Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Pregnant for the Last Time
The oddest commentary I've read about Pregnant Man Thomas Beattie is this Annalee Newitz essay, which asks why the media ignored the parade of pregnant men she knew in San Francisco to focus on this schlub.
Beattie is the first pregnant man most people will ever meet. He's the guy in People magazine right now looking preggers and hunky, and the guy who was on The Oprah Winfrey Show last week. And it makes sense that he's the first wonder of tranny obstetrics medical science to hit the spotlight. He's a nice, small-town Oregon boy, married for five years to a nice, small-town lady, and his full beard and muscles make it quite obvious that he's a dude.
In other words: he's not a freak from a freaky city like San Francisco. He is, as they say in the mainstream media, relatable.
Newitz must be watching different Beattie coverage than I'm watching. This is before she connects Beattie to Barack Obama.
In some ways, those are the same questions people are asking about a possible Obama presidency. Can the majority of people in the United States accept a mixed-race guy in a role previously reserved for white dudes? To return to the issue of Beattie, can the majority accept a man taking on a role (pregnant dad) they'd never contemplated before, except when watching a bad Arnold Schwarzenegger sci-fi comedy called Junior?
As much as they were when watching Dennis Paymer take the oath in 24, or Morgan Freeman guide us through our crises in Deep Impact. I'd guess.
Beattie is not a political creation like Obama — he's the creation of medical technology, pure and simple. Hormones and surgery made him male. Artificial insemination made him pregnant.
And fear made him a monster!
Timothy|4.10.08 @ 2:13PM|#
I'm sorry, but I kind of don't get why this is so curious.
A biological female is pregnant...that's not really so very
shocking. This biological female has taken steps to become
phenotypically male, but these steps have not been completed with
surgery that would change this person's genitals to an ostensibly
male set of genitals, and this person is still in posession of two
X chromosomes and a uterus. Biologically, this is not particularly
curious.
I suppose it's a bit more curious that this person who wishes to be
male is the party who is electing pregnancy (as opposed to his
female and wishing to stay femal spouse), but there's nothing
particularly strange about this aside from that decision.
The Democratic Republican|4.10.08 @ 2:13PM|#
Why did you have to bring Deep Impact into all of this? Awful. Terrible.
|4.10.08 @ 2:21PM|#
This "hunky dude" ( wtf?) is a LADY on hormones. His "full beard" and "muscles" are thin and the result of a feminine woman on hormones. Applying male standards of actual males he looks like a very effeminate man who will try but never manage to grow a beard and has never lifted a weight.
Bingo|4.10.08 @ 2:21PM|#
Prebutt to Casey Serin: Yes, we know he's really a gay woman with a beard and I agree that there isn't anything wrong with that.
ed|4.10.08 @ 2:23PM|#
Not buying it either. If I put a red dress on a potato, is it a
tomato?
Not that I would do that.
I second that|4.10.08 @ 2:25PM|#
Agree with Timothy. A hairy woman who had her breasts surgically removed is pregnant. But it doesn't sell magazines unless you call her a man.
javier|4.10.08 @ 2:29PM|#
not a pregnant man. You won't find a single Y chromosome in her body. Just a women on hormones and some surgery. It reminds of the south park after the sex change miss garrison is told she still can have a baby. "So i am not a real female, I just have mutilated genitals."
|4.10.08 @ 2:30PM|#
If I put a red dress on a potato, is it a tomato?
What if you inject a potato plant with tomato hormones until it
produced a red fruit with a skin?
|4.10.08 @ 2:33PM|#
What if you inject a potato plant with tomato hormones until
it produced a red fruit with a skin?
I guess then it would probably be a pretty ugly tomato, or a funky
looking potato, then wouldn't it?
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 2:34PM|#
Junior was awful, just awful. Just because Arnold and
DeVito were great together in Twins didn't mean that they
could just do any idiotic screenplay and have it be great.
It was after the end of Arnold's Golden Era: Conan to Total
Recall.
Handsome Dan|4.10.08 @ 2:37PM|#
As much as they were when watching Dennis Paymer take the
oath in 24...
FWIW, I think you mean Dennis Haysbert. Anyway.
adrian|4.10.08 @ 2:40PM|#
is she on hormone replacement? what the hell is that kid going to look like if so..
|4.10.08 @ 2:41PM|#
If you have an x and a y chromosone, you're a male.
