Transgender women dream of being pregnant - very soon could be reality

It is creating a life that would otherwise not have been.

I disagree that they would be victims.
I also disagree with bullying regardless of how it is justified.

 

//begin irrelevant comment
Man, for a second I thought this was going to be about the Swans that live in the Park,

"Then I told you 'bout our kid, now he's not a tomato", https://www.songfacts.com/facts/cream/badge
//end irrelevant comment

Elective surgery of any kind is personally not something I would ever choose to do.

From my point of view, if this thread is not a good example of the principle then what is?

I never asserted anything about reproductive improvements in deep space, or an Antarctic vacuum laboratory, or one in Oak Ridge Tennessee, hahaha...

Apologies, only attempting to lighten it up a bit....

Birth rate improvements as an argument in favor of transplanting a womb into the the biologically original body of a man is, to me anyway, ah, a real stretch to the framework of this discussion.

To immediately disprove your assertion that there is no argument that increasing childcare outcomes would benefit a birthrate < 2.1 you are welcome to Google it, "better child care improves birth rate", by which you will find there are plenty of arguments about it. Apparently it is broadly debatable, although in my opinion it is not. Also you have apparently and perhaps unintentionally expanded my assertion to benefiting the nation, which in my opinion makes your position even less tenable, especially with respect to the educational aspect of childcare and what I believe is critical to the success of democracy.

Finally I've reached the most interesting feature of this discussion, which on my part is its overlap with a couple of the most ****ed up science fiction stories I've ever read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World

O wonder!
How many goodly creatures are there here!
How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world,
That has such people in't.

— William Shakespeare, The Tempest, Act V, Scene I, ll. 203–206

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Island_of_Doctor_Moreau

 

How so? this is rather vague?

 

To be fair, he is calling surrogacy slavery of the woman, not the child.

 

There is no evidence of this.This is your projection of your personal thought of how you would feel.

 

You realize that you pay for adoptions as well? Are you making a claim that adoption is also human trafficking?

 

Hmm.. The above still, for me, doesn't justify the medical reassignment of children. Frankly they aren't mature enough to know. Given your response, it appears that you'e far more interested in solving what seems to me to be a condition of nurture that then creates this condition that you believe in. I can only speak from my experience, and none of it involves this "roman concept" that you inserted. Perhaps that was something that keeps you up at night? But the rest of you comment is unfounded, The thing that I find most concerning though is your construct that demands that your sliding scale is somehow different than the scales that everyone else also uses. And frankly, about the only thing that is this or that is your gender. Genetically. you either are, or are not a man, or a woman. Everything else you've attached to that conversation is conditioning or environmental. Folks can be as fluid as they want to be, but yearning to be the sex you are not and believing that you should be able to be that is an exercise that science can modify, but cannot change. Our medical ability ends at the Frankenstein limits of cutting things off, or sewing things on, and forcing the body to "change" unnaturally by removing the organs that produce the appropriate hormones and replacing them artificially. Unfortunately, the genetic coding in every remaining cell is still the original. That doesn't get rewritten, does it. For it can not.

 

For the most part, if one is a traditional surrogate, it is done through artificial insemination, not sex. Gestational surrogate get IVF, so that the offspring she is carrying is not genetically her's. Again no sex. And just to reenforce if you haven't already answered the previous post. Adoption is a commercial transaction. Are you denouncing that as well?

 

huh? is a trans woman a guy who thinks he's a woman or a woman who thinks she's a man?

 

No matter what we label it, we still have to see it as an error of nature. Otherwise there would be nothing to fix. Mind you that in noting so, it is no more or less a negative than any purely physical error, such as a club foot, or (to use a case I recently learned about from the person themselves) the large intestine not forming properly.

All transplants have had high rejection potential when we first started learning how to do each one. When we first try it there will be high risks, and as we do more, we learn more and the proceedure becomes easier and more succesful

First anything new will be the subject of courisity and cruelity. As such becomes more common place, no one will think twice upon it. But we have to go through the "novelty" phase before we get to commonplace.

As far as risk to the child, we already do that all the time. Women who choose to remain pregnant, even where there is high risk to the baby, for example. We also do so for our children. The above mentioned large intestines is a good example. My step daughter was a test subject for a new treatment of an illness. It worked, and saved her life. Trans and same sex couple do try to adopt, but are often turned away because they are trans or gay.

