I’m not going to speak for TLDRIDKJKLOLFTW, and I’m going to note that he does not speak for me.
Tossing that term around so lightly is not warranted imho. First off, I have no issue whatsoever with transsexuals. If someone feels the need that strongly to change their sex, then they ought to have the right to do so. What I have an issue with is the inconsistency of this particular person’s position. If he believes that he is male to the point of needing a reassignment, then he should not be willing to take part in any portion of the female’s part in carrying a child. It doesn’t make any sense that someone who wants believes that they are male so intrinsically would stop all treatment, to take part in what they consider to be the exact opposite of their role in the world. Moreover, that same inconsistency DOES demonstrate at least some behaviour that ought to give any sane doctor or professional pause in dealing with that person.
This is about the same as the people that think that they are elves, or reincarnated dragons. He is being male when it suits him to be, not automatically. By getting pregnant, he is NOT living as a man. MEN can’t get pregnant. Inconsistency is often an indicator to people working with TS that they aren’t ready, or have some other underlying issue rather than the authentic disorder that needs correcting via surgery.
Frankly, finding one extremely unusual person’s aberrant behaviour disturbing or revolting is not the same as bigotry, asshole.
I started this thread initially because usually finding myself easily able to accept all sorts of alternative lifestyles, I was surprised by my immediate revulsion to this one particular case. Having talked about more about it with some friends, including some in the LGBT community, I stand by position that this person is an extreme aberration who is abusing both science and the legal system to achieve their ends.
Oh spare me. You didn’t come in here expressing dignified outrage at the “inconsistency.” You came in here going "ew, ick, look at that it’s sooo disguuusssstiiiiing!
Why? Because you, from your vantage point as an expert on all things transgender in general and the life of this man in particular, say so?
It may not make sense to you but it makes sense to the couple whose decision it is.
Even assuming arguendo that this is correct, that isn’t what happened to this couple. They weren’t met with “pause.” They were met with scorn, ridicule and religious bigotry.
This constant comparison of this man to non-existent creatures is becoming more and more insulting.
No, he is being a man all the time, because he is a man.
This one can.
You continue this charade like your objection here is based on something other than your own personal ick factor, and it’s not cute.
I’m sure that this happy couple and their healthy baby girl, when she’s born, will take your opinion, and the opinions of your small-minded friends, exactly as seriously as they should be.
TLDRFUCKINGWHATEVER’s post read as someone who does, indeed, have issues with transexuals in general, and came across as bigoted to me, as well. However, he also comes across as a troll in general on several issues, so that may not be really significant. He’s a general purpose asshole, and not really worth too much attention.
You, on the other hand, I would not characterize as bigotted, based on what you’ve posted in this thread. However, I do think that it’s not quite accurate for you to say that you have no issue “whatsoever” with transexuals: you clearly have an issue with this particular transexual. My apologies if I’m reading too much into your posts, but it appears to me that you’re okay with people adopting the opposite gender role of the one they’re born into, but only so long as they completely inhabit (and thereby affirm) that gender role. You seem to be uncomfortable with people who blur or break gender role distinctions. I think this is supported by the next part of your post:
The idea that this man’s decision to become pregnant is “inconsistent” indicates that you’re still vested to some extent in the idea sharply deliniated male/female roles, even though you’re okay with people choosing which role to fill. This person views himself as male. He’s able to reconcile pregnancy with his own sense of maleness. This is inconsistent with traditional views of masculinity, but is not necessarily internally inconsistent for this particular person. He’s definitly creating a non-traditional sexual role for himself, but there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with that. It is, ultimatly, an extreme expression of one of the core values of the philosophy of queer rights.
Okay. But so what? He’s forged a gender identity that’s significantly outside the mainstream, but why should any of us care about that? Why is that a bad thing? Why is it not okay for a person to partially inhabit a gender role into which they were not born, but okay for them to entirely inhabit that role?
It can be such an indicator, but it is not necessarily such an indicator. It depends on the individual.
Oddly enough, the response I wrote to the last section of your post also applies to this section of your post.
How do you figure this as abuse, of either science or the law?