If you have two x chromosones, you're female.
Period. Everything else is just a really horrible imitation no
matter how "trans" you are.
thoreau|4.10.08 @ 2:42PM|#
adrian raises a good point. Are there any consequences for the
kid if the mother/father/host/whatever is on hormone therapies
during pregnancy?
I can't imagine that screwing around with sex hormones during
pregnancy is the best of ideas, you know?
|4.10.08 @ 2:43PM|#
I just have a really hard time having sympathy for cross
dressers on hormones (I REFUSE to use the word
"transgender").
Choose to be a freak, don't expect to get special treatment or not
be treated like a freak.
|4.10.08 @ 2:46PM|#
Prebutt to Casey Serin: Yes, we know he's really a gay woman
with a beard and I agree that there isn't anything wrong with
that.
Whew... thanks for saving me some keystrokes. :-)
some dude|4.10.08 @ 2:47PM|#
I think there may be another milestone here that passed unnoticed. Is this the first time a picture of a biological woman without a top is shown all over network TV?
ed|4.10.08 @ 2:48PM|#
I want to reiterate that I don't experiment with cross-dressing
vegetables.
When I'm sober.
|4.10.08 @ 2:59PM|#
This one has been a real pickle for my students to figure out.
We spent an entire class today talking about biological
male/femaleness. It was pretty interesting. Most of my students
agree with the above comments re: gender and hormones.
The class is Intro to Journalism and Media Studies. I was pleased
that they grasped the concept that a pregnant man sells, and that
papers are willing to relegate to a mere mention the technicality
that Beattie is genetically a female.
As a side note, one thing was revealed about many of my students:
boys and girls had almost ZERO clue as to what goes on with their
reproductive systems (they are between 9th and 11th grades). After
the Beattie discussion subsided I went on and did something I
probably should not have done, but something they all seemed to
appreciate and take seriously: we talked about periods and
artificial insemination and what it takes to get pregnant and how
erections work and whether or not you can get pregnant from
pre-ejaculate and what it means to "pop your cherry." I did not
think ignorance of these things was still prevalent amongst
teenagers. They all had grave misconceptions about sex. Given how
easily so many were reeled in by the Beattie story, it seems like
most of America might, also.
Brandon|4.10.08 @ 3:01PM|#
"I just have a really hard time having sympathy for cross
dressers on hormones (I REFUSE to use the word
"transgender").
Choose to be a freak, don't expect to get special treatment or not
be treated like a freak."
Cesar, are you a libertarian or a freeper? It's kinda hard to tell
here.
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 3:05PM|#
Considering that Cesar didn't advocate for laws/force to be used against "freaks", it seems he is still libertarian. Libertarians don't have to go to GLBT meetings, you know.
Taktix®|4.10.08 @ 3:09PM|#
Loretta: It's every man's right to have babies if he wants
them.
Reg: But... you can't have babies.
Loretta: Don't you oppress me.
Reg: I'm not oppressing you, Stan. You haven't got a womb! Where's
the foetus going to gestate?! You going to keep it in a box?!
Judith: I've got an idea. We shall fight the oppressors for your
right to have babies, brother.
Err... sister.
Sorry.
ed|4.10.08 @ 3:13PM|#
After the Beattie discussion subsided I went on and did
something I probably should not have done
Expect a knock on your door very soon, MadBiker.
|4.10.08 @ 3:13PM|#
...As a side note, one thing was revealed about many of my
students: boys and girls had almost ZERO clue as to what goes on
with their reproductive systems (they are between 9th and 11th
grades)...
When I was that age, I was just as, if not more, ignorant as your
students. Damn, you think we'd learn as a society.
Yeah, she's a freak. One who is reveling in her 15 minutes of fame.
It makes me think that JoJo, the dog faced boy, may have actually
enjoyed his sideshow gig.
|4.10.08 @ 3:18PM|#
Sometimes, one person's "freak" is another person's series of
choices. We are all different and therefore deal with life
differently.
It's when the government, system or society start to enforce,
encourage and propagandize choices things get ugly. Because of some
people's desire to tell others how to live we are forced to deal
with the war on some drugs.
/I have a lot less problem with this (pregnant XX chom man) than I
do with people's closed mindedness.
|4.10.08 @ 3:23PM|#
Cesar, are you a libertarian or a freeper? It's kinda hard to tell here.
