Unicode Consortium’s draft for Emoji 14.0 includes a “Pregnant Man” and “Pregnant Person.”
The emojis — which could appear on Apple’s iPhone and other technology products — are touted by the service as a mechanism to support “non-binary” people
A blog post from Emojipedia explains:
Pregnant Man and Pregnant Person are new, and recognize that pregnancy is possible for some transgender men and non-binary people. These are additions to the existing Pregnant Woman emoji.
Person with Crown is a gender-inclusive alternative to the existing emojis for Princess and Prince.
The above additions will mean that nearly all emojis can have default a gender neutral option, with choice to use a woman or man where relevant. A few exceptions remain, which are being reviewed, as per this Unicode Emoji Subcommittee report from 2020.
The service will also offer a “Coral” emoji to facilitate conversations about climate change.
Social media users were quick to point out that men cannot get pregnant.
Biological Men CAN NOT have babies…… https://t.co/m3GHQJScBl
— Graham Allen (@GrahamAllen_1) July 15, 2021
MEN 👏 CANNOT 👏 HAVE 👏 BABIES!!! https://t.co/EArsvA4WC8
— Elisha (@ElishaKrauss) July 15, 2021
Tell me they didn’t really add a pregnant man emoji… the agenda is real. https://t.co/kMHm3SFS8X pic.twitter.com/f7dEviAbDQ
— Olivia Rondeau 🇺🇸 (@rondeaulivia) July 15, 2021
The Left believes a gun emoji is far too dangerous but 12 options for pregnant men must be included.
Remember this when they claim to be moderate! https://t.co/OeM0Jqv6lJ
— Jim Banks (@RepJimBanks) July 15, 2021
In recent months, the notion that men can become pregnant has become increasingly popular — including among progressive policymakers. As The Daily Wire recently reported, President Biden’s first budget proposal included the phrase “birthing people” in a provision about healthcare:
The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate among developed nations, with an unacceptably high mortality rate for Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, and other women of color. To help end this high rate of maternal mortality and race-based disparities in outcomes among birthing people — and in addition to the investment in maternal health included in the American Families Plan — the Budget includes more than $200 million to: reduce maternal mortality and morbidity rates nationwide; bolster Maternal Mortality Review Committees; expand the Rural Maternity and Obstetrics Management Strategies program; help cities place early childhood development experts in pediatrician offices with a high percentage of Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program patients; implement implicit bias training for healthcare providers; and create State pregnancy medical home programs.
During a recent hearing, Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) grilled Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra about the White House’s use of the term.
“Can you help me get a good definition of ‘birthing people?’” Lankford asked. Becerra struggled to respond: “Well, I’ll check on the language there, but I think if we’re talking about those who give birth, I think we’re talking about — uh — I don’t know how else to explain it to you other than… I think it simply reflects the work that’s being done.”
“The language is important always,” replied Lankford. “We don’t want to offend in our language. I get that, but would you at least admit calling a ‘mom’ a ‘birthing person’ could be offensive to some moms?… Can you at least admit that term itself could be offensive to some moms?”
Becerra said that he would look more closely at the terminology: “We’re trying to be precise in the language that’s used.”
Lankford retorted: “‘Mom’s a pretty good word. That’s worked for a while, and I think that’s pretty precise as well.”
This article has been revised for clarity.