Transgendered man 5 months pregnant

[sari]

Very interesting story - I'm sure there will be some interesting reactions...


Transgendered man 5 months pregnant, he says

Last Updated: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 | 11:19 AM ET

A transgendered Oregon man says he is five months pregnant and expecting a baby girl.

Thomas Beatie told The Advocate, a magazine devoted to gay, bisexual and transgendered issues, that he made the choice because his wife can't have children.

Beatie, who writes he is "legally male and legally married," said his wife Nancy had a hysterectomy because of severe endometriosis.

Sterilization is not a requirement for gender reassignment, allowing him to keep his female reproductive organs, he said. Beatie did have breast reduction surgery and testosterone therapy, but stopped taking the hormone after deciding to become pregnant.

"It had been roughly eight years since I had my last menstrual cycle, so this wasn’t a decision that I took lightly," he said. "My body regulated itself after about four months, and I didn’t have to take any exogenous estrogen, progesterone, or fertility drugs to aid my pregnancy."

The couple used a sperm bank and home insemination, he wrote. His first pregnancy resulted in an ectopic pregnancy with triplets.

"It was a life-threatening event that required surgical intervention, resulting in the loss of all embryos and my right fallopian tube," he said. "When my brother found out about my loss, he said, 'It’s a good thing that happened. Who knows what kind of monster it would have been.'"

This pregnancy is free of complications and a baby girl is due on July 3, said Beatie.

The couple has only recently started to experience "opposition" from friends, family and medical professionals, Beatie said.

"Doctors have discriminated against us, turning us away due to their religious beliefs. Health-care professionals have refused to call me by a male pronoun or recognize Nancy as my wife," he said. "Receptionists have laughed at us. Friends and family have been unsupportive; most of Nancy's family doesn't even know I’m transgender."

Beatie told The Advocate most people in his community don't know he is pregnant.

"But our situation ultimately will ask everyone to embrace the gamut of human possibility and to define for themselves what is normal," he wrote.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/03/26/transgender-pregnant.html?ref=rss
And
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_21043.aspx

[mudcreekmama]

I think the kind of discrimination he's (they've as his wife is involved too) faced is horrible.

I am concerned about the medical issues that this child might face. Excessive testosterone in a mother is linked to lower birth size, later risk of breast cancer, and a higher risk of autism. It would be like being highly stressed the entire pregnancy - all the same issues. Most of the negative effects are seen in baby boys though, so it is a good thing he's carrying a girl.


Then again, if he stopped testerone treatment before he got pregnant would his hormone levels normalize for a female body and then have a totally normal pregnancy? I don't know.


Very interesting story - I'm sure there will be some interesting reactions...


Transgendered man 5 months pregnant, he says

Last Updated: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 | 11:19 AM ET

A transgendered Oregon man says he is five months pregnant and expecting a baby girl.

Thomas Beatie told The Advocate, a magazine devoted to gay, bisexual and transgendered issues, that he made the choice because his wife can't have children.

Beatie, who writes he is "legally male and legally married," said his wife Nancy had a hysterectomy because of severe endometriosis.

Sterilization is not a requirement for gender reassignment, allowing him to keep his female reproductive organs, he said. Beatie did have breast reduction surgery and testosterone therapy, but stopped taking the hormone after deciding to become pregnant.

"It had been roughly eight years since I had my last menstrual cycle, so this wasn’t a decision that I took lightly," he said. "My body regulated itself after about four months, and I didn’t have to take any exogenous estrogen, progesterone, or fertility drugs to aid my pregnancy."

The couple used a sperm bank and home insemination, he wrote. His first pregnancy resulted in an ectopic pregnancy with triplets.

"It was a life-threatening event that required surgical intervention, resulting in the loss of all embryos and my right fallopian tube," he said. "When my brother found out about my loss, he said, 'It’s a good thing that happened. Who knows what kind of monster it would have been.'"

This pregnancy is free of complications and a baby girl is due on July 3, said Beatie.

The couple has only recently started to experience "opposition" from friends, family and medical professionals, Beatie said.

"Doctors have discriminated against us, turning us away due to their religious beliefs. Health-care professionals have refused to call me by a male pronoun or recognize Nancy as my wife," he said. "Receptionists have laughed at us. Friends and family have been unsupportive; most of Nancy's family doesn't even know I’m transgender."

Beatie told The Advocate most people in his community don't know he is pregnant.

"But our situation ultimately will ask everyone to embrace the gamut of human possibility and to define for themselves what is normal," he wrote.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/0...t.html?ref=rss
And
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_21043.aspx

[mudcreekmama]

I was thinking that I hoped his wife would have access to meds and help in lactating - like for an adoption.

[sari]

I was thinking that I hoped his wife would have access to meds and help in lactating - like for an adoption.

Good idea. I hope they look into it.
I had the same initial reaction - "who will breastfeed??!!"

Then, as the discussions moved to ignorant and really irritating posts on the Forum I first saw this story on, I got outraged at people's black and white view of the world. People were posting things like 'Make up your mind'. :rolleyes:

Aside from this - I find it really troublesome that he might not be eligible for maternity leave - a time designed to help recover from childbirth - despite being the one to give birth! And even more worrisome: if he does get granted maternity leave, he might subsequently have his legal status as a male revoked! After all he's gone through to make that monumental change, and making a really tough choice to stop the drugs and do the childbearing - he's faced with THAT?? Brutal. :mad: :(

[mudcreekmama]

Parental leave would be a non issue here in Canada - "parents" can split it up any way they like - both parents are entitled to benefits and job security during their leave (up to a year).

[mudcreekmama]

I don't know, once you start growing that hair it doesn't stop just cause the hormones are normal again (thats why women with PCOS get extra hair growth, it is still there - just grows more slowly once your hormones levels normalize).

[Bickery]

Parental leave would be a non issue here in Canada - "parents" can split it up any way they like - both parents are entitled to benefits and job security during their leave (up to a year).

I don't understand why he wouldn't have FMLA. Maybe it's a better leave package than that they are talking about (or his employer does not have to honor FMLA).

[Ahnyx]

So wait...does he have penis? I didn't read the links so I'm confused. It says he's legally male, so does that mean he had reassignment surgery?

-Melanie

[~PQ]

I am sure this will be unpopular here, but I think it's horrible- he wants to have his cake and eat it too, and to what cost?? Either be a man or be a woman. Women have wombs. WOmen give birth. That is what MAKES us women. It is the very defining thing about our gender. Womb-woman. Ugh, I am trying to "check" my really disgusted gut reaction but it just isn't hapening- this feels so very wrong to me.

[~PQ]

Good idea. I hope they look into it.
I had the same initial reaction - "who will breastfeed??!!"

Then, as the discussions moved to ignorant and really irritating posts on the Forum I first saw this story on, I got outraged at people's black and white view of the world. People were posting things like 'Make up your mind'. :rolleyes:

Aside from this - I find it really troublesome that he might not be eligible for maternity leave - a time designed to help recover from childbirth - despite being the one to give birth! And even more worrisome: if he does get granted maternity leave, he might subsequently have his legal status as a male revoked! After all he's gone through to make that monumental change, and making a really tough choice to stop the drugs and do the childbearing - he's faced with THAT?? Brutal. :mad: :(

I haven't seen the board or posts you refer to but I can REALLY understand why people reacted strongly. Frankly I find the idea of a hairy, deep voiced, adams apple, penis wobbling, man walking around with a swollen pregnant belly... repugnant. Its NOT natural, I don't know its unnatural for me in a way that being transgendered is not. For whatever reason the idea of someone changing genders doesn't bother me... but the idea of a MAN and this is what he is- he is not a woman pretending to be a man, he is someone who identifies as a man both socially and physically... carrying as baby inside his abdomen, repulses me.

I don't doubt they didn't make this decision lightly and it was a tough choice. IMO it was the WRONG tough choice though. There is no rule that says they *must* give biological birth to a child to be parents, they could have used a surrogate, they could have adopted. They could even have chosen to live childfree. This notion that everyone is meant to physically give birth is so modern and radical- we're not all physically able to do so, and it diminishes the many hundreds of thousands of loving surrogate and adoptive families out there for science to insist we all CAN do it this way.

[~PQ]

On second thought, I think the whole thing is a hoax. It just doesn't add up medically- for example, HOW did he get the sperm introduced if he has a penis?? The picture looks fake too,

[hamamelis]

I haven't seen the board or posts you refer to but I can REALLY understand why people reacted strongly. Frankly I find the idea of a hairy, deep voiced, adams apple, penis wobbling, man walking around with a swollen pregnant belly...


I had to laugh at this because in my senior art class one of my best drawings I did was a picture of a naked, pregnant man pulling his upper lip over his head. :shockfunny: I wish I knew what happened to that piece.

[kathy caribe]

I find it fascinating. Honestly, my first GUT reaction, was that because of his breast reduction, he won't be able to breastfeed. After that....I don't know....all of it seems like a non issue. I imagine (hope?...in my crazy optimistic way), that after the baby is born, they can go back to "no one knowing" and be an invisible family, an average family.

Seems like an extreme to go to, but......no more extreme than if The Sweetie and I decided to BOTH have reversals....and that would be completely socially acceptable and embraced.

My exact reaction; I kept reading hoping to read that his wife would breastfeed since she still has breasts.

I see it as a complete non-issue but am sick about the opposition he's getting. Maybe a midwife or DEM might be better for them?

[kathy caribe]

I am sure this will be unpopular here, but I think it's horrible- he wants to have his cake and eat it too, and to what cost?? Either be a man or be a woman. Women have wombs. WOmen give birth. That is what MAKES us women. It is the very defining thing about our gender. Womb-woman. Ugh, I am trying to "check" my really disgusted gut reaction but it just isn't hapening- this feels so very wrong to me.

