focused on body parts, biological functions or broader descriptions.

In healthcare, the purpose is often to ensure communication includes anyone who may require a specific service regardless of gender identity.

For example, not everyone who becomes pregnant identifies as a woman, and not everyone needing prostate care identifies as a man.

As a result, some organisations now use terms designed to include a wider range of identities.

The language changes are most commonly seen in healthcare communication, public policy, universities, charities and diversity guidance.

Supporters believe the terminology reflects modern understanding around gender identity and inclusion. Critics argue the wording can sometimes sound overly clinical, impersonal or difficult to understand.

The 10 most common desexed terms being used today.

As inclusive terminology becomes more widespread, several phrases now appear regularly in public communication and healthcare guidance.

1. Birthing people.
Used instead of or alongside “mothers” or “pregnant women”.

2. People with a cervix.
Used to refer to individuals who require cervical screening or reproductive healthcare.

3. Chestfeeding.
An alternative term used alongside breastfeeding.

4. People who menstruate.
Used instead of “women” in discussions about periods and menstrual health.

5. Pregnant people.
Used instead of “pregnant women”.

6. People with prostates.
Used in prostate health awareness and screening communication.

7. People producing sperm.
A broader term sometimes used in fertility or reproductive discussions.

8. Parent one and parent two.
Used in some official forms instead of “mother” and “father”.

9. Human milk feeding.
A broader alternative to breastfeeding in some healthcare settings.

10. Assigned male at birth or assigned female at birth.
Terms often used in gender identity discussions instead of simply “male” or “female”.

These terms are not universally adopted, and many organisations continue using traditional biological language either exclusively or alongside newer terminology.

Why healthcare language is changing.

The shift towards desexed language is largely connected to changing attitudes around gender identity and representation.

Healthcare organisations increasingly recognise that biological sex and gender identity are not always viewed as the same thing by every patient.

Some transgender men may still need cervical screening, pregnancy care or abortion services. Some transgender women may still require prostate checks or fertility treatment.

Supporters of inclusive language argue that traditional terminology can unintentionally make some individuals feel excluded from healthcare services.

By using broader terms, organisations aim to make public communication more welcoming and accessible to everyone affected by a particular health issue.

Many NHS trusts, charities and medical organisations now include both traditional and inclusive wording together.

Examples include phrases such as “women and people with a cervix” or “men and people with prostates”.

Supporters believe this approach balances inclusivity while still maintaining clarity.

They also argue language has always evolved over time as society changes.

Words and phrases once considered normal decades ago may no longer be widely accepted today, while newer terminology gradually becomes part of mainstream communication.

Critics say some terminology creates confusion.

One of the biggest concerns raised about desexed language involves public understanding.

Critics argue that healthcare communication should prioritise simplicity and directness above all else.

Medical campaigns often rely on quick and clear messaging, especially when discussing cancer screening, pregnancy, sexual health or disease prevention.

Some opponents believe terms such as “people with a cervix” are less immediately understandable than words like “women”.

There are also concerns that replacing familiar language with more clinical terminology may make information feel colder or less personal.

For some women, words such as “mother” and “breastfeeding” are closely connected to identity, family and lived experience.

Critics argue that changing these terms can feel alienating or unnecessarily complicated.

Others worry about the impact on people with lower literacy levels, reduced English proficiency or limited health knowledge.

Healthcare communication experts often stress the importance of using language that can be quickly understood by the broadest possible audience.

There are also concerns surrounding translation and interpretation, particularly in languages where biological sex forms a central part of grammar and sentence structure.

Supporters believe inclusive language helps vulnerable groups.

Despite criticism, supporters of desexed language argue the terminology can significantly improve healthcare experiences for transgender and non-binary people.

Many advocates say traditional language can make some individuals feel invisible or excluded from medical services.

Supporters believe small language adjustments can help create environments where patients feel respected and recognised.

For some transgender people, seeing inclusive terminology in healthcare guidance may increase confidence in accessing medical support.

Advocates also argue that using broader language does not necessarily erase biological sex.

Instead, they say it expands communication to include everyone affected by a particular issue.

This is why many organisations now combine traditional and inclusive wording together rather than replacing one entirely.

Supporters often describe the language shift as part of a wider move towards equality, diversity and modern representation across public life.

Social media has accelerated language changes.

Much of the public awareness around desexed language has grown through social media.

Platforms such as X, TikTok, Instagram and Facebook have played a major role in spreading both support and criticism of changing terminology.

Screenshots of NHS guidance, school policies or university documents frequently go viral online.

This has helped turn what was once a relatively niche issue into a national conversation.

Social media also tends to amplify emotionally charged topics, particularly those involving identity, healthcare and politics.

As a result, discussions surrounding desexed language often become highly polarised very quickly.

Some people see the terminology as modern and inclusive. Others view it as unnecessary or confusing.

The speed at which language trends spread online also means new terms can enter public awareness much faster than in previous generations.

Public institutions are trying to balance inclusion and clarity.

Healthcare providers and public bodies now face the challenge of balancing inclusive communication with straightforward messaging.

Many organisations are attempting to use both biological and gender-neutral language together.

Examples such as “women and people who menstruate” or “men and people with prostates” have become increasingly common in official guidance.

Supporters say this approach allows institutions to remain inclusive without completely abandoning traditional wording.

Critics argue the combined terminology can sometimes make communication longer, more complicated or repetitive.

There is also no universal agreement on which terms should be used or when they should appear.

Different organisations often adopt different language policies, which can lead to inconsistency across public communication.

This variation has contributed to ongoing confusion and disagreement around the issue.

Research into the effects remains limited.

Despite the growing visibility of desexed language, there is still relatively little large-scale research examining how the terminology affects public understanding or healthcare outcomes.

Experts continue to debate whether gender-neutral wording improves communication, increases healthcare access or unintentionally creates barriers for some groups.

Questions also remain around how different age groups, educational backgrounds and cultural communities respond to changing language.

Younger generations may adapt more easily to newer terminology, while older audiences may prefer more familiar wording.

Researchers may eventually need to examine whether inclusive language improves trust and participation in healthcare services or whether it affects clarity for the wider public.

Until stronger evidence becomes available, much of the conversation continues to be shaped by personal experience, political opinion and social values rather than definitive scientific research.

The future of desexed language is still evolving.

Language constantly changes alongside society, culture and politics.

Terms that once sounded unfamiliar can eventually become normal parts of everyday communication, while older language may gradually fade over time.

Whether desexed language becomes fully mainstream across healthcare and public institutions remains uncertain.

Some organisations are likely to continue expanding inclusive terminology, while others may return to more traditional biological wording.

What is clear is that discussions around language, identity and communication are unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

The growing use of terms like “birthing people” reflects wider changes taking place across modern society, particularly around how institutions communicate with increasingly diverse populations.

As public conversation continues, healthcare providers and public bodies will likely keep searching for ways to balance inclusion, clarity and public understanding.

What are your thoughts on the growing use of terms like “birthing people” and “people with a cervix” in public communication? Share your views in the comments and join the conversation around how language is evolving across modern Britain.