A British cancer charity is under fire after suggesting that vaginas be alternatively referred to as “front holes” or “bonus holes.”
Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust, a UK charity dedicated to providing support to both “women and people with a cervix,” partnered with the LGBT Foundation to publish a new glossary of “inclusive” terms in order to cater to trans-identified individuals.
“Using the correct language when referring to someone’s gender identity is a simple and effective way to demonstrate support and recognition,” the charity states on their website. “If incorrect language is used without being corrected, it can cause someone to feel hurt or distressed. This may lead them to leave and to eventually seek support elsewhere.”
Included in the LGBT glossary are the terms “bonus hole,” and “front hole,” which the charity claims are “alternative words for the vagina,” adding that it’s “important to check which words someone would prefer to use.”
British comedian Leo Kearse tweeted that the charity and others are “worried about offending trans people, but don’t give a bonus hole about offending women.”
Independent outlet Valiant News further noted that the site includes material designed for individuals to identify who has a cervix, and if they have one.
“People who were assigned female at birth usually have a cervix,” the charity says, but those who have had “gender confirmation surgery…may not have a cervix,” so it’s worth checking with a medical professional first.
“The information is from a webpage written for health professionals to support trans men and / or non-binary patients with a cervix to attend cervical screening,” said the cancer charity in a statement to Fox News. “The page includes a glossary of terms they may hear from their patients and was developed with expert organisations who work with the LGBT community.”
“Our mission at Jo’s is to prevent as many cervical cancers as possible, and a big part of that is increasing uptake of cervical screening,” the charity added. “Women are our main audience for this, however some trans men and / or non-binary people have cervixes and to reduce as many cervical cancers as possible we also provide information for this group.”
Writing for Pride.com, Ariel Messman-Rucker claimed that criticism of the terms simply amounted to “the standard transphobic conservative rhetoric,” and implied that conservatives believed the term was mandatory to use.
“Offering alternative terms to people who are seeking medical treatment is an easy way to be respectful of the gender dysphoria some trans men and nonbinary folks may be experiencing,” Messman-Rucker argued. “Whether or not you use ‘bonus hole’ – or not – [sic] should be a personal choice.”