Why should he have to choose a definition created by society when nature gave him his own definition? So he can "fit in"? How INCREDIBLY bigoted and short-sighted of you.

[~PQ]

Why should he have to choose a definition created by society when nature gave him his own definition? So he can "fit in"? How INCREDIBLY bigoted and short-sighted of you.
Kathy he CHOSE to reject the one nature gave him. I think it is bigoted and short-sighted of you to reject the basic premise of all transgendered people, that while they may have been BORN one gender, they are in fact another.

Nature says women have wombs and have babies. He is a man, not a woman. You may not like that he is a man but tough cookies, that's what he socially and physically identifies with.

[webbeccjo]

Kathy he CHOSE to reject the one nature gave him. I think it is bigoted and short-sighted of you to reject the basic premise of all transgendered people, that while they may have been BORN one gender, they are in fact another.

Nature says women have wombs and have babies. He is a man, not a woman. You may not like that he is a man but tough cookies, that's what he socially and physically identifies with.


What!?!?!?!


He IS a man..he happens to have been born with female organs...nature made him a man inside a womans body.
why the hell shouldn't he be able to avail himself of the organs that happen to be inside his body just because he IS a man!!! why shouldn't those organs that were likely the he source and focus of much emotional pain in his life be something he can use when he wants/needs to!?!?

I'm uncomfortable with your response that he should just deal with it and not be allowed to "have his cake and eat it too" (what a yucky thing to say btw)


I can certainly understand an infertile couple's desire to do whatever it takes to have a child and it seems reasonable to want to use his uterus if its available.


And just because you don't approve of something doesn't make it wrong.

[JaamE]

Kathy he CHOSE to reject the one nature gave him. I think it is bigoted and short-sighted of you to reject the basic premise of all transgendered people, that while they may have been BORN one gender, they are in fact another.

No! How many times is gender chosen in the process of making a person... 3 isnt it? And the only one we recognize is the outward appearance. *That* is wrong.

Says the chick with the transgendered friend.

[~PQ]

What!?!?!?!


He IS a man..he happens to have been born with female organs...nature made him a man inside a womans body.
why the hell shouldn't he be able to avail himself of the organs that happen to be inside his body just because he IS a man!!! why shouldn't those organs that were likely the he source and focus of much emotional pain in his life be something he can use when he wants/needs to!?!?

I'm uncomfortable with your response that he should just deal with it and not be allowed to "have his cake and eat it too" (what a yucky thing to say btw)


I can certainly understand an infertile couple's desire to do whatever it takes to have a child and it seems reasonable to want to use his uterus if its available.


And just because you don't approve of something doesn't make it wrong.

It's wrong in my eyes, and just because others DON'T think it's wrong doesn't make it right. He is a man, men do not give birth. As a woman giving birth is *my* birthright, and I find the idea of a man doing it horrid and an insult to nature.

It's all likely academic anyway because I think it'll turn out no one is actually agonizing or hurting over this because he's a NUTTER who made the whole thing up just to start arguments like this. http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272619726.shtml

But there are skeptics and one lives right next to the couple. "Quite frankly, I think it's a hoax," said neighbor Ron Schlieper, according to a report from Fox news. "I saw him a few days ago and he didn't look like that," he said in reference to the picture from the Advocate Web site.

A larger photo is here, is the neighbor right? "He was walking down the street with who I thought was his wife, Nancy, and I don't recall seeing a belly. If that (picture was taken) a month ago, he would have been much bigger just a few days ago," the neighbor concluded.


***


There is also a hint that it might be a hoax. Another report claims that Thomas Beatie has signed a confidentiality agreement that expires on April 1. Is this all a big April fools joke or is the story accurate?

[anna v]

I'm conflicted over it. To me someone who identifies as male and who has had some reassignment surgery (not genital from what I have read) who then chooses to do a very female role is odd. TBH I would have thought that someone who was born male in a female body and who had at least some surgery would have major major problems with carrying a baby. Ummm if he had had genital reconstruction and had a penis, how would the sperm have gotten to the uterus?

I'd think that a male born with a male body would have less conflict psychologically carrying a baby because they never had to struggle with gender assignment.

I just find the thing so odd. And if it is a hoax, then it's really odd.

I hope it works out well for all of them.

[Tracy]

Ya, I'd like to know how he could even get pregnant when he claims to have had a sex change. (nt)

[sari]

On second thought, I think the whole thing is a hoax. It just doesn't add up medically- for example, HOW did he get the sperm introduced if he has a penis?? The picture looks fake too,

Ya, I'd like to know how he could even get pregnant when he claims to have had a sex change. (nt)

From the article:
"The couple used a sperm bank and home insemination, he wrote. His first pregnancy resulted in an ectopic pregnancy with triplets.
"It was a life-threatening event that required surgical intervention, resulting in the loss of all embryos and my right fallopian tube," he said."


Nature says women have wombs and have babies. He is a man, not a woman. You may not like that he is a man but tough cookies, that's what he socially and physically identifies with.

As he says on his blog:
"Wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire." [emphasis mine]

[kokoro]

If this is really true then I support them. If it is a hoax it is only not all that interesting to me. I don't think it is anyone else's business if this is what they chose to do and it really is a real story.

[Tracy]

But if he had a sex change he wouldn't have a vagina anymore would he?(nt)

[anna v]

It's the ectopic with triplets which kinda has my BS detector in play. Esp with DIY insemination.

[Tracy]

The feeling that I'm getting from others on boards that I post on is that it's not even news worthy. If he is still technically a woman, which he must be to Carry a baby, then the reality is that a woman, who happens to identify as a man, is pregnant, but nothing biologically new.

If the story is true, then what is newsworthy, more so than the pregnancy, is how people who are considered out of the "ordinary" are still treated quite badly even in this day and age.

If the story is made up, then it will only do more damage to those people struggling to be accepted by their family and society.

[kokoro]

It's the ectopic with triplets which kinda has my BS detector in play. Esp with DIY insemination.

What is DIY insemination? (I don't know what DIY stands for.)

[indigo]

What is DIY insemination? (I don't know what DIY stands for.)

"do it yourself"

[kokoro]

It's the ectopic with triplets which kinda has my BS detector in play. Esp with DIY insemination.

The feeling that I'm getting from others on boards that I post on is that it's not even news worthy. If he is still technically a woman, which he must be to Carry a baby, then the reality is that a woman, who happens to identify as a man, is pregnant, but nothing biologically new.

If the story is true, then what is newsworthy, more so than the pregnancy, is how people who are considered out of the "ordinary" are still treated quite badly even in this day and age.

If the story is made up, then it will only do more damage to those people struggling to be accepted by their family and society.

Yes. I felt badly reading how they were treated. but I'm not surprised. I think that transgendered people and couples where one is transgendered are probably generally going to face a lot of prejudice still unfortunately. I really feel for people who are in that situation in general and so when I read this that was my lense.

[Debra]

I was reading about this today and there is some question as to the validity of the story. I do find it an interesting subject though. It's going to happen at some point. I personally have no problem with it (nor is it any of my business, frankly), but I find the medical side of this rather fascinating.

And now I'm thinking of Ahhhnold Schwarzenegger in that god awful movie. Oy. Yes ladies and gentlemen, THAT is our governor! LOL

[indigo]

Very interesting story - I'm sure there will be some interesting reactions...


Transgendered man 5 months pregnant, he says



If this is true, I'd be very concerned. Since women are born with all the eggs they will ever have, this egg has been exposed to years of testosterone. I doubt anyone knows the effect that could have on the health of the baby, at birth or in the future. The fact is, whether this sounds insensitive or not, excessive male hormones are not what eggs are supposed to be exposed to, because they are supposed to be inside women.

This is just nature; this is science.

I do fully empathize with the couple's desire to have a baby. But getting pregnant with eggs that have been in a male-hormone-bath for years seems pretty unwise to me. I do get that he's in a difficult situation, but sometimes that means that not all choices are good ones.

I wouldn't be as concerned if the man used a donated egg.

[aleutsi]

But if he had a sex change he wouldn't have a vagina anymore would he?(nt)

In various articles it was mentioned that he only opted for the breast reduction surgery and the hormone treatment. Something like there are three surgeries involved with FtM sex changes: breast reduction, male organ construction and hysterectomy... the latter two being the most expensive and invasive and some opt out of them.

:dunno:

[Bickery]

http://www.amazon.com/Dress-Codes-Girlhoods-My-Mothers-Fathers/dp/031242258X/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206679129&sr=8-5

I stumbled upon this book in an odd way -- since we're on the subject, it's a good read.

[Tracy]

Ah, I see then. Thanks!(nt)

[bumblebee]

Kathy he CHOSE to reject the one nature gave him. I think it is bigoted and short-sighted of you to reject the basic premise of all transgendered people, that while they may have been BORN one gender, they are in fact another.

Nature says women have wombs and have babies. He is a man, not a woman. You may not like that he is a man but tough cookies, that's what he socially and physically identifies with.

I think you're confusing sex and gender. Sex is biological; gender is largely societally and socially constructed and assigned, i.e., gender is not inextricably linked to genitalia. Since he still has a vagina, uterus, ovaries, etc. (the article is a bit vague), he is still fully capable of carrying a child regardless of his gender identity! I don't know all of the health risks involved with taking testosterone, but the testosterone would be my only objection to such a pregnancy.

I know trans people who will never have or don't feel like they want/need sex reassignment. Their physical body (sex) doesn't have to match their gender. Many bio-females who identify as male have functioning female breasts/genitalia, and they don't ever consider surgery--but they are still male gender-wise. Do you feel that they should not be able to carry a baby as well ("have their cake and it eat it too"), or is your main objection to the potentially dangerous use of testosterone, or what?

You can feel however you want about the topic, obviously, but if you're conflating sex and gender, many people sensitive to gender issues will consider your opinion inflammatory and inaccurate.