I DO have problems with someone who blurs or breaks gender roles. I can’t find anything to identify with them on. I can’t utilize any mental framework to help me understand how to relate to someone like that. It’s about the same to me as dealing with an alien, or another species. I don’t want to pigeonhole them into a stereotype or a narrow role, but sense of gender is pretty broad, i’m sure most would agree. The vast majority of people are either one or the other after all. We aren’t talking about cultural norms, or roles that we are bucking here, we are talking about an entirely new gender? Males, in all vertebrates for og’s sake don’t carry babies internally though an egg or placental process.
Now it’s only recently that we’ve been able to really reassign sex. I think that it’s a good thing that science allows us to essentially correct a mistake. This person though doesn’t truly qualify as either male or female, Otto’s crying aside. Okay he says he’s male, but he has retained his female organs, and is utilizing them. That is function that is explicitly limited to females; so to truly call him male is political correctness at best. Physically he remains female.
Is this a proper use of science? to allow, and create what is essentially an entirely new sex? He’s not doing this because he feels he is both, he’s doing it from a selfish motivation to have a child of his own genetic material. Due to the fact that women have control of their bodies, and rightfully so, there is no one who can stop him. He remains outside of the law, neither a father, nor a mother. Who can be listed as mother on the birth certificate? What rights could he sue for in a divorce? Both? None? Whichever he likes and suits his ends better? That is what bothers me. It’s as if because of his protected status as a member of LGTB community, he’s immune from any criticism whatsoever. If he was a father, he’d have certain rights, same as if he was a mother. As both and neither, can he simply choose whichever suits him better at the moment and expect the support of the law and the community?
I’m sure that i’m not coming across right, but like I stated earlier the concept is completely alien to me.
I find myself in partial agreement with you. I have little knowledge of these kind of complex gender issues so I don’t have a lot to add to the conversation.
My question is about the above quote. What legal rights would be different between a father and a mother? If he is the parent/legal guardian of the child, what legal difference would gender make?
Mothers nearly always get preference in custody battles unless they are proved incompetent. They have a far easier time suing and collecting child support, and enforcing divorce orders. There probably isn’t really anything on the books, but in practice it’s true. Women usually get preferential treatment in domestic cases as well. Mothers usually don’t have to pay alimony etc… (Yes, yes, I know there plenty of Kept husbands who collect but in general). They have an easier time enforcing “birthparent” type contact orders too. The law is generally more sympathetic to women as well, despite what the statues might be.
Then there is the issue of right to choice. Father’s do not have a right currently to sign away their responsibility, and even contracts signed aren’t usually enforceable in court. Women have the exclusive right to control and choose about pregnancies, but seeing as HE is male how does THAT even play out?
Sorry, but it’s not up to you to determine whether or not you’re an asshole.
I’m pretty sure you mean “hypocrisy”, and I’m just wondering what skin off your ass it is in the first place. The fact that a biological woman who identifies as a man is having a baby affects you…how? I guess you’re worried about this stuff because you’ve already got the whole poverty/hunger/famine/war thing figured out, right?
Oh wait, you’re the one who snoops on your hubby’s computer and throws a fit of fiery indignation and righteousness if you find porn, aren’t you? That explains everything.
You know, normally I’m all over your ass when you say stuff like that. But in this case, I couldn’t help but smile when I read it.
That’s actually not a problem at all with Wikipedia, which I believe is under the GPL.
I think that covers more people than you think. Maybe you shouldnt’ve tried to be so clever; when you aim low, you never miss. (Well, maybe not you, but most people.)
Well, I guess you’re really cool and tolerant now that you have friends “in the LGBT community”, but I’m still not seeing why it’s such a big deal if someone chooses to have a baby while identifying as male. How is this an “abuse” of science and the legal system? Are you saying that it should be illegal for certain people to get pregnant? I’m not getting the science thing at all, either–are you saying that this couple has some kind of superpowers that bend the laws of physics?
By the way, yes, you are a bigot. Keep on defending yourself, though; it’s kind of amusing.
I completely understand where you’re coming from. I used to feel exactly the same way. When I was in college, I had to read The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula LeGuin, and it really made me examine my preconceptions about gender and how it influenced my interactions with other people. It’s one of only a small handful of books that I’ve read that led directly to a fundamental alteration in my worldview. I highly recommend it, even if you’re not normally a science fiction fan.
Again, so what? Gender is a social construct. Socially, this guy wants to be treated as a male. That (as is so often the case when the term is bandied about) isn’t “political correctness,” it’s simple courtesy. The idea squicks you out, and I don’t think you can be blamed for that reaction, but your reaction to him is your problem, not his. Just because he makes you uncomfortable, it doesn’t automatically follow that what he’s doing is wrong.