Where did I say there should be a law against it? I guess I forgot
the standard disclaimer. They can do WHATEVER THEY WANT. They
shouldn't be beat up, killed, etc for it. But it doesn't mean I
have to clap and say what a GREAT choice!
|4.10.08 @ 3:25PM|#
I guess its the part where they want affirmative action, the
part where they demand their health insurance companies foot the
bill, etc, is where they loose me.
A person saying they are born with a homosexual orientation seems
very likely to me.
Saying they are "males born in a female body" or whatever just
doesn't pass my BS detector.
Your mileage may vary, though.
|4.10.08 @ 3:25PM|#
In some ways, those are the same questions people are asking
about a possible Obama presidency. Can the majority of people in
the United States accept a mixed-race guy in a role previously
reserved for white dudes? To return to the issue of Beattie, can
the majority accept a man taking on a role (pregnant dad) they'd
never contemplated before, except when watching a bad Arnold
Schwarzenegger sci-fi comedy called Junior?
Does this person get PAID to think and then write about it? If so
there is no justice to be found in this world or the next.
|4.10.08 @ 3:29PM|#
Sometimes, one person's "freak" is another person's series
of choices. We are all different and therefore deal with life
differently.
In my, and Cesar's, defense
freak1 (frēk)
n.
1. A thing or occurrence that is markedly unusual or irregular: A
freak of nature produced the midsummer snow.
2. An abnormally formed organism, especially a person or animal
regarded as a curiosity or monstrosity.
3. A sudden capricious turn of mind; a whim: "The freaks of the
psyche can no more be explained than the Devil" (Maurice
Collis).
4. Slang.
a) A drug user or addict: a speed freak.
b) An eccentric or nonconformist person, especially a member of a
counterculture.
c) An enthusiast: rock music freaks.
Referring to definition 1, I reiterate, a freak.
|4.10.08 @ 3:31PM|#
Also, is anyone thinking of the unborn kid here? What if hes
born with some serious defection because of the hormones his parent
was hopped up on during pregnancy?
Yeah, let me ruin a kids life and future health so I can be an
exhibitionist and have 15 minutes of fame.
Bling Bling|4.10.08 @ 3:31PM|#
If she was really a man, she'd grow some real balls and for the sake of the child, abort the pregnancy.
|4.10.08 @ 3:33PM|#
Beattie is the first pregnant man most people will ever
meet.
Well, no. Beattie is a pregnant woman. She happens to be a pregnant
woman who has had extensive cosmetic procedures, but its not like
that's so unusual either.
This one has been a real pickle . . .
Actually, the whole point is that there isn't a real
pickle.
Hell, J sub D, definitions 2 and 4(b) work just as well.
|4.10.08 @ 3:34PM|#
Well, no. Beattie is a pregnant woman. She happens to be a pregnant woman who has had extensive cosmetic procedures, but its not like that's so unusual either.
Thank you, RC Dean.
Gus|4.10.08 @ 3:36PM|#
"He's the guy...hunky, and...his full beard and muscles make it
quite obvious that he's a dude."
I thing David Weigel is in love!!! In loooovvvveeeee!!!!!
|4.10.08 @ 3:41PM|#
"After the Beattie discussion subsided I went on and did
something I probably should not have done, but something they all
seemed to appreciate and take seriously: we talked about periods
and artificial insemination and what it takes to get pregnant and
how erections work and whether or not you can get pregnant from
pre-ejaculate and what it means to "pop your cherry." I did not
think ignorance of these things was still prevalent amongst
teenagers. They all had grave misconceptions about sex. Given how
easily so many were reeled in by the Beattie story, it seems like
most of America might, also."
I agree. You did something you probably should not have done in a
Journalism and Media Studies class. In the future, please teach
Journalism and Media Studies.
BakedPenguin|4.10.08 @ 3:42PM|#
Uh, Gus - Annalee Newitz wrote that. That's what blockquotes are for.
Gus|4.10.08 @ 3:48PM|#
"Uh, Gus - Annalee Newitz wrote that. That's what blockquotes
are for."
Oh, I understand that. But nonetheless, I still think David is in
love and is expressing himself via Newitz's words.
|4.10.08 @ 3:49PM|#
Does anyone know for sure if she is still taking male hormones?