ETA:

It's wrong in my eyes, and just because others DON'T think it's wrong doesn't make it right. He is a man, men do not give birth. As a woman giving birth is *my* birthright, and I find the idea of a man doing it horrid and an insult to nature.

OK, I missed this when I posted. But I'm still curious if you think anyone who identifies as male but has the physical capability to carry a child and goes on to carry said child is wrong and insulting. To me, this is an incredibly complex issue that's likely to metamorphose and gain attention more and more as the years go by, and it's obviously of particular relevance in the GLBTQ community. What if someone who IDs as "butch" or "genderqueer" chooses to carry a baby? Is it "horrid and insulting" unless one is 100% female-identified?

Gender is not always black-and-white, and I think that even many female-identified biological women today probably greatly clash and conflict with previous societal and psychological definitions of what it means to be a "true woman," or they embody traits or ideas that were previously believed to be "masculine." Almost everyone would fail a gender purity test IMO.

[Nancy]

This was my initial reaction as well, that his body had already been chemically altered, so undeniably the eggs were exposed as well. Mucking with nature isn't a good idea, generally.

I honestly believe this is a hoax. The link it's on is questionable anyway, are there ANY reputable news sources who have reported it?

I find the entire thing strange, and I can't say I am comfortable with the concept. Too much mucking around with hormones and nature and all that. This will probably come off offensive, but sometimes I believe that people think think they "deserve" a baby at all costs....but there are many ways to complete a family, this just feels egotistic to me, to possibly expose a child to issues for their own needs. If this is real, I fear this baby will not have a healthy life, and I'm speaking from the perspective of having been exposed in my own prenatal life to medications that altered my fertility.

[sari]

...snip...
I honestly believe this is a hoax. The link it's on is questionable anyway, are there ANY reputable news sources who have reported it?
...snip...

Actually - in my initial post there are two links to reputable news sources in Canada. CBC is Canada's version of the BBC, similar to the American NPR, I think, except they do TV as well. The CBC is very highly respected, and a trustworthy news source.
Citytv (the other link) is part of a very large media conglomerate and is not in the habit of reporting false stories either.

It was also a story in yesterday's 'Globe and Mail' newspaper - a well respected national paper in Canada.

I don't know for certain that it's not faked, but if it is, then some VERY reputable news sources have been duped, not just the public. :)
(That doesn't make it impossible, though, that it's a hoax... just saying that these sources ARE generally very trustworthy.)

[mudcreekmama]

because nonsurgical reassignment only involves hormonal therapy and usually a breast reduction.

[Nancy]

Whatever link I went to was highly questionable, I'm glad my kids weren't in the room actually, there were some offensive photos on it, and links to lots more!

[mudcreekmama]

So should women with PCOS not have children? Estrogen poisoning is what its about but and the body turns the excess into androgens. My eggs have been exposed to excess androgens since puberty, not just for 8 years.

[sari]

Whatever link I went to was highly questionable, I'm glad my kids weren't in the room actually, there were some offensive photos on it, and links to lots more!

I checked and re-linked the websites this morning, to make sure the links are good now.
Sorry you ended up somewhere else! Dunno what happened... :confused:

[aleutsi]

Ah, I see then. Thanks!(nt)


Oh and he says so himself on his blog - for anyone interested:

http://advocate.com/issue_story_ektid52664.asp

[kathy caribe]

but there are many ways to complete a family, this just feels egotistic to me, to possibly expose a child to issues for their own needs. If this is real, I fear this baby will not have a healthy life, and I'm speaking from the perspective of having been exposed in my own prenatal life to medications that altered my fertility.

Having a child, irregardless of how you get there, is probably the most egoistic action you can take. Do you feel the same way about women who have had chemo for cancer (putting them into menopause decades early) and using donor eggs? Do you feel the same way about women who are infertile for any reason doing IVF, donor eggs, whatever their options?

[aleutsi]

This was my initial reaction as well, that his body had already been chemically altered, so undeniably the eggs were exposed as well. Mucking with nature isn't a good idea, generally.

I honestly believe this is a hoax. The link it's on is questionable anyway, are there ANY reputable news sources who have reported it?


I get a feeling that it's a hoax, too, but just from the picture - he says he's five months along and that belly looks farther along than 5 months to me.. and it looks photoshopped to me, although you can see the scars from the breast reduction surgery, the belly area just looks fake. Of course, even in my own off the camera pics - sometimes things look fake when they are not.

But I can still see how a reputable news source can broadcast it as news - they aren't reporting that he IS pregnant, they are reporting that a legal man is SAYING he's pregnant. That is true as far as I can see.. on his blog he's saying he's pregnant.

:dunno: I guess we'll see in June (or was it July)

[Kim]

I found it repugnant as well, PQ. A lot of reasons for that feeling, both scientific e.g. Indigo et al and societal. It's like if you find something repulsive though it must automatically mean you are a bigot. Huh.

[sarahs]

Hmm. I guess my reaction is that they might have considered adoption instead. I am very open to different ways of making a family but I don't think biological children are always the optimal choice. Of course, I say this from the privileged position of a fertile white straight woman so take it for what its worth. In any event they should not be exposed to discrimination and bigotry and I wish them a healthy happy baby.

[Jill]

I found it repugnant as well, PQ. A lot of reasons for that feeling, both scientific e.g. Indigo et al and societal. It's like if you find something repulsive though it must automatically mean you are a bigot. Huh.

Same here.

[michelle]

To be fair, he's certainly not the first transman to choose to stop his testosterone and get pregnant. While it's not often talked about, and certainly not publicly, it does happen. Sometimes it's a case of a single parent wanting a child, sometimes they're gay men who want a child, sometimes there's a reason a female partner can't carry a child.

Most transmen do not opt for any sort of genital reconstruction as the surgical options available are very, very poor. The choices are limited to a functional micropenis or a dysfunctional (read: no ability to produce erection) member. Since he hasn't had a hysterectomy, his ability to become pregnant/birth a child is no different than any of ours. I have no doubt that anyone willing to accept the social and physical burdens that carrying a child as a transman would bring will be an amazing and devoted dad to that baby.

And really, anyone looked at the difficulties queer folk in general have adopting? The options for this couple to become parents were likely limited to this. Unfair it certainly is, but that's the reality. The legalities of their marriage likely wouldn't have made adoption any easier.

[sarahs]

To be fair, he's certainly not the first transman to choose to stop his testosterone and get pregnant. While it's not often talked about, and certainly not publicly, it does happen. Sometimes it's a case of a single parent wanting a child, sometimes they're gay men who want a child, sometimes there's a reason a female partner can't carry a child.

Most transmen do not opt for any sort of genital reconstruction as the surgical options available are very, very poor. The choices are limited to a functional micropenis or a dysfunctional (read: no ability to produce erection) member. Since he hasn't had a hysterectomy, his ability to become pregnant/birth a child is no different than any of ours. I have no doubt that anyone willing to accept the social and physical burdens that carrying a child as a transman would bring will be an amazing and devoted dad to that baby.

And really, anyone looked at the difficulties queer folk in general have adopting? The options for this couple to become parents were likely limited to this. Unfair it certainly is, but that's the reality. The legalities of their marriage likely wouldn't have made adoption any easier.

Yes, I was thinking after I wrote that that they may not have an easy time adopting. Living in a large city, I know many gay/lesbian adoptive parents but the transgender thing is definitely an additional barrier. Although I also know a transgender woman (full surgical reassignment) who is parenting with her female partner but the child is the biological child of the partner from a prior relationship and they appear as a lesbian couple raising a kid together which raises no eyebrows here. I wish that openess could be found everywhere.

[3Queens]

I found it repugnant as well, PQ. A lot of reasons for that feeling, both scientific e.g. Indigo et al and societal. It's like if you find something repulsive though it must automatically mean you are a bigot. Huh.

I don't see in any way how finding something unappealing or even repulsive makes you bigoted against that thing? I think objections were made to saying how WRONG it is for a transgendered man to become pregnant. *shrug*. I mean, I certainly find the idea of sex with another woman unappealing at best. That doesn't in any way, shape or form make me not accept people who DO find that appealing. It is non-acceptance of differences in other people's choices or differences that make a person bigoted IMO.

[indigo]

So should women with PCOS not have children? Estrogen poisoning is what its about but and the body turns the excess into androgens. My eggs have been exposed to excess androgens since puberty, not just for 8 years.

I wasn't sure if you were replying to me. But I'd feel the same way about any eggs that have been exposed to something that could be dangerous. What those dangerous things are,I don't have the knowledge to say. If androgens pose a danger to eggs, then I absolutely would feel the same way.

[sarahrose]

I'm not opposed (although I find it all a little weird) and I'm not feeling all accepting about it either. I guess I could say I'm neutral but really I just don't understand. I really don't know all that much about transgender and the emotions or thoughts behind it.

Let me see if I can get it straight. This is a man who was born a woman. Has always felt like a man. Decided to "change" gender to be the gender that he/she identifys with (and feels he/she is). So the choice is then made to live life as a man. She becomes he. So in essense that would mean giving up all things female about herself. I can only imagine that this is a very difficult choice. One that includes all sorts of treatments and surgery. One that is not easy to live with.

But then to decide later on to "use" those parts that he believes wholeheartedly aren't supposed to be there in the first place because heis a "man" not a woman, seems a little strange to me. If he defines himself personally and legally as a man I 'd think that the idea of childbirth has gone out the window. Defining yourself a man and then using the parts that are so classically female just seems strange.

[Nancy]

I feel that way on behalf of the CHILDREN. If there are true and serious risks to the to be born children, then I think you should explore other options. I'm not speaking out my butt here either, I have never felt that my family was whole, I would have loved more children than I have, but there are serious dangers to my unborn children due to my very high risk of prematurity. I chose to not pursue another pregnancy and had my tubes tied after my second.

