I've moved — check out my new blog at cassyfiano.com!

Redirecting in 10 seconds...

Thursday, April 3, 2008

Woman calling herself a man gets pregnant; liberals cheer.

I've written about sex changes before. But this one takes the cake.

A "man", by the name of Thomas Beatie, has come out with the fact that he is pregnant. He's expecting a girl in July with his wife, Nancy.

Liberals, of course, are simply swooning. Beatie has appeared on Oprah and is being fawned over by feminists and liberals everywhere. To them, it exemplifies their entire philosophy: if it feels good, do it.

Here's part of Beatie's appearance on Oprah:


Is this some fancy new scientific breakthrough? No, it's just a woman who had a sex change and is now calling herself a man.
I am transgender, legally male, and legally married to Nancy. Unlike those in same-sex marriages, domestic partnerships, or civil unions, Nancy and I are afforded the more than 1,100 federal rights of marriage. Sterilization is not a requirement for sex reassignment, so I decided to have chest reconstruction and testosterone therapy but kept my reproductive rights. Wanting to have a biological child is neither a male nor female desire, but a human desire.

Ten years ago, when Nancy and I became a couple, the idea of us having a child was more dream than plan. I always wanted to have children. However, due to severe endometriosis 20 years ago, Nancy had to undergo a hysterectomy and is unable to carry a child. But after the success of our custom screen-printing business and a move from Hawaii to the Pacific Northwest two years ago, the timing finally seemed right. I stopped taking my bimonthly testosterone injections. It had been roughly eight years since I had my last menstrual cycle, so this wasn’t a decision that I took lightly. 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.




...

How does it feel to be a pregnant man? Incredible. Despite the fact that my belly is growing with a new life inside me, I am stable and confident being the man that I am. In a technical sense I see myself as my own surrogate, though my gender identity as male is constant. To Nancy, I am her husband carrying our child -- I am so lucky to have such a loving, supportive wife. I will be my daughter’s father, and Nancy will be her mother. We will be a family.

Social questions aside, I think this only proves the point I made with my last post about sex changes. Being transgender does not actually change your gender. This Thomas Beatie is obviously still a woman! She can choose to dress like a man, have testosterone therapy and chest reconstruction, but she still has her period once a month and is able to get pregnant.

You can mutilate your genitals all you want, but it doesn't change your gender, no matter how much you tell yourself it does. As I said before:
Now, here's what really puzzles me about sex changes.

When it comes down to it, is the sex really changed?

I mean, think about it. Just because you castrate some guy and carve a vagina into him and pump him full of hormones, how does that make him female? There is more to a vagina than what you see in Playboy, biologically speaking. Most of it is inside our bodies, not outside. I don't think doctors can add on a cervix, or a uterus, or ovaries, or fallopian tubes, or any of that kind of thing -- just like you can't add on a prostate or testis to a woman.

Unknowingly, Thomas Beatie has just proved my point. When she decided to carry their child, she said herself that she didn't have to take any estrogen or any other kind of feminine hormones. She simply stopped her testosterone therapy, and boom, her body regulated itself, she was having periods again, and was able to get pregnant.

I'd say that's a pretty compelling argument that sex changes don't actually change your sex. You're just wearing a permanent costume.

And what will these parents tell their daughter about her conception? Will they disclose to her that "Daddy" is really a mommy? Or will they just whitewash the entire thing?

13 comments:

Angry White Guy said...

I really do hate you for that picture...

Vernunft said...

What an unimpressive beard.

Gredd said...

I'm going to go stab myself in the eyes repeatedly until the pain goes away.

Texas Truth said...

This is SICK!!!!! WHAT A COUPLE OF FREAKS!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

I went to college in the 1970s. Then, it was safe, in biology class, to suggest that anyone who couldn't accept their genetic makeup was mentally ill. My, how things have changed.

Baz said...

I think you've got your terms confused. "Sex" is a biological term referring to physical condition. "Gender" is sociological/literary term that refers to a person's outward presentation. So a cross-dresser may be sexually a man, but is gender female.

I can't understand why this bothers you so much, other than an elementary-school style grossed-out reaction.

So this guy carries elements of both. If you can't identify those elements, I guess I can see why this might be scary to you.

I'm not saying this is a good idea, but we've all had bad ideas, some of them costly or hurtful. That's the human condition.

Anonymous said...

Baz---it not "this guy" That person is NOT a guy. It is a woman who has mutilated herself and pumped her body full of hormones. Do I care? No. And there is NO WAY IN HELL I'm going to look at that picture again. Gross gross gross gross GROSS!!!!

I R A Darth Aggie said...

I'm not saying this is a good idea, but we've all had bad ideas, some of them costly or hurtful. That's the human condition.

Yes, but we should not go out of our way to encourage more of the same.

The road to hell is paved with it seemed like a good idea at the time.

TC said...

Shoot, my Granny had a better mustache than that without any kind of hormone regiment when she forget to use her delipatory cream.

Baz said...

Baz---it not "this guy" That person is NOT a guy. It is a woman who has mutilated herself and pumped her body full of hormones.

Per my earlier comment, gender is what we represent ourselves as socially, so his gender is male. Gender is a social construct. Sex is biological.

Yes, but we should not go out of our way to encourage more of the same.

The road to hell is paved with it seemed like a good idea at the time.


The whole body-mod thing is a very slippery slope. Where do we draw the line? Earrings are body-mods, but very socially acceptable. Tattoos? Brands? Tongue-splits? Female circumcision? Male circumcision? Human Growth Hormone? Steroids? Plastic surgery?

We do encourage some of these (some tacitly, some explicitly), so I guess it's a democratic thing. But then there's the whole "tyranny of the majority" problem. So what do you do? Where do you draw the line? It's a simple question with no simple answer.

It's a complex issue, so dismissing it as "gross" is neither interesting nor helpful.

SkinnyJay said...

Baz,

You talk about a slippery slope of "where do you draw the line" in body-mods. Yet you talk about how we "tacitly and explicitly" condone or condemn some body-mods compared to others. That is what I would call "the line".

When I read "Man gets Pregnant" I know something is wrong. It is physically impossible for a man to become pregnant. With this in mind the "man" who got pregnant cannot possibly be pregnant. Therefore the "man" isn't a man, but in fact a women.

So when someone has an opinion of where the line is you bring up that you don't know what you are talking about! "Where's the line!" Because as long as the line isn't where you want it is is erroneous or close-minded or a "tyrrany".

Baz said...

So when someone has an opinion of where the line is you bring up that you don't know what you are talking about! "Where's the line!" Because as long as the line isn't where you want it is is erroneous or close-minded or a "tyrrany".

OK, so it's clear to you where the line is, but every community has different values, and the whole point of the liberties and freedoms we enjoy in these United States is that communities can establish those limits for themselves, within the bounds of the law.

I've known a few body-mod people and transgenders, so I feel pretty confident that I do know what I'm talking about.

This is not new stuff. Read your Shakespeare. Lots of gender-bender questions raised 400 years ago.

Bedaeurn said...

I fully believe in the right of all people to have opinions, even if I don't agree with them. I also believe that, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, people should do what makes them happy. Therefore, I say kudos to Thomas for his bravery and his wish for children. More power to him and his wife. May they find all the happiness in the world.