You go, girl!
I think I don’t agree with the premise. Thomas can call himself what he likes and act the way he likes (within current law–let’s not go crazy, kids!) and I hope all goes well for him, but I don’t agree that gender is separate from biology. I agree that certain aspects of it are, but it cannot be entirely divorced from it. It shouldn’t, IMO. I can see how in those rare cases a person feels like a woman and has been born genetically and physically male, and wants to change that (I remember Renee Richards well–and I was a child). I get that. I accept that and will even support that. I wish no harm to Thomas et al. But I don’t agree with this I get to use the equipment I so fully shunned not so long ago. And then I’ll start shunning it again. I don’t agree with that–whatever that is. I don’t think it’s right. There’s a word for this feeling or whatever, but I can’t think of it. Disingenuous comes close. Expedient does too, but not quite.
And my thinking so changes nothing, but it gives me closure. Because this thread has been so heated, I will say again that I wish no ill to Thomas or the baby or his spouse.
I keep meaning to add here that I see your point, matt, about infertile women (and men) and I agree with it. But those infertile people have not turned their backs on their genetic genders and biological manifestations of same and then claimed it back when it is convenient–I use convenient, not as a criticism, but because it fits the situation. Infertile people are not the same as Thomas.
Would it help to perhaps say that while gender can be separate from biology, that sex is pretty much connected?
I know you’re tired of the discussion, but I just wanted to mention - this is the part which seems to me to have upset you. And Acid Lamp too, in a way.
And, I think it’s tied to the gender-identification issues which **matt ** mentioned.
I don’t feel that way about TG females (I’m female BTW). I don’t feel as if they’ve turned their backs or renounced being women. But I do see where a person could feel that way about it. And I think that’s OK if you can’t ‘go there’. We shouldn’t be telling each other how to identify with our gender - on either side of this coin.
Following along the thought process the way wolfstu presented the biological aspect of it, I think ‘male’ could be broadened to include someone like Thomas. It’s like when you have another child - you don’t love the first child any less. Expanding the definition of ‘male’ doesn’t take away from anyone’s maleness.
I was wondering this in the similar thread on GD. But now that I think about it, one of the points of materialists arguing against the soul is (correct me if I’m wrong) is that there IS no “real” or “basic” us - just what we THINK of ourselves AT THE TIME based on that great mess of biology and synapses that is our brain. If we were to change that brain through injury or whatever, we change with it, irrevocably.
So, one could say that the idea of gender is based on those biological brain impulses - no soul needed. If a man got a blow to the head changed those impulses so that that he suddenly decided he was a woman, I believe matt and Otto would, given their words here, happily say that (s)he is now a woman.
Well, if we’re going to speculate, I’d suggest that matt ‘n’ Otto would advise the person undergo medical treatment and therapy.
Even so, what difference does it make if the person now wants to be called a woman? I realize you’re looking for some critical flaw in the argument that demolishes the entire structure, but the fact that Acid Lamp can’t casually walk into the Ladies’ Room at Dodger Stadium surprisingly does not cause Thomas Beatie’s pregenancy to spontaneously abort despite that fact that by all obvious laws of man, God, nature and the simpler times of our childhood when men were men and women were women and it was us vs. the Commies and life made sense, that it SHOULD, consarn it!
thank you. I think I stumble over the I don’t want to be a woman, but will when it works out for me–to me this weakens the case for “I’ve longed all my life to be a man.”
I also don’t quite see how Tom doing this makes all men lesser, but I do see it as making women lesser–but I’m not about to go there again. I am glad I took part in this discussion–it has made me think through issues I never considered before.
I thought that when a woman wanted to become a man, that’s what she wanted to become–and would never go off the hormones etc for life. I mean, if you really want to be a man, that should include acceptance of the fact that you cannot get pregnant, so shouldn’t you now live within the new constraints that biology didn’t give you, but you willing assumed (at great cost, both emotional and financial)?
I didn’t realize it could be seen by some as multiple choice–and that this was considered a desirable, positive thing. My(mild) disapproval changes nothing. But I feel better having dragged this out into the light of day and really looked at it. I’m sure I’m not as open minded as some would like, but I’ll have to live with that.
Gah–I just reiterated my whole position. Sorry!