If any of those conditions force undue risk on the babies, then I do think it is egotistic, yes. Choosing to become a parent at a high physical cost to the child is selfish. Donor eggs clearly are not a risk, so I don't see the connection. I would have less an objection to this guy if he had used donor eggs. I think that there are some serious side effects possible to a girl child born to a person who is on testosterone therapy.

[mudcreekmama]

The research I was given when I discussed the likelihood I'd NEVER be able to conceive naturally :shockfunny: was that it wasn't a danger to the eggs. If my hormone levels were not normal DURING pregnancy (and they were) there were risks to male babies, I detailed these above, and an increased risk of breast cancer to a female fetus.

It was the same risk factorss that *any* pregnant woman under extreme stress was facing - and as I said that was only if the androgen imbalance was there during pregnancy.

He says his hormone levels are normal.

[mudcreekmama]

This is a great post bumblebee :-)

I also wonder...would it be okay for this person to have stayed closetted about their gender identity, live as a woman, feel suicidal (most trans people have) and have babies? Who'd be crying out at the injustice about that sad life?

[indigo]

This is a great post bumblebee :-)

I also wonder...would it be okay for this person to have stayed closetted about their gender identity, live as a woman, feel suicidal (most trans people have) and have babies? Who'd be crying out at the injustice about that sad life?

My word! Are those our only two choices? My only issue is the safety of the baby, the health of the eggs. If it turns out that it's perfectly safe for eggs to be bathed in testosterone for 8 years, then I have no problem with it.

[mudcreekmama]

I think...people that identify as transgendered often feel there is an either or decision they need to make, when there isn't a perfectly valid *ambiguous* option. Its not any different than sexual identity there's a continuum between 100% heterosexual and 100% homosexual, societally there's very little acceptance of anyone in the middle. Maybe *gender* is the same way?

I just wanted to say I know 3 people who are trans. One of them was a prof at U of T and I had this...inkling that she was transexual but I didn't know for sure until she was dying of breast cancer and came out about her reassignment. The other two are male identified and my God, have their lives been insanely hard. M is on that fence in between both genders really identifying as both, having two spirits. He faces all the discrimination women face, all the discrimination gay men face and all the descrimination lesbians face. I have a really hard time being around M because his pain is always right there under the surface. He can't "pass" S can pass and does with anyone who doesn't know and its a lot easier for him but because genital reassignment is so useless and invasive he hasn't ever done it and talks a lot about his feelings of inadequacies regarding it.

[mudcreekmama]

Well I'm thinking more of the "have your cake and eat it to" comments or the "thats *my* birthright not theirs" type of comments. It seems to me the issue a lot of people have is that if they don't know about a person's gender ambiguity then everything is fine, if someone actually addresses it for the sake of their mental health they're suddenly outraged.

[bumblebee]

Well I'm thinking more of the "have your cake and eat it to" comments or the "thats *my* birthright not theirs" type of comments. It seems to me the issue a lot of people have is that if they don't know about a person's gender ambiguity then everything is fine, if someone actually addresses it for the sake of their mental health they're suddenly outraged.

Exactly. Very well said.

And in regard to the issue of testosterone, there are trans individuals who have taken it and have gone on to have healthy babies, as michelle noted. It isn't anything new, but I don't actually know the full or possible effects of testosterone on eggs.

[indigo]

Exactly. Very well said.

And in regard to the issue of testosterone, there are trans individuals who have taken it and have gone on to have healthy babies, as michelle noted. It isn't anything new, but I don't actually know the full or possible effects of testosterone on eggs.

Yeah, that is really my only concern. Other than that, I may vaguely feel that it's odd or whatever, but that is just opinion. I mean, there are lots of cases where I think that someone's choices are odd, but I'd never discriminate against the person.

I do find it hard to comprehend in a way. I mean, there are very few things in the world that I think are "woman" things to do. Having a baby is one of them. So regardless of how he feels about himself, in a way, I guess I think he's sort of a woman. Having a baby is just such a defining womanly thing for a human to do.

But those are just my thought processes and not something that should impact him. It really makes no difference to me what he does.

[candeo]

Good idea. I hope they look into it.
I had the same initial reaction - "who will breastfeed??!!"

Then, as the discussions moved to ignorant and really irritating posts on the Forum I first saw this story on, I got outraged at people's black and white view of the world. People were posting things like 'Make up your mind'. :rolleyes:

Aside from this - I find it really troublesome that he might not be eligible for maternity leave - a time designed to help recover from childbirth - despite being the one to give birth! And even more worrisome: if he does get granted maternity leave, he might subsequently have his legal status as a male revoked! After all he's gone through to make that monumental change, and making a really tough choice to stop the drugs and do the childbearing - he's faced with THAT?? Brutal. :mad: :(

I don't know what you're referring to, but the Family and Medical Leave Act guarantees 12 weeks unpaid (woohoo) leave to parents - either male or female - after the birth or adoption of a child. Very small employers aren't bound by it, so that may be coming into play, and then it's possible that his employer has their own paid or unpaid leave policy that is more generous than the one required by law, and they're not letting him access that. Don't know what that would be about.

[candeo]

I suppose if there are health implications for the baby then that would be a concern, but otherwise I'm in the "so what?" camp. I think there are more and more people who are rejecting rigid notions of gender, and maybe that's not an entirely bad thing.:dunno: I suppose I could be missing something. That's been known to happen.

[Kim]

In that case, I correct my statement: I think it was a poor choice. I don't think a person in his circumstances (by that, what I can determine from reading) should become pregnant to have a child. It strikes me as wrong in a right/wrong kind of way.

[kokoro]

Why?

[kokoro]

In that case, I correct my statement: I think it was a poor choice. I don't think a person in his circumstances (by that, what I can determine from reading) should become pregnant to have a child. It strikes me as wrong in a right/wrong kind of way.

I agree here too....but...for whatever reason, they decided they wanted bio children. Having been the product of a really disastrous adoption placement, I never feel like I can say "you should just adopt!", yk? It's not that easy....by a long shot.

Not easy and I think wanting to have a child is such a *basic* and strong drive to most humans. I don't know that all the people who recommend others 'just adopt' would like to give up having children biologically themselves. I know *some* would but certainly some who say that wouldn't want to have that restriction.

Personally I have *one* child who I gave birth to. I wanted 2 or 3. I have someone in my family who has a lot of kids and often says of her friends who wish they had more than one, "oh, well, just be happy for your one. You are lucky! blah, blah, blah" and I feel, 'Easy for her to say.' Yes, it is true. They are lucky to even have one child but that doesn't make it easy to wish you had more and not have them. The idea one can adopt won't make it easier for a person who doesn't have any child and wants one, either, at least not in all cases. (shrug)

I do think being transgendered would be a block to being allowed to adopt for many and even if not, not all people can afford adoption fees. which also reminds me of this friend who has this flip, 'if you can afford to have kids you can afford to adopt.' Um, not really!

[kokoro]

I'm not opposed (although I find it all a little weird) and I'm not feeling all accepting about it either. I guess I could say I'm neutral but really I just don't understand. I really don't know all that much about transgender and the emotions or thoughts behind it.

Let me see if I can get it straight. This is a man who was born a woman. Has always felt like a man. Decided to "change" gender to be the gender that he/she identifys with (and feels he/she is). So the choice is then made to live life as a man. She becomes he. So in essense that would mean giving up all things female about herself. I can only imagine that this is a very difficult choice. One that includes all sorts of treatments and surgery. One that is not easy to live with.

But then to decide later on to "use" those parts that he believes wholeheartedly aren't supposed to be there in the first place because heis a "man" not a woman, seems a little strange to me. If he defines himself personally and legally as a man I 'd think that the idea of childbirth has gone out the window. Defining yourself a man and then using the parts that are so classically female just seems strange.

I think it sounds like his commitment to his family is very strong and somehow having a bio child between the two of them was important for them. I imagine it was a very difficult and painful decision. If they are fine with it who cares?

[indigo]

I'm not opposed (although I find it all a little weird) and I'm not feeling all accepting about it either. I guess I could say I'm neutral but really I just don't understand. I really don't know all that much about transgender and the emotions or thoughts behind it.

Let me see if I can get it straight. This is a man who was born a woman. Has always felt like a man. Decided to "change" gender to be the gender that he/she identifys with (and feels he/she is). So the choice is then made to live life as a man. She becomes he. So in essense that would mean giving up all things female about herself. I can only imagine that this is a very difficult choice. One that includes all sorts of treatments and surgery. One that is not easy to live with.

But then to decide later on to "use" those parts that he believes wholeheartedly aren't supposed to be there in the first place because heis a "man" not a woman, seems a little strange to me. If he defines himself personally and legally as a man I 'd think that the idea of childbirth has gone out the window. Defining yourself a man and then using the parts that are so classically female just seems strange.

I'll try again to put my thoughts into words about this, and your post is good jumping-off point. I think that it's hard for a lot of people to accept transgendered people at all. No matter how many hormones a woman takes to become a man, no matter how much she lives as a man, no matter even the surgeries, to many people he's still "really" a woman...and just pretending to be a man.

That's not the way I look at it, but the fact is, lots of people do. I personally have heaps and heaps of empathy for transgenered people and do believe that gender is partially separate from sex organs.

So I think what niggles at me about this case is that it seems to give these people (the ones who doubt the legimacy of the adopted gender for transgendered people) fuel for the fire. "See? Doesn't matter if she has a beard. She really IS still a woman."

And, worse, I worry that it will give them "evidence" to use against other transgendered people.