Just guessing, but it seems like she would have to quit them in
order to get pregnant and stay off for the duration of the
pregnancy. That's what I had assumed, and I was wondering what
she's going to look like when her 9 months are up.
I have no problem with sex reassignment surgery. It is a bit
disturbing that she's chosen to make such a spectacle of herself,
and I do wonder what the effect of all this will be on the child.
But I think similar thoughts about plenty of people who parade
their private bidness on TV talk shows.
Brandon|4.10.08 @ 3:50PM|#
"I guess its the part where they want affirmative action, the
part where they demand their health insurance companies foot the
bill, etc, is where they loose me."
Fully agree with you here.
I just don't like calling people freaks because they're markedly
different than me.
Brandon|4.10.08 @ 3:51PM|#
"Does anyone know for sure if she is still taking male
hormones?"
He's not.
|4.10.08 @ 3:57PM|#
I only call you a freak if you make a huge spectacle of it. Which is what shes doing.
Brandybuck|4.10.08 @ 3:57PM|#
Saying they are "males born in a female body" or whatever just doesn't pass my BS detector.
Amazingly enough, I agree. This is one of the areas that marks me
as a sloped-head paleolibertarian instead of a properly enlightened
cosmo. While I have no interest in regulating the non-violent
activities of homosexuals, I still have to recognize this person as
a lesbian female and not a straight male. This story has as much
newsworthiness as one that ponders how a silicone augmented mother
is going to breast-feed her baby.
Tolerant Cosmopolitan|4.10.08 @ 4:03PM|#
Libertarians don't have to go to GLBT meetings, you
know.
Quick! Everyone shout down Episiarch! Freedom of expression is only
allowed to those who use it correctly!!!
Taktix®|4.10.08 @ 4:04PM|#
While I have no interest in regulating the non-violent
activities of homosexuals, I still have to recognize this person as
a lesbian female and not a straight male.
Take the political slant out of it for a second:
If a guy walked around naked with hair glued to his skin and called
himself a llama, would you call him a llama or a very silly
human?
|4.10.08 @ 4:05PM|#
Its also worth noting that homosexuals has been around since the beginning of civilization, wheres "transgendered" seems to be an exclusively modern phenomenon.
thoreau|4.10.08 @ 4:11PM|#
Cesar-
Do you know that? Certainly recipients of sex change surgery seem
to be a modern phenomenon, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's a
long history of people who very strongly wish they were the other
gender and identify as such.
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 4:13PM|#
I'm sure it's possible to feel like you are one gender trapped
in the body of another gender. There are stranger psychological
phenomena out there.
However, it's pretty rare and the resultant desire to mutilate your
body into another form (possible with modern technology) can get
you qualified as a "freak". Big deal. Vince Troyer is a "freak" too
and everybody loves him.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 4:16PM|#
"I have no problem with sex reassignment surgery."
Well I do. Look what happened to Les Fienberg (author of "Stone
Butch Blues:).
My lesbian women studies sister is also opposed to it. She feels
there would be no need to reassign if the world wasn't unduly
focused on gender norms and genitalia. Love who you love without
drugs or surgery; don't allow society to force you to alter
yourself to fit (vaguely / marginally) their biological
stereotyping.
And I agree with her.
|4.10.08 @ 4:19PM|#
Its also worth noting that homosexuals has been around since the beginning of civilization, wheres "transgendered" seems to be an exclusively modern phenomenon.
Not really: Emperor
Elagabulus
|4.10.08 @ 4:21PM|#
Does anyone know for sure if she is still taking male
hormones? Just guessing, but it seems like she would have to quit
them in order to get pregnant and stay off for the duration of the
pregnancy. That's what I had assumed, and I was wondering what
she's going to look like when her 9 months are up.
I have no problem with sex reassignment surgery. It is a bit
disturbing that she's chosen to make such a spectacle of herself,
and I do wonder what the effect of all this will be on the child.
But I think similar thoughts about plenty of people who parade
their private bidness on TV talk shows.
Damn, that is a good question that won't be asked on the talk
shows. Fetal exposure to maternal hormones is not something we
really understand other than it is really friggin' important.
|4.10.08 @ 4:22PM|#
Again, I'm not a psychologist nor do I play one on the internet. It just seems fishy to me, in a way that being born with another sexual orientation does not.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 4:22PM|#
"Its also worth noting that homosexuals has been around since
the beginning of civilization, wheres "transgendered" seems to be
an exclusively modern phenomenon."