I think wether wanting to have children is “selfish” is seperate from the issue of this person’s transexuality. Lots of people who could otherwise adopt choose instead to undergo expensive fertility treatments, and this couple is no more or less blameworthy for their decision than any other. Arguably less so, as the barriers to adoption for non-traditional couples tend to be much higher.
I do think you make a good point, in that there’s a good chance this guy isn’t trying to create a “new” gender, so much as he’s willing to compromise his sense of gender in order to become a parent. The article indicates that they only did this because his wife was incapable of carrying a child. Had she been fertile, I doubt he would have gone to the trouble of trying to conceive himself. In that circumstance, his pregnancy does not indicate a lack of conviction in his transition, it just indicates that his transition is not his highest priority in his life. Which, I think, is actually an indicator of good mental health: he wants to be a man, but he also wants to be a parent, and he’s able to accept temporary setbacks in one goal in order to further another.
I think it’s rather disingenous to think that he’s going to derive any particular legal advantage from this situation. He belongs to a minority that has no recognized federal protection at all, and only tenuous protections on the state level, and only so long as he remains in his current state of residence. Plus, he appears intent on taking the father’s role in the child’s upbringing. He’s transexual, and male: that’s two strikes against him in any custody hearing right there. If his wife seeks a divorce, she’s likely to end up with every advantage once they get to court. The one thing he’s going to have going for him is that he’s got the actual genetic connection to the child. But this isn’t entirely without precendent in the courts. A biological man married to an infertile woman can have a child via surrogate mother, and be in roughly the same position. I don’t how the court’s traditional bias towards the mother plays out in those cases: does the fact that the mom doesn’t share any genetic material with the child trump the mother/child relationship, in the court’s eyes? I’ve no idea, but I suspect the best he can hope for here is to be judged by the same standard. Much more likely is that, because he belongs to a sexual minority, he’s going to have far fewer legal rights to his kid once the courts get involved.
You know, if you think about it, why does this guy (or anyone else, for that matter) have to be 100% any gender? What about people born with ambiguous gender and/or hermaphrodites? Who gives a shit?
ETA: Miller, would it be possible for him to adopt the child as well, just to give himself an advantage? Or wouldn’t that work?
What do you mean when you say that gender is a social construct? I think the exact opposite is true…if people can be transgendered because they were born that way (that is, because they believe themselves to be one gender, but living in the body of the other gender), how can it be a social construct?
I don’t disagree with the rest of what you are saying here, except that I do think it’s an awfully big disconnect for people to be able to grasp…that socially, he wants to be treated as a male, even when pregnant? I wouldn’t say it was “wrong” in the sense of being morally wrong, or hypocritical necessarily, but it does seem like it might be a tad…I don’t know…unreasonable.
So in other words, you’ve decided that you’re the Gender Police for the entire world, and you’re nowhere near as tolerant of transgenderism as you claim to be, which means this whole thread was a waste of time.
I’ve no idea, but I don’t think it would make a difference. There’s a lot of judges out there who are going to rule against a gay or transexual parent, regardless of the strength of their claim, simply on the grounds that a queer parent would by definition be a harmful influence.
I’m quite satisfied with the work I do when I’m on the clock. If I forbade myself from calling it like I saw it at any time, and forced myself to be totally polite to assholes who are spewing bigoted slime and who are never going to see what’s wrong with it, on my vacation time, my blood pressure would shoot through the roof and I’d end up being even more of an asshole. Or driving off a cliff, which I’m sure would make many posters in this thread happy.
Damn. No wonder you changed your username to one with “hostile” in it. I guess it’s a good thing you get all this anger out on message boards rather than in real life, at least.
ETA: Didn’t see your previous post. Sorry.
And on an off note, like the OP was reminded of that Arnold movie (which one was that), did anyone see that episode of The Cosby Show when Cliff had a nightmare that all the men in the family were pregnant, and then they ended up giving birth to things like toy cars, and footballs? And Cliff had a three foot long hoagie, and a bottle of orange pop?
Or one of my favorite Beavis & Butthead episodes, when Beavis thinks he’s pregnant?
(And I hope this doesn’t come off as being a bigotted asshole-they just popped into my head)