Why does this matter? Because of discrimination. Next time a transgendered teen wants to use the school restroom of the gender he/she identifies with, it could get even harder than it is now. Middle America is asked to accept that a woman can become a man, or vice versa. Not just live as one or identify as one but really BECOME one. This is damn hard to for people to grasp. And men having babies really, really doesn't help that understanding.

Does this mean that I personally think that the guy shouldn't do it? No, not really. As long as there are no health risks to the baby from the testosterone-bathed eggs, I don't really care if he does it or not. But I do think it's realistic to realize that it can hurt the cases of other transgendered people who are struggling to be accepted as legitimately male (or female, depending which way they're going.)

[MorgnsGrl]

I'll try again to put my thoughts into words about this, and your post is good jumping-off point.

This does a very good job of summing up my feelings, as well.

[kathy caribe]

Does this mean that I personally think that the guy shouldn't do it? No, not really. As long as there are no health risks to the baby from the testosterone-bathed eggs, I don't really care if he does it or not. But I do think it's realistic to realize that it can hurt the cases of other transgendered people who are struggling to be accepted as legitimately male (or female, depending which way they're going.)

The argument that this guy is hurting other transfolk sounds very much like the argument that as long as the black folks act "white" they'll be accepted, but acting "black" will just hurt the cause of those acting white to be accepted. I don't buy it. Bigotry is bigotry and that is the cause that needs to be attacked, not having people act in accordance with accepted "rules" of society so Middle America won't feel uncomfortable.

[Bickery]

I don't know what you're referring to, but the Family and Medical Leave Act guarantees 12 weeks unpaid (woohoo) leave to parents - either male or female - after the birth or adoption of a child. Very small employers aren't bound by it, so that may be coming into play, and then it's possible that his employer has their own paid or unpaid leave policy that is more generous than the one required by law, and they're not letting him access that. Don't know what that would be about.


This is exactly what I was thinking earlier and didn't get it out as well as you did.

[indigo]

The argument that this guy is hurting other transfolk sounds very much like the argument that as long as the black folks act "white" they'll be accepted, but acting "black" will just hurt the cause of those acting white to be accepted. I don't buy it. Bigotry is bigotry and that is the cause that needs to be attacked, not having people act in accordance with accepted "rules" of society so Middle America won't feel uncomfortable.

Again, in case you missed it, I don't think the guy is doing anything wrong. (Assuming his actions don't hurt the baby.) But if we close our eyes to the effect this kind of thing has we're naive and foolish. It's HARD for people to understand this new way of looking at gender. Just when people get to the point of saying, "OK, so maybe you can be born a girl but REALLY be a man" they confronted with, "Oh, and now men can have babies."

It's not a simple matter of bigotry. It's utter confusion.

[kathy caribe]

Again, in case you missed it, I don't think the guy is doing anything wrong. (Assuming his actions don't hurt the baby.) But if we close our eyes to the effect this kind of thing has we're naive and foolish. It's HARD for people to understand this new way of looking at gender. Just when people get to the point of saying, "OK, so maybe you can be born a girl but REALLY be a man" they confronted with, "Oh, and now men can have babies."

It's not a simple matter of bigotry. It's utter confusion.

Oh, I totally got your point but if you're open to the discussion, I really think it harkens back to the good ole days of racial discrimination. As long as *they're* kept in their place and don't offend the sensibilities of Middle American *they* can be tolerated. But when blacks want the same respect and rights as whites, when gays want the same acceptance as heteros, when people cannot or choose not to accept a definition of gender as determined by Middle America, I'm sorry, but I think it is the same argument as blacks should *know their place* that gays should not show affection (though it is ok for heteros to) and that trans folk should not let anyone know they are trans. Kind of like the same argument about BFIP. "It's ok to breastfeed as long as grandpa doesn't see it because then you're SHOVING YOUR BARE NIPPLE DOWN HIS THROAT and that hurts the cause of breasfeeding mothers". Unless Middle America is brought out of their comfort zone how will they ever grow to acceptance? If they're never forced to confront that life is not like the "Katsup Advisory Board" (I'm listening to PHC right now), how are they are change and accept?

[indigo]

Oh, I totally got your point but if you're open to the discussion, I really think it harkens back to the good ole days of racial discrimination. As long as *they're* kept in their place and don't offend the sensibilities of Middle American *they* can be tolerated. But when blacks want the same respect and rights as whites, when gays want the same acceptance as heteros, when people cannot or choose not to accept a definition of gender as determined by Middle America, I'm sorry, but I think it is the same argument as blacks should *know their place* that gays should not show affection (though it is ok for heteros to) and that trans folk should not let anyone know they are trans. Kind of like the same argument about BFIP. "It's ok to breastfeed as long as grandpa doesn't see it because then you're SHOVING YOUR BARE NIPPLE DOWN HIS THROAT and that hurts the cause of breasfeeding mothers". Unless Middle America is brought out of their comfort zone how will they ever grow to acceptance? If they're never forced to confront that life is not like the "Katsup Advisory Board" (I'm listening to PHC right now), how are they are change and accept?


I get what you're saying. I can see the similarities with those situations but I don't agree it's analogous. What "middle America" (lol....as if England or Saudi Arabia or Spain would have an easier time with this) is being asked to do is to basically accept that there is no such thing as gender at all, at least not in any definable sense.

People used to be able to answer the question: what is a man? What is a woman?

This got more difficult with sex reassignment, but lots of people adjusted to that. They said, "OK, this is difficult but if you say that you're a man, then you are a man."

But now all of a sudden a man is doing the most womanly thing in the world - carrying a baby. It's only natural that people will say, "Whoa, Nelly. Just a minute ago you were telling me that you were a man. But now you're having a baby, which is the most womanly thing one can do. So are you REALLY a man? Are you taking a break from a man for 9 months?"

I get that it's painfully difficult for people who have less than simple gender identity. But, frankly, it pisses me off that when other people, who are trying damn hard to follow some kind of logic here, and trying to come up with a definition of what a man or woman is, are called BIGOTS because they don't get it.

I'm one of the most "live and let live" people you will meet and I don't really CARE what other people do, but if I'm being honest here I DON'T get it. I don't know how to define "man" so that it includes someone who has female organs and is carrying a baby.


Not that it really matters one way or the other if I can understand or define it. (I doubt that anyone is wating on my understanding before proceeding with his or her life.) But I am not a bigot and I don't want to be called one.

[kathy caribe]

I get that it's painfully difficult for people who have less than simple gender identity. But, frankly, it pisses me off that when other people, who are trying damn hard to follow some kind of logic here, and trying to come up with a definition of what a man or woman is, are called BIGOTS because they don't get it.

I'm one of the most "live and let live" people you will meet and I don't really CARE what other people do, but if I'm being honest here I DON'T get it. I don't know how to define "man" so that it includes someone who has female organs and is carrying a baby.


Not that it really matters one way or the other if I can understand or define it. (I doubt that anyone is wating on my understanding before proceeding with his or her life.) But I am not a bigot and I don't want to be called one.

I'm missing something here because I only called Kristy a bigot when she asserted it was "wrong" and that the man in question "couldn't" do what he was doing ("have his cake and eat it too"). Well, he obviously is, but to say that it is wrong and that he shouldn't be able to is WILDLY different from "I don't understand". I'm pretty sure I'm the only one calling anyone a bigot so if you thought I was calling you a bigot I totally apologise. And maybe you can explain to me what brought you to that conclusion.

[kokoro]

Probably not the best place to put this. I understand you not wanting to be called a bigot and fwiw I didn't feel what you posted was bigoted, just that you couldn't understand this case. I picture a person who has several conflicting desires. It is easy for me to picture a person who is transgendered and feels they were meant to be a man *also* having an equally strong desire to have a bio child. And I do not think any one person has to take on the role of ambassador to the world. Yes, he represents transgendered people but so do many others.

I just don't see that it is anyones business what that family decides to do. I dont' see how it hurts anyone in any way.

[lizinpa]

Honestly, PQ, I agree with you completely. And this is not to say I am discriminatory about transgendered people. In short make up your mind.

~~waiting for the flames~~

[kokoro]

This is on Oprah right now.

[Bonny]

my girls saw the commercial for it yesterday .... it was really NOT an indepth conversation I was wanting to have w my 8yo.

[sari]

For those of us who are interested, but at work, and without tivo... Can someone give a synopsis/summary?

[kokoro]

I think they seem like lovely people. They are as I had pictured. I hope the show will open people's minds. Personally I would not have any issue talking about this with D even now but my parents told me all about how babies are made from when I was very small--probably by 3 with more and more detail as we got older.

[kokoro]

..

[aleutsi]

..

Maybe in your time zone.. it hadn't started here (CDST) when you first posted this and it's not yet over.

[kokoro]

Oh, yes. forgot about that. Let me know what you think.

[Bonny]

it's on right now here, but I don't have it on.

[kokoro]

I'm not sure how to summarize. I missed the beginning. They showed them together (the couple) discussing the pregnancy. He no longer has clothes that fit easily and they do not make men's maternity clothing so he doesn't know what he will do. He is a man and he is pregnant. His wife can't have children. He stopped testosterone two years ago. His ob was interviewed and said his hormone levels are normal and this is a healthy pregnancy in response to Oprah asking about the risk to the baby. They talked about how 8 other docs apparently refused to take them on and asked their ob why she agreed to do so. She said she feels patients choose her and not the other way around and that once she met the couple and saw what nice people they are and how committed their relationship is she couldn't do anything but offer them the best care (or something like that.)

they showed him getting an ultrasound and he was so moved. he was beaming at the ultrasound imagine and cried at the end "tears of joy" at learning the baby is healthy. He lost another pregnancy last year that was etopic.

Their neighbors were interviewed via skype and were very supportive. They were "surprised by not shocked." They had no idea he was transgendered and have been friends for a few years.

the audience was very supportive. They showed shocked faces of audience members as the couple retold very briefly stories of his brother's and father's reactions and treatment toward them.