Guess you never heard of the Berdache
http://wiki.susans.org/index.php/Berdache
Or similar folk in S. Asia
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 4:26PM|#
My lesbian women studies sister is also opposed to it. She
feels there would be no need to reassign if the world wasn't unduly
focused on gender norms and genitalia. Love who you love without
drugs or surgery; don't allow society to force you to alter
yourself to fit (vaguely / marginally) their biological
stereotyping.
And I agree with her.
Then it's a good thing that you don't have control over their
bodies and they do, so they can do what they want with it.
|4.10.08 @ 4:34PM|#
Saying they are "males born in a female body" or whatever
just doesn't pass my BS detector.
I hear you, Cesar. That was my gut reaction, too, when I first
heard about this.
But the psychiatrists have come down pretty clearly on the side of
this being a legitimate concidtion, separate from homosexuality. In
fact, there have been cases of people who were transgendered but
heterosexual (meaning, men who liked women) and then continued to
get wit da women after their reassignment surgery and treatments,
thus becoming homosexuals.
So while you and I might need a scorecard to keep up, that doesn't
mean they're just gay people looking for a kick.
|4.10.08 @ 4:38PM|#
It just seems fishy to me, in a way that being born with
another sexual orientation does not.
What exactly seems fishy to you?? You think that they are lying or
what? You dont beleive that these people feel/think that they are
one gender trapped in the body of another gender? What exactly can
you base your opinion of their emotional state and psychological
condition on? You think that all transgener surgery is done on a
bet? Im sorry that is just non-sensical to me. Sounds more like you
got a case of the 'Eeeeek factor'.
There is a pretty rare disorder out psychological out there, where
a person beleives that one of their appandages is not really theirs
and wants it removed. It was discussed here not too long ago. Does
that seem 'fishy' to you.
|4.10.08 @ 4:43PM|#
In fact, there have been cases of people who were
transgendered but heterosexual (meaning, men who liked women) and
then continued to get wit da women after their reassignment surgery
and treatments, thus becoming homosexuals.
I actually used to work with one. He was married. And the wife
supported his choice. The odd question was what bathroom she would
use after the surgery, since everyone would know him before and
after. In case you are wondering he started using the women's
facilities after becomming a she. I dont know if any women actually
had a problem with that, but I didnt hear anything.
|4.10.08 @ 4:50PM|#
I was momentarily frightened and taken aback by this headline,
for a number of reasons. First of all, because I thought that a lot
had happened scientifically during a relatively brief period of me
not following the news closely. Secondly, I thought the articles
were about a real man, since that is how this blog post was worded
by Weigel.
Please, it's fine to acknowledge people's legitimate psychological
disorders/anomalies, but claiming that a man is pregnant is getting
to the point of misleading people about human biology and
scientific progress. She can be a "man", but she is not a
man. I just find it kind of obnoxious that people's
redefinitions of invented reality are starting to interfere with
everyone else's reality. You are welcome to pay lip service to the
transgendered community, but don't report something that isn't
factually true. Thomas Beattie is still biologically a woman, and
it doesn't make me culturally insensitive for saying so. She needs
to deal with that, and I really hope for the baby's sake that those
hormones don't adversely affect the pregnancy.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 5:00PM|#
"Then it's a good thing that you don't have control over their
bodies and they do, so they can do what they want with it."
I don't recall saying they couldn't take drugs and alter themselves
surgically, just that it's a shame they feel they must.
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 5:05PM|#
I don't recall saying they couldn't take drugs and alter
themselves surgically, just that it's a shame they feel they
must.
Why? They got dealt an unusual hand of cards, which makes them
totally uncomfortable in their natural state. These procedures
makes them feel better. It's not like they're doing it out of
insecurity or social pressure, which you seem to think they
are--they're doing it because they feel wrong and after
they feel...righter.
Your opinions on whether alterations are a shame are
irrelevant.
Scooby|4.10.08 @ 5:10PM|#
Epi,
And your opinions on his opinions are likewise irrelevant, as are
my opinions on your opinions...and so on, and so on...
Where is that list of libertarian disclaimers, again?