It’s quite alright. Sometimes when I do that I get a bit clearer each time. As I read through your struggles in this thread, your points became clearer. I think I now see your point of view, “once you’ve embarked upon this path, there’s no turning back”.
As I’ve rolled this around in my mind it seems like a boundary thing. As in, if someone erases the boundaries, how am I supposed to navigate? Acid Lamp’s earlier feeling of “I don’t know how I’m supposed to react to people like that” evoked this with me. In this situation some people feel like common sense has been turned upside down; as if the rug were jerked from under their feet; as if they woke up one day and the sun decided to rise in the west and set in the east. And when they reacted negatively, their fears were trivialized instead of acknowledged.
What would a person’s reaction be if they went to drive downtown and suddenly all the traffic signs and pavement markings had disappeared? Or if one were asked to assemble something from a box of parts without directions. People get angry, even outraged in that kind of situation, and that makes sense to me.
The hitch in our get-along here is that, to some people, their identity is bound up very closely with their gender and to others it’s not. (See matt_mcl’s earlier post which explained it better than I can).
Then a situation like Thomas’ presents itself and it freaks some people out, while others are ‘meh’ about it.
Although I happen to be ‘meh’ about it, I understand the ‘why’ of the freaking out.
Awww, I think it’s cute.
I mean, lesbians, ick.
ding, ding, ding! This is it for me (along with what I posted). If anything goes, does anything matter? Like or not, humans are social animals and need rules to get along and get by. I don’t see Tom as the end of civilization or anything, but am I curious as to how he can function in life. I’m sure he’s doing just fine. I am not so sure about the rest of us! 
At the risk of proselytizing, I could suggest some really fantastic books: Gender Outlaw and My Gender Workbook by Kate Bornstein, and GenderQueer: Voices from Beyond the Sexual Binary by Joan Nestle et al. They’re really great, readable books that are not only decent primers to trans stuff but also go into all of the “multiple choice” and how people can feel so many different kaleidoscopic things about their gender. As I like to say, gender isn’t true/false, it’s an essay question.
Some people (like Bornstein, to a certain extent) go in for the “there are no more rules” thing. When I talk about it with people who aren’t used to dealing with these sorts of situations, I like to talk about it more as there are strong tendencies instead of rules, or there are rules that work most of the time, or there are rules that we acknowledge are problematic in certain situations.
I imagine he does what, in the end, all of us do: try to find support and surround ourselves with people who love, accept, and support us and create a positive mental environment for us to be in.
I completely agree that gender is on a continuum, and I have masculine elements in me (and depending on the aspect of personality we are talking about, these either predominate or not)–so maybe we’re all a bit “trans”.
I don’t think I need to read Bornstein to look :dubious: at that–just on principle. Even anarchy has rules–one being there are no rules, but let’s not mindfuck ourselves more than needed tonight! Rules is probably the wrong word–tendencies is better.
Fair enough and well said.
I know I’m late to the party on this thing but I want to say my piece here anyway. (I didn’t read the whole thread so I may be repeating stuff that was already said)
I think it is wrong and here’s why.
I can understand and respect transgendered folks desire to phyiscally look like their desired sex as well as be treated as their desired sex. I’m olay with that. This dude decided that he wasn’t okay being a woman so he remoed his boobs and took hormone treaments to grow facial hair and whatnot. I’m okay with that too. What I’m not okay with is a person who says “Hey, I’m a man on the inside and I want to be treated like one and/or addressed as such BUT…I’m going to go ahead and have a baby because my guts can still produce one so be understanding and supportive okay!!”
Guess what. Once you decided you wanted to be a man you lost the support for the womanly functions of your previous life from me. You don’t have the right to force your fucked up decision on another human being, the child. How are you going to explain this shit to the child as it grows older? If your spouse couldn’t have a kid then why the fuck didn’t you adopt one then? There are tons of kids who need a home out there? Why blaze this trail unneccessarily? It’s one thing to do stuff for yourself, and that’s the only reason you can be doing this is for yourselves, but now this kid will have a stigma attached to it not by its choice but by yours.
The whole thing fucking stinks and, as someone who has supported all LGBT rights it took this for me to finally say “Wait a fucking minute here…No way. The line is being crossed”
There’s my 2 bits now the thread can go back to it’s death.