Oprah said she hoped people would stop the need for labeling things all the time and I can't remember what else but it was something about recognizing love can look all different ways or something about love that was *beautifully* phrased and very progressive and to which the audience applauded wildly.

The parents talked about hoping the child will grow up free of prejudice and that "we aren't born prejudiced." they said they will keep their gender roles and that he will be the father and she will be the mom and that even now when he is pregnant he is still very much a man. They just wanted a baby of their own and she can't have one. She also got a lot of laughs when she said she thought most women would love for their husbands to be the one to be pregnant.

They said they decided to go on Oprah and in People magazine because they wanted to control how their story was told rather than having others tell it for them. They felt this would show them in a better light.

The woman's daughter's were interviewed and were also very supportive. They are happy for them and feel they are a couple that is a model in their commitment to each other. They were relieved when Thomas decided to have the surgery done because it 'ended the confusion for everyone and allowed him to be who he really is.'

There was more.

I hope it opened minds. I think anyone who saw that if they watched with an open mind would have found the couple charming and been touched by their story. It is simply two people who love each other and want a child together.

Oh, and they talked about how he actually got pregnant even though he has a penis.

[karunamayi]

I actually just watched snippets of it now. I can't say that Oprahs demeanor was very cool.

She seemed uncomfortable and slightly mocking.

Truthfully, i don't watch her show so maybe that is how she always is...?

I do feel my heart strings being tugged for them.

[bumblebee]

I actually just watched snippets of it now. I can't say that Oprahs demeanor was very cool.

She seemed uncomfortable and slightly mocking.

Truthfully, i don't watch her show so maybe that is how she always is...?

I do feel my heart strings being tugged for them.

I didn't see the show and haven't watched Oprah in months, but she's always seemed pretty condescending and somewhat mocking when it comes to things that are different or things she doesn't fully understand.

I'm biased, though, because I really dislike how so many idolize and adulate Oprah (and I seem to disagree with almost everything the "experts" on her show say, especially Dr. Oz and Dr. Robin Smith).

[kokoro]

I didn't pick that up at all. (shrug)

[Ali]

Now I'm confused -- does he have a penis or a vagina? :bag:

Lawfully, what makes you male or female?

[kokoro]

Now I'm confused -- does he have a penis or a vagina? :bag:

Lawfully, what makes you male or female?

I missed the beginning but he does have a penis and he still has a womb as well.

[indigo]

I missed the beginning but he does have a penis and he still has a womb as well.

In order for the DIY impregnation to work, wouldn't he also need a vagina? Um, unless the urethra in the penis somehow leads to the uterus? I'm a little stumped.

[lunita]

Well, physiologically the penis is analogous to the clitoris, so couldn't the vagina still be behind the penis? (what the heck am I doing speculating about this?)

[karunamayi]

and with the growth, it resembles a small penis which he is able to use, sexually.

So, the clitoris is larger and the vagina is still there, along with all the reproductive organs.
Now I'm confused -- does he have a penis or a vagina? :bag:

Lawfully, what makes you male or female?

[aleutsi]

I missed the beginning but he does have a penis and he still has a womb as well.

I missed the beginning, too. But his blog says he only had the breast reduction and hormone therapy. I think Oprah made an assumption and he just didn't correct her because it doesn't really matter, does it?

[kokoro]

In order for the DIY impregnation to work, wouldn't he also need a vagina? Um, unless the urethra in the penis somehow leads to the uterus? I'm a little stumped.

I missed that part. I heard it but was checking the computer. I heard that they had to go far and pay a lot to have a doc do it for the first pregnancy so they thought why not do it themselves the 2nd time. I got the impression that she was inserting soemthing into his penis and then putting sperm in that way but as I said, I wasn't paying attention to that part so I could have it wrong.

[kokoro]

I missed the beginning, too. But his blog says he only had the breast reduction and hormone therapy. I think Oprah made an assumption and he just didn't correct her because it doesn't really matter, does it?

That could be it, too. Oprah said, "you're the one with the penis" but I'm not sure I ever heard either of them say anything about a penis.

[kokoro]

and with the growth, it resembles a small penis which he is able to use, sexually.

So, the clitoris is larger and the vagina is still there, along with all the reproductive organs.

Oh, interesting.

[Bonny]

I am not comfortable going terribly in depth with my littles about this, esp my 8yo, who was incessant with her questions after she saw the commercial, particularly to the degree that it sounds like the show covered.

My kids do all have very age appropriate knowledge of how babies are made. IMO this topic is just a wee bit beyond that.

[kokoro]

I am not comfortable going terribly in depth with my littles about this, esp my 8yo, who was incessant with her questions after she saw the commercial, particularly to the degree that it sounds like the show covered.

My kids do all have very age appropriate knowledge of how babies are made. IMO this topic is just a wee bit beyond that.

I can understand that you feel differently than I do about this. Personally I have *no* problem at all talking in detail about this to my son. He gets that he and DH have penises and I have something else, that women have babies, that women nurse babies, etc. Just no big deal IMO.

[indigo]

I can understand that you feel differently than I do about this. Personally I have *no* problem at all talking in detail about this to my son. He gets that he and DH have penises and I have something else, that women have babies, that women nurse babies, etc. Just no big deal IMO.

Does he get that men have babies too? I'm just thinking that this could is awfully complicated for a little kid to understand. If he says "so can I have a baby someday?" do you say "Yes, if medical technology allows for it" or "No, because you are not a man who has a uterus"?

I mean, I can sort of understand that gender and sex aren't the same thing. I'm not sure how easy it is for little kids to understand, though, because they tend to look at things a little more concretely.

If my 10yo asked I don't think it would be hard to answer. I'd just say, "He had an operation and took hormones so that he could more easily live as a man, but he still has the reproductive system of a woman." I'm not sure he could have grasped that at age 5 or 6.

[kokoro]

Does he get that men have babies too? I'm just thinking that this could is awfully complicated for a little kid to understand. If he says "so can I have a baby someday?" do you say "Yes, if medical technology allows for it" or "No, because you are not a man who has a uterus"?

I mean, I can sort of understand that gender and sex aren't the same thing. I'm not sure how easy it is for little kids to understand, though, because they tend to look at things a little more concretely.

If my 10yo asked I don't think it would be hard to answer. I'd just say, "He had an operation and took hormones so that he could more easily live as a man, but he still has the reproductive system of a woman." I'm not sure he could have grasped that at age 5 or 6.

I would just put it in little kids terms. D would understand, 'he was born a woman but *inside* his body felt like a man. Doctors are helping him change into a man with medicine. He still has the special part of his tummy that can carry a baby inside, though, so he can have a baby. Other men who were born as boys don't have this special part so they can't have babies.' *Big deal*! Seriously! If D can't get that I'd worry! He is a smart child and doesn't have the prejudices or biases that some adults do about this and other issues. He would just accept it as *no big deal* because, IMO, that's what it is.

As I said, I get and understand that not everyone sees it this way.

[indigo]

I would just put it in little kids terms. D would understand, 'he was born a woman but *inside* his body felt like a man. Doctors are helping him change into a man with medicine. He still has the special part of his tummy that can carry a baby inside, though, so he can have a baby. Other men who were born as boys don't have this special part so they can't have babies.' *Big deal*! Seriously! If D can't get that I'd worry! He is a smart child and doesn't have the prejudices or biases that some adults do about this and other issues. He would just accept it as *no big deal* because, IMO, that's what it is.

As I said, I get and understand that not everyone sees it this way.

So you'd not say he "is a man" but that he's "changing into a man"? That makes sense to me.

[kokoro]

Yes. I would just explain the truth in as simple terms as I could. But the subject hasn't come up. I don't plan to talk about it to DS just as I don't plan to talk about most daily news but I also have no problem with discussing it with him. Subjects I would *not* want to talk about with him are things like drugs, alcohol (we don't drink so he doesn't know about it at all), the reality of crime, details about the war in Iraq and war in general, serious details about pollution, the environment, anything about Peak Oil, etc but something like this would not bother me in the least.

[sarahs]

I wound up having to deal very openly with this issue when my oldest was quite little because I work with a woman who went through the transgender process. My DD was friendly with her when she was a he and I needed to explain the transition to her. I think it weirded her out at first, just the idea that the person she knew was changing so drastically externally. She is fine with it now.

[threecubs]

I wound up having to deal very openly with this issue when my oldest was quite little because I work with a woman who went through the transgender process. My DD was friendly with her when she was a he and I needed to explain the transition to her. I think it weirded her out at first, just the idea that the person she knew was changing so drastically externally. She is fine with it now.

This is a little off topic, but this reminded me of it. When I was little, I seriously thought I would grow up to be a man! I really did. I can't remember how old I was, but I remember the house I lived in when I thought about it, and I must have been around 3 or 4.

[Bonny]

I wound up having to deal very openly with this issue when my oldest was quite little because I work with a woman who went through the transgender process. My DD was friendly with her when she was a he and I needed to explain the transition to her. I think it weirded her out at first, just the idea that the person she knew was changing so drastically externally. She is fine with it now.


I think we all have our "topics". My olders, in particular, have had a lot more knowledge (and experience) with drugs, alcohol and suicide than their peers, at a very young age, unfortunately. It just depends a great deal on 1)what life deals you and 2) their level of understanding. Had we not dealt first hand with those topics, I suspect we would not have had the conversations that we did.

[Vicky]

I found it repugnant as well, PQ. A lot of reasons for that feeling, both scientific e.g. Indigo et al and societal. It's like if you find something repulsive though it must automatically mean you are a bigot. Huh.