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 5:13PM|#
My opinion is totally irrelevant, no question. However, I do enjoy giving it.
|4.10.08 @ 5:15PM|#
I guess I got too comfortable with only having 2 definitions for a man and a woman (one for gender, one for sex). I guess I can just toss all those out the window, since this man seems to be a man in gender, and both a man and a woman in sex. < sigh >
|4.10.08 @ 5:18PM|#
Why?
Because of the very next sentence you wrote:
They got dealt an unusual hand of cards, which makes them
totally uncomfortable in their natural state.
That's gotta suck.
|4.10.08 @ 5:18PM|#
oh, so then is he only a woman in sex? If he had been taking hormones and no longer is, what does that qualify as? I give up on classifications, and that's probably just as well. It just makes discussing it harder.
|4.10.08 @ 5:20PM|#
All we really need to do, for a definitive ruling on the sex of
this person, is ask the International Olympic Committee where
he/she/it would be allowed to compete.
The doping issue would have to be resolved separately.
|4.10.08 @ 5:20PM|#
If I were to cut off Reinmoose's let, would he still be a
quadruped?
If I cut off two of them, would he be a biped?
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 5:25PM|#
That's gotta suck.
Exactly. Therefore it's not a shame when they do something that
makes them feel better, even if to others it seems like
mutilation.
Brandybuck|4.10.08 @ 5:28PM|#
If a guy walked around naked with hair glued to his skin and called himself a llama, would you call him a llama or a very silly human?
Leftist/Liberal/Cosmotarian answer: "Of course he is a llama! He
had no choice in how he was born. If he wants to be a llama who are
we to say otherwise. We should weep with joy now that the has found
happiness in his llamahood. Group hug everybody!"
Rightist/Conservative/Paleolib answer: "He is a man walking around
with hair glued to his ass, nothing more. I don't care how weepy
you get over his plight, the reality of his species does not
change. His right to his hirsute activities does not trump my right
to call him a very silly human. Now let me get back to posting bile
at LRC."
Mark|4.10.08 @ 5:40PM|#
"Why? They got dealt an unusual hand of cards, which makes them
totally uncomfortable in their natural state. These procedures
makes them feel better. It's not like they're doing it out of
insecurity or social pressure, which you seem to think they
are--they're doing it because they feel wrong and after they
feel...righter.
Your opinions on whether alterations are a shame are
irrelevant."
Yes you are right I am wrong. You are now like a god to me. Though
I do think for a god, you're pretty damn ignorant with respect to
the side effects (including death) hormones and surgeries often
produce. But then again, what do I know?
Episiarch|4.10.08 @ 5:42PM|#
Yes Mark, it's up to you to decide the pros and cons of this procedure, and not the people who it actually effects. Good thing you're so benevolent.
|4.10.08 @ 5:42PM|#
basically this chick is like female cyclist tammy Thomas or a female bodybuilder, without the muscles.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 5:43PM|#
"Yes Mark, it's up to you to decide the pros and cons of this
procedure, and not the people who it actually effects. Good thing
you're so benevolent."
Odd that a god would confuse opinion with dictate. Really, very
odd.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 5:46PM|#
Full disclosure: I am transgendered. I am a heterosexual male that gender-identifies as a female. Always have. But then as an omnipotent, you would already know that. The disclaimer is for the rest of the group.
|4.10.08 @ 5:47PM|#
Hooray for one of the last acceptable bastions of intolerance,
the ever-popular Transgendered People Are Freaks!
Honestly, I don't know why it continues to shock me when I read a
thread at Reason that involves the transgendered in any way and
find it to be full of disturbingly intolerant shenanigans.
It's as though biological determinism lurks deep within us all,
regardless of political outlook, and just waits for the right
outlet to come bursting back to the surface.
I feel like I've made this post a dozen times over the past few
years. Maybe I should just accept that even those who are otherwise
reasonable and sensible people will become creepy and intolerant
when faced with gender dysphoria.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 5:50PM|#
Hey I have to leave work, but I leave you with this, epi, would a non-transgendered male even know who the heck Les Feinberg is, let alone discussed the pros and cons of sexual reassignment surgery? I would be more than willing to discuss this with you at a later date as it's clear from your posts that you have little more than a knee-jerk understanding of the issue.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 5:55PM|#
" let alone discussed the pros and cons of sexual reassignment
surgery?"
That should have read:
let alone discussed the pros and cons of sexual reassignment
surgery with his lesbian sister?
