• M0oP0o@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Oddly I don’t think that can be a full 100% due to infant death during or shortly after birth.

        • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 hours ago

          The host is a great description, going to have to start using that… well maybe not.

          • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            The way it lands would probably depend on context, including who the speaker is. Having a uterus and calling yourself a “potential host” is vastly different from someone else, for example RFK Jr, using the term to refer to others. One is a deliberate subversion of the expectation that anyone with a uterus is supposed to be pro “having babies.” The other can be straight-up dehumanization (depending on how it’s used.)

            Being on the internet, where the sex and gender of a speaker aren’t always obvious, you’re probably making a wise choice by avoiding the term.

            With all that said, as a uterus-haver, I still laughed when I read it. So… ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯

            • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              I for some reason though of it being used in the worst video dating reel. Think “lowered expectations” but with some modern “trad wife” wanting asshat.

              “Looking for an available female for the purpose of becoming the host of my son”