Casting broad judgment on it as flat out wrong, does. I have to admit something here - I feel repulsed by the thought of sexual reassignment. It is an immediate, gut reaction. I feel ashamed of that. I see that reaction as a failing on my part, not something to be unrepentant about. Intellectually and logically I do not feel the same way. I see that immediate reaction as being a product of societal indoctrination, though, not a sense of ethical judgment of right and wrong. I try to be as open to difference and as non-judgmental as possible in life.

I have a friend who is a transfemale. She is lovely and warm and delightful and I know what terrible turmoil her decision has created in her life. It was certainly not a decision that was easy - it was hard physically and financially, it took its toll on relationships with family and friends. Because I KNOW my friend, though, I know that she went through with it because to do anything else would be living a lie, and she just couldn't live a lie anymore.

I see this transman's decision to bear a child as courageous and a testament to how much he loves his wife and values family. I think it was a huge sacrifice for him to decide to use the organs that he felt were not a part of his identity as a person. I am sure it was not a decision that was made lightly and that a lot of thought and discussion went into their decision to pursue this route. I wish them only happiness.

[sarahs]

I think we all have our "topics". My olders, in particular, have had a lot more knowledge (and experience) with drugs, alcohol and suicide than their peers, at a very young age, unfortunately. It just depends a great deal on 1)what life deals you and 2) their level of understanding. Had we not dealt first hand with those topics, I suspect we would not have had the conversations that we did.

Yup. Its really interesting to see how the different life experiences, family dynamics influence what we wind up teaching our kids about. I doubt I ever would have thought to cover transgender issues if it hadn't been part of my reality. Suicide hasn't been part of our reality but early death from heart attack has been. Kids eyes get opened in so many different ways.

[Kim]

I watched some recaps of it. I find it very odd still, it's not been easy for me to find unflinching support for it and I'm not sure why. It grosses me out that a man, physically and mentally a MAN, is carrying a child.

Then again, the drive to have a child is huge if you feel it.

They seem to be very loving people. I've met some very frightening parents who came by their babies in traditional manner.

I have concerns for the quality of the eggs. I think no matter what is said about hormones at this point, residual effects if any won't show up til later.

I have nothing else. No clear perspective on it. FTR, transgendered people are not an issue for me. It was the pregnancy that made me pause.

[3andadog]

[QUOTE=Kim;19840]I watched some recaps of it. I find it very odd still, it's not been easy for me to find unflinching support for it and I'm not sure why. It grosses me out that a man, physically and mentally a MAN, is carrying a child.


Well, he's NOT physically a man, or else he wouldn't be able to carry a child. He may be mentally, legally and appearance-wise a man, but physically he's a woman. DNA can't (yet) be altered to match emotional gender. Only physical *appearance* can be surgically and hormonally changed. So since conceiving and gestating a baby has nothing to do with mental, legal, or appearance gender and *everything* to do with physical gender, the person having a baby, despite how he looks, is actually a woman.

Robin

[Kim]

I understand that he maintains the reproductive means to carry a child. I think of him as a man. That is how he thinks of himself as well.

[aleutsi]

I watched some recaps of it. I find it very odd still, it's not been easy for me to find unflinching support for it and I'm not sure why. It grosses me out that a man, physically and mentally a MAN, is carrying a child.


Well, he's NOT physically a man, or else he wouldn't be able to carry a child. He may be mentally, legally and appearance-wise a man, but physically he's a woman. DNA can't (yet) be altered to match emotional gender. Only physical *appearance* can be surgically and hormonally changed. So since conceiving and gestating a baby has nothing to do with mental, legal, or appearance gender and *everything* to do with physical gender, the person having a baby, despite how he looks, is actually a woman.

Robin

But what about those people who are born with both biological characteristics of male and female?

This wiki article brings up a lot for discussion. A quote:

"This phenomenon complicates the common XY sex-determination system, because it proves that genes don't always definitely determine the sex."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersexuality#Conditions

[indigo]

But what about those people who are born with both biological characteristics of male and female?

This wiki article brings up a lot for discussion. A quote:

"This phenomenon complicates the common XY sex-determination system, because it proves that genes don't always definitely determine the sex."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersexuality#Conditions

It seems that there are three things that come into play...

1. Chromosomes
2. Sexual organs
3. Mind (how the person thinks of him/herself)

I admit that I just run into a logical conundrum when these things get complicated.

[mirage1]

I see this transman's decision to bear a child as courageous and a testament to how much he loves his wife and values family. I think it was a huge sacrifice for him to decide to use the organs that he felt were not a part of his identity as a person. I am sure it was not a decision that was made lightly and that a lot of thought and discussion went into their decision to pursue this route. I wish them only happiness.Exactly, that's where I am, as well. I have a family member who absolutely does not identify with the physical characteristics she bears and would honestly never be able to take the steps this man is taking. So I see the courage/challenge in what he's doing from a very close perspective.

[Pensive]

I must be missing something. It just doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I hope he has a healthy baby and I wish him and his wife happiness. I have zero issues or concerns about this. I just don't get the strong negative reactions. More power to him and his wife. I wish them so many good things.

[MadAboutYou]

I must be missing something. It just doesn't seem like a big deal to me. I hope he has a healthy baby and I wish him and his wife happiness. I have zero issues or concerns about this. I just don't get the strong negative reactions. More power to him and his wife. I wish them so many good things.

I saw the Oprah show and thought he was very genuine and smart and just a great guy. When Oprah questioned him about it being a womanly desire to have a baby, he said no, it's a human desire, which I think is true. They seem to be a stable couple and they have a normal desire to have a baby, even if it is in an unusual way.

To be honest, I think some men have more of a nurturing disposition than others. I think my dh would be happy to conceive and carry a child if he (men) could. He is a very nurturing man. Yet he is also very masculine.

I find the whole thing interesting and wish them only the best. I think they will be very loving parents.

[~PQ]

I actually just watched snippets of it now. I can't say that Oprahs demeanor was very cool.

She seemed uncomfortable and slightly mocking.

Truthfully, i don't watch her show so maybe that is how she always is...?

I do feel my heart strings being tugged for them.

Can't stand Oprah, shes a machine.... a money and propaganda machine. She tends to always be condescending. My favorite is when she has a parenting or marriage topic come up and she's just a big ole expert about all things parenting and marriage (even though she has done neither) She's also the force that launched The Big Head (Dr Phil).

I obviously didn't see the show and don't care to. I havn't discussed this with my kids (and its been easy to avoid as they never watch network TV so they havn't seen the Oprah commercials) and I am sure they would find the whole scenario very weird.

BTW on another board someone linked to a transgender discussion about this and it was funny, there seems to be a lot of "WTF??!" in the transgender community over this too.

I hope the baby doesn't suffer from the hormones the egg was subjected to all these years or from the publicity this couple sought out.

Mostly I hope Oprah and Dr Phil get into a fist fight on air though. :p

[~PQ]

Now I'm confused -- does he have a penis or a vagina? :bag:

Lawfully, what makes you male or female?
Now at first I thought he had a penis, which is why it seemed so shocking (because how the hell do you get the sperm IN there??!!) but then in later readings I read no, he is pre-op and is still actually a woman (therefor this isn't actually very strange, because there isn't anything strange about a woman with no breasts getting pregnant) But then I just read a post HERE that said he had a penis, so hell I don't know. There's gotta be a womb and an entryway into that womb somewhere in there somewhere to make this work- right??

[sari]

Perhaps a wee anatomy lesson, to lessen the confusion?

If he has a penis, it would be in front of where the vaginal opening is - an extension of his former clitoris. There is no physical 'difficulty' to having both a penis and a vagina - they are in different places on the body. The penis is in FRONT of where a vaginal opening would be.

I don't believe that this trans man has had penis construction done - he states in his blog that he hasn't, and it's not uncommon for FTM transsexuals to opt out of penile construction. But it is certainly possible to have a penis AND a vagina - an example of this would be some of the people who are born inter-sexed, and have aspects of both genders' genitalia.

Regardless, I'm still not quite sure why it would matter to anyone whether he has a penis or not. I just don't understand what the big deal is, I guess, but then *I* don't see gender as a dichotomy - I feel it is a spectrum, with multiple options, just like sexual orientation. <shrug> But that's just my belief system - there are many other ways to look at it, obviously.

[anastasia]

...*I* don't see gender as a dichotomy - I feel it is a spectrum, with multiple options, just like sexual orientation. <shrug> But that's just my belief system - there are many other ways to look at it, obviously.

I agree with you. I don't think gender is strictly male/female, and I think it's unfortunate that transsexuals are under such enormous pressure from society to conform to this either/or standard.

While the vast majority are either male or female, I don't think those are the only natural options, biologically or otherwise. I think there may be a lot of other genders that are simply not recognized. I'd love to see this couple's situation increase awareness of that possibility.

[~PQ]

Perhaps a wee anatomy lesson, to lessen the confusion?

If he has a penis, it would be in front of where the vaginal opening is - an extension of his former clitoris. There is no physical 'difficulty' to having both a penis and a vagina - they are in different places on the body. The penis is in FRONT of where a vaginal opening would be.

I don't believe that this trans man has had penis construction done - he states in his blog that he hasn't, and it's not uncommon for FTM transsexuals to opt out of penile construction. But it is certainly possible to have a penis AND a vagina - an example of this would be some of the people who are born inter-sexed, and have aspects of both genders' genitalia.

Regardless, I'm still not quite sure why it would matter to anyone whether he has a penis or not. I just don't understand what the big deal is, I guess, but then *I* don't see gender as a dichotomy - I feel it is a spectrum, with multiple options, just like sexual orientation. <shrug> But that's just my belief system - there are many other ways to look at it, obviously.

Heres another anatomy lesson- surgeons often use penile skin to create a vagina in male to female transgenders. So your description of where a penis vs vagina is accurate for most of us, but its not always true for transgenders. Obviouly in THIS case we are talking female to male so it's not the same thing, but I'm still curious about his genitals and how they are constructed right now.