I have no problem with Thomas or his decision to get pregnant. As long as there are no health risks to the child or to him, I don’t see how it is anyone’s business or place to pass judgement on him or his partner. If there are health risks, that is a matter for Thomas and his doctor to hash out, and I hope that he did his due dilligence in assessing any risks.
I’m not intimately familiar with Thomas’ life or what may have influenced his decision, but I can identify with him to a degree. I play with gender roles all the time. I do not consider myself transgender, I have no desire to have surgery (beyond a breast reduction perhaps, but that is just because they’re too damn big), I have no desire to take hormones, I do not insist on a male pronoun, but I do live my life in many ways that are considered stereotypically “male”. While there are significant differences between myself and Thomas, I have more in common with him than with most women, imho.
My partner and I are flirting with the idea of adoption, as we think the world is over-croweded already, and neither of us are very keen on the whole pregnancy thing. However, I am the last of my lineage. I think about that much more than I think about any other reason to get pregnant.
If for whatever reason I happened to have made similar decisions as Thomas has with respect to his gender identity, it is not much of a stretch to think of myself trying to get pregnant as well.
There is, in my opinion, an undeniable fluidity to being human, and to all of life. To deny it is folly. Why not just let it be?
Pretty much, yeah.
So, when you say you “understand and respect” transgender people, that’s pretty much a lie, right? Because in the next paragraph, you say that being transgendered is a “fucked up decision” that’s unfair to “force on another human being.” Which, frankly, is not exactly “understanding and respectful.”
As for adoption, do you really think this is an option for someone who’s transgendered? People keep mentioning adoption in this thread like it’s as easy as running down to Wal-Mart. Adoption is an incredibly difficult process even if you fit the contemporary preconceptions of what a “normal” family should be. For gay or transgendered couples, it’s nigh-impossible.
I’m also confused why it would be okay, in your view, for this guy to adopt a kid, but not to have one himself. Surely, his “fucked up decision” will have as much of a harmful effect on an adopted child as it would for a natal child, right? For that matter, what if this guy had a kid before he realized he was transgendered? Would he then have an obligation to remain as his birth sex? Just in terms of the effect on the kid it, seems that would be worse for the kid, wouldn’t it?
Well, thanks for your support, as far as it went. It’s too bad you hit an upper limit on being open minded and tolerant. It’s kind of sad that even around here, so many people have found out the same limitation in themselves. Like the man said, it’s taking longer than we thought.
I don’t have any problem with this guy having a baby. Big deal, it has no effect on me or the world in general as far as I can see.
Hey, the uterus is being used as God intended, so why the fuss?
I can definitely sympathize with his decision not to remove his uterus. In changing gender entirely, science is not far enough along to equip you with fully working reproductive organs. If you decide to change over, you give up all hope of ever having a biological child. For some people, that is a very strong urge. “Just go adopt” is not always feasible, as others have pointed out, it is a long and expensive process and not everyone gets approved for adoption. And not everyone is suited to be adoptive parents and there is nothing wrong with that.
It’s not like he wanted to experience pregnancy just for the hell of it. Or because it was a womanly thing, or he was wavering in his decision to live as a male. It’s the only way he could have a biological child. I can see how giving up that option forever would be very hard for some people. They have stated it would have been a first choice to have her become pregnant, but she couldn’t. Maybe if she had undergone long and / or expensive medical processes she could, but they chose not to. They had another option that most couples don’t have, and they opted to use it.
They stated that it was fairly simple to get him pregnant, they didn’t have to undergo IUI or in vitro or anything, they just picked up some sperm from the bank and a syringe and there you go. Much easier, cheaper and safer than any other possibility for them. So why not? Why make her undergo tons of expensive and possibly painful processes to get pregnant? Why wait years and spend money to adopt if that is not what they want to do (if they could even get approved)? They had this option and they took it.
Your reading comprehension sucks. The “fucked up decision” is not to be transgendered you dumb fucker, it’s to have the baby once you decide you are a man.
Go ahead and keep on raging though you dumb cock.
His decision may not have had anything to any biological urge to reproduce. It may simply be a question of economics. I’m watching a reality series which features a FTM who’s had chest reconstruction but not bottom surgery. He mentioned in the course of the show that the bottom surgery would cost $100,000. Now, I have no idea if he was exaggerating for dramatic effect but regardless, that surgery is very expensive and there isn’t to the best of my knowledge an insurance company in the country that covers any portion of it.