 

Think of the use of the word trans as short for "transitioned into". The following word is their gender, their internal identity.

 

Define this please.

 

What does "straight trans" even mean? That's an oxymoron.
or at least a near meaningless and highly ambiguous concept

 

please elaborate. An error of nature? If you are born with a wee-wee and male hormones, you're a male

 

It's amazing the lengths some people will go to to keep up a fantasy.

 

Well, at the very least it sounds like it could be very close along the lines of economic exploitation and patriarchism/classism.
You'll generally have an upwardly mobile (usually white) middle class man who is "transitioning into a woman", hiring some poor (usually brown) woman. The woman is pressed for the money, and one could draw some analogy to the concept of prostitution.

If one really thinks about it, true transgenderism, where one goes "all the way" and gets the full surgery, is really a luxury not all tiers of society can afford. One could almost say it's a sign of decadence for the upper middle and upper classes. For someone struggling in poverty, that sort of thing is usually the farthest thing away from their minds.

I don't think we can automatically lump all cases of surrogacy into the same boat, but I think we can say in most cases of a "trans woman" wanting to have a baby, the other woman (surrogate) is not just doing it all out of the goodness of her heart.

 

I'm kind of surprised that you didn't use Heinlein's "All you Zombies" which was made into the film "Predestination"

 

Again, a rather meaningless statement in this context.

There are some people here claiming a "trans woman" is a man, and others claiming it is a woman.
It depends whether you consider it a man or woman.

 

"Brave new world" indeed.

 

And what if this trans woman is getting an abortion because her health is threatened??

Because, you know, carving out a space into the internal organ's of a man's body and surgically installing a transplanted uterus can potentially lead to some health complications.

I don't think availability of uteri will be too much of an issue, with trans men removing them, and trans women having them installed.

(related thread: Appeals court in California says transgender can sue Catholic hospital for not removing his uterus )

 

Medical reassigning for children doesn't happen, even if a rare few do call for it. And by rare, I mean within the transgender community, which is already a relatively small number. More common is medical assignment, which happens where a baby is born with an obvious intersexed condition.

Which is true. There are many other conditions and circumstances that can mask as transgenderism. On top of that, is gender expression, or rather assumed gender expression. For example, a boy that likes to play with baby dolls. ("It's not a baby doll, it's an infant action figure!") Personally, I see no issue with this especially since it would be a reflection of how real fathers would or should treat their own babies. But beyond that, there is a incorrect assumption that only girls should like to play with dolls. This is an artificial, imposed expection, not a natural one. But in imposing this, the boy might start thinking that they're supposed to be a girl instead. This is why it is important that they see an experienced therapist to help tell actual transgenderism from other possibilities.

Or intersexed, which is turning out to be more common than initially thought. One of the problems is that a person can be intersexed and never know it, because most intersexed conditions are not outwardly visible. For example, AIS causes an intersexed condition in which the genes that create the male form are never activited. The person is genetically male, but is born with externally female genitals. If she never tries to have children, she might never find out that she had male DNA and is intersexed.

Not yet at least, although I am not necessarily an outright advocate for such either. There are applications that could be extremely helpful or extremely bad. That said, there are other issues at play. In additioin to the potential intersexed conditions, there is also the issue of human chimeriasm. This too is startng to look to be more common than intitially thought. Artificial chimarism (blood or organ transplant) aside, human chimarism is when fraternal twin are created but one dies during the zygote/blastocyst stages and is absorbed by the other. This results in a single person with two sets of DNA. This has been medically documented. So far, as far as my limited research goes, the most highly documented cases have been the results of same sex fraternal twins. But since we know that opposite sex fraternal twins can occur, it must be assumed that a human chimera can result from them as well. One body with both male and female DNA. And as you note, you can't rewrite DNA.

 

I am going to agree with you that our wording is confusing. Quite honsetly what we need is a word that says attracted to men/males and one that means attracted to women/females. The sex/gender of the one attracted should be irrelavant.

 

Let me just point you to post #71, and if we need to go further then we can.

 

For example, when a "straight" man transitions into a woman and claims "I am a lesbian!"

 

That can be as easily applied to the fantasy of homosexuals and transgeneders not existing and chooseing to be that way.