Usually, even transgender folk have a penis OR a vagina and not both. You don't see why people are curious about this? It's unusual to have a baby if you have a penis, because a penis usually precludes a vagina, so of COURSE people are curious. Frankly sometimes I wonder what people's genitals look like who I KNOW are "all male" or "all female", and if I'm curious about them I'm darned sure gonna be curious about the pregnant MANs hoohah or lack of.

[zoya]

I have mixed feelings... not about this particular man having a baby, but their reasons for going so public with their story. I honestly believe it were me, I'd want as much privacy (heck I like my privacy as it is) DD thought why not just enjoy this pregnancy, have their baby and enjoy a quiet life. They said themselves they were concerned abotu their privacy now and their saftey... her daughters seem to feel the same way.

Hermaphrodites can be in the same situation from what I understand, this would be a more natural occurrence and very rare, but it can happen that a male could conceive and have a child.

I think this child needs her privacy and I hope they find a way to get that back for their daughter. I really wish they had waited to share their story with the world, journaling, writing a book taking lots of pictures etc... would have been a way to record their journey.

Does anyone remember years ago (I mean several years ago..decades?) Joan Rivers interviewing a pregnant man on her talk show? She even had his doctor on... I think it turned out to be a hoax, but based on some truth as some in the medical/scientific community were experimenting with abdominal ectopic pregnancy back then at least it was in the news back in the day. BTW this isn't the movie Rabbit test that Joan was in, it was her talk show.

Life happens :)

[Kari]

Heres another anatomy lesson- surgeons often use penile skin to create a vagina in male to female transgenders. So your description of where a penis vs vagina is accurate for most of us, but its not always true for transgenders. Obviouly in THIS case we are talking female to male so it's not the same thing, but I'm still curious about his genitals and how they are constructed right now.


I saw the show. He has not had a penis surgically created. However, the amounts of testosterone he was taking caused his (female) clitoris to grow and enlarge into a functional small "penis". (They even made a "does size really matter joke" LOL). According to the couple, they are able to use this former-clitoris-now-small-penis in order to have intercourse. Of course, there are no testicles so no sperm is produced.

Set back behind the clitoris/penis is the opening to the vagina, which is still functional for him/her.

I think that's what has been causing confusion for people, the fact that he talks about having a penis, at the same time saying he hasn't had re-assignment surgery, and also at the same time having functioning female reproductive organs.

[Kari]

I saw the show. He has not had a penis surgically created. However, the amounts of testosterone he was taking caused his (female) clitoris to grow and enlarge into a functional small "penis". (They even made a "does size really matter joke" LOL). According to the couple, they are able to use this former-clitoris-now-small-penis in order to have intercourse. Of course, there are no testicles so no sperm is produced.

Set back behind the clitoris/penis is the opening to the vagina, which is still functional for him/her.



For a visual idea of what this looks like, you can google images of "Chy***na P***enis" (take out the ***'s). There is a female WWF wrestler who has this same type of oversized clitoris that resembles a small penis. She also has fully normal female anatomy otherwise.

:dunno: Who knew?

[~PQ]

For a visual idea of what this looks like, you can google images of "Chy***na P***enis" (take out the ***'s). There is a female WWF wrestler who has this same type of oversized clitoris that resembles a small penis. She also has fully normal female anatomy otherwise.

:dunno: Who knew?

OMG it is a teeny tiny little mini-penis, like the eraser penises they give out at adult toy parties. It's so CUTE...lol. The posters think its scary but I think it's cute like a miniature anything. Like, miniature greyhounds are freaking adorable.

Thankyou, my evening is now complete now!! :rofl:

[Kari]

OMG it is a teeny tiny little mini-penis, like the eraser penises they give out at adult toy parties. It's so CUTE...lol. The posters think its scary but I think it's cute like a miniature anything. Like, miniature greyhounds are freaking adorable.

Thankyou, my evening is now complete now!! :rofl:

Glad I could be of assistance. :rofl:

[aleutsi]

Glad I could be of assistance. :rofl:

Just a general question.. is the urethra actually a part of the clitoris... so if it grows it becomes something to urinate with? Very interesting. I did not know they could grow past gestation. I wonder if Ch***na took testosterone for body building?

[aleutsi]

No, the urethral opening on a woman, is not out of her clitoris. It's between the clitoris and the vaginal opening. So, a testosterone enhanced clitoris, would not ever be able to be used for urination.

Right, I knew it wasn't out of her clitoris... just wondering what all grew.. like (this is such an odd conversation!) if the skin surrounding the urethra got all drawn up to the clitoris during the growth and it was a part of the.. uh... shaft? See, basically, I knew it wouldn't be.. like.. *right* where it is for a man... but wondered if it would be somewhere on... it. :spinning:

[mirage1]

I agree with you. I don't think gender is strictly male/female, and I think it's unfortunate that transsexuals are under such enormous pressure from society to conform to this either/or standard.

While the vast majority are either male or female, I don't think those are the only natural options, biologically or otherwise. I think there may be a lot of other genders that are simply not recognized. I'd love to see this couple's situation increase awareness of that possibility.Great post, Tasia.

[Amanda_Reyasmom]

For a visual idea of what this looks like, you can google images of "Chy***na P***enis" (take out the ***'s). There is a female WWF wrestler who has this same type of oversized clitoris that resembles a small penis. She also has fully normal female anatomy otherwise.

:dunno: Who knew?

YK, I really tried to stay out of this, but HOW do you come about this information!?:jester:

[Bickery]

While the vast majority are either male or female, I don't think those are the only natural options, biologically or otherwise. I think there may be a lot of other genders that are simply not recognized. I'd love to see this couple's situation increase awareness of that possibility.

This thread prompted me to google a m b i g u o u s g e n i t a l i a -- and this seemed the best place to mention that, speaking of anatomy lessons.

Usually, when this is recognized, it is fetishized and people become the sum of their parts. I remember my sociology* teacher mentioning AG in class and telling us that she's had many students thank her for it because it's more common than most people realize. (1 in 2000 is what I keep seeing -- this includes hypospadias, which is common enough that I know of more than one child who's had it, not including at yaaps.)

*I remember so much from that class! They'd better give me more than elective credit when I go in and beg them to!

[Bickery]

I agree with you. I don't think gender is strictly male/female, and I think it's unfortunate that transsexuals are under such enormous pressure from society to conform to this either/or standard.

While the vast majority are either male or female, I don't think those are the only natural options, biologically or otherwise. I think there may be a lot of other genders that are simply not recognized. I'd love to see this couple's situation increase awareness of that possibility.

Also, you reminded me of the Vonnegut novel in which (I may not be 100% accurate on this, it's been awhile) an alien is aware that it takes 17 different people to conceive a human child and not just sexual intercourse between a male and a female. I've always thought that it's possible that there's more to it than we know.

[Mary]

This was my initial reaction as well, that his body had already been chemically altered, so undeniably the eggs were exposed as well. Mucking with nature isn't a good idea, generally.

I honestly believe this is a hoax. The link it's on is questionable anyway, are there ANY reputable news sources who have reported it?

I find the entire thing strange, and I can't say I am comfortable with the concept. Too much mucking around with hormones and nature and all that. This will probably come off offensive, but sometimes I believe that people think think they "deserve" a baby at all costs....but there are many ways to complete a family, this just feels egotistic to me, to possibly expose a child to issues for their own needs. If this is real, I fear this baby will not have a healthy life, and I'm speaking from the perspective of having been exposed in my own prenatal life to medications that altered my fertility.

You have to pay the piper sometimes and who knows what the cost will wind up being for the baby? I'm not comfortable with it.

[Hobbes]

(((I wrote this in replying to one of Indigo's posts, but it's not really a response to hers)))


I always miss these long big discussions :/

Just going to through this out from some of the things I've learned in my human genetics courses in graduate school and from being in the LGBT community.

1 in 100 people have some form of IDENTIFIABLE (though not identified necessarily in individual cases) gender dysmorphism or difference that is genetically based and makes them neither 'completely' male or female. This doesn't include gay, lesbian, a lot of transgendered individuals, and other queer people.

There is definitely a dichotomy of "male" and "female" that is easily and straightfowardly determined, and it is the majority of what we experience in life. We think of male as having a penis, being attracted to women, having certain behavioral characteristics and a woman as having child bearing organs, being attracted to men and having certain behavioral characteristics.

BUT that doesn't meant there isn't a sizable minority of humans who DON'T fit that dichotomous norm.

I am one of them. I have certain behavioral characteristics (though missing others like competiveness, etc) and a penis. BUt I'm not attracted to women.

I am uncomfortable judging someone who doesn't fit the norm no matter how they don't fit it. These are REAL differences with REAL LIFE consequences.

Yes, 80-90% of you fit the real and nature-given dichotomous definition of "MALE" or "FEMALE" but there is a hell of a lot of us who don't and fall in a different, and just as REAL and NATURE-GIVEN category.

As to this particular person's experience and choices. I'll admit I am not comfortable with the way they are going about it, no more than I'm comfortable about people who bare their relationships in day-time talk shows sometimes. But on the bigger issue, I'll make no judgement.

Their reality doesn't fit yours, but that doesn't make it any less real or nature-given.

[kathy caribe]

As to this particular person's experience and choices. I'll admit I am not comfortable with the way they are going about it, no more than I'm comfortable about people who bare their relationships in day-time talk shows sometimes. But on the bigger issue, I'll make no judgement.

Their reality doesn't fit yours, but that doesn't make it any less real or nature-given.

At some point in the postings or the article, I believe it was mentioned that the reason they are going public is because their hand was forced. Some publication somewhere was writing a piece on them without talking to them or getting the story FROM them. To avoid something completely inaccurate, they decided to do the story themselves.