Time to catch the bus!
|4.10.08 @ 5:55PM|#
Smacky:
"Please, it's fine to acknowledge people's legitimate psychological
disorders/anomalies, but claiming that a man is pregnant is getting
to the point of misleading people about human biology and
scientific progress. She can be a "man", but she is not a man. I
just find it kind of obnoxious that people's redefinitions of
invented reality are starting to interfere with everyone else's
reality."
I agree. I had a similar reaction when I first heard about it. I
saw a picture of Oprah with her hands on "his" belly, looking as if
there were some sort of miracle happening. It's crazy that no
"straight" news stories even pause over the facts of the
case.
PC is nothing if not idealistic.
SIV|4.10.08 @ 5:59PM|#
Hormones and surgery made him male.
She isn't male.
Timothy covers it in first comment.
When I first saw the headline I thought there had been a cool
freaky scientific advance and an actual man was carrying it like an
ectopic pregnancy or something.
Immediately went from a "man bites dog" to "dog bites man"
story.
|4.10.08 @ 6:04PM|#
I don't recall saying they couldn't take drugs and alter themselves surgically, just that it's a shame they feel they must.
Why? They got dealt an unusual hand of cards, which makes them totally uncomfortable in their natural state. These procedures makes them feel better. It's not like they're doing it out of insecurity or social pressure, which you seem to think they are--they're doing it because they feel wrong and after they feel...righter.
Your opinions on whether alterations are a shame are irrelevant.
It's time for
Standard Libertarian Disclaimer #11. "People can do whatever
they like, but that really creeps me out."
|4.10.08 @ 6:19PM|#
Episiarch,
C'mon. Haven't you ever heard someone use the phrase "It's a
shame..." before?
It's a shame the game got rained out. It's a shame a tree feel on
the Civic. It doesn't actually mean something is shameful.
If a guy walked around naked with hair glued to his skin and
called himself a llama, would you call him a llama or a very silly
human? This fella didn't glue anything to anything. He changed
the biological condition of his body, creating (partially, at this
point) the effects that would ensue if he'd been born with a Y
chromosome. A better comparison would be if a guy had surgery to
turn his arms into legs, had hooves attached, and took some course
of medicine that caused him to grow a hump and a pelt. I think the
answer to "Is a a llama?" has to be, at least, "Sorta."
|4.10.08 @ 6:20PM|#
If I had surgery that lengthened my tibias, fibias, and femurs
so that I was 6'5", would I still be a short guy who mutilated
himself, or would I qualify as tall?
Anybody going to go with "short guy?"
|4.10.08 @ 6:22PM|#
Mark - all surgery is risky. Taking hormones is risky. When I
say I have no problem with sex reassignment surgery, I'm basically
saying people should have the right to get it if they want to. I
feel the same way about elective cosmetic surgery or any risky
surgery that might enhance a person's quality of life.
Yes, it is sad that there are people who are so unhappy and
out-of-place in their own bodies that they would be driven to
undergo these risky procedures and basically live the rest of their
lives with mutilated and non-functional genitals. And possibly,
psychology & psychiatry should be more selective in terms of
who they are willing to sign off on for sex reassignment. I don't
know anything about that. I doubt there are good statistics on
satisfaction with the change, especially over time. Camille Paglia
has said she's glad gender reassignment wasn't available when she
was young, or she would have done it. I don't think I really have
much choice but to take a pragmatic attitude about it, to treat
people who have had gender reassignment (with MTFs it's sometimes
still apparent) like human beings, which they are, and to withhold
judgment on whether it's a good thing or a bad thing.
My issues with this particular case are the media obfuscation of
the truth about the pregnancy, and a bit of a bad feeling about
this person's drive to create so much publicity about it, with
potential, unnecessary fallout for the child. But my speculation
about the latter is meaningless.
|4.10.08 @ 7:07PM|#
J sub D-
When I was that age, I was just as, if not more, ignorant as
your students. Damn, you think we'd learn as a society.
Really? Go smack your Mom and Dad for me!
By the time I was in 9th grade, I had already memorized my
home's 1968 "Collier's Encyclopedia" entries on "puberty",
"anatomy" (with the cool 'flip-over' transparencies!), "sexuality",
"birth control", etc.-- and, had also "endured" three of those
massively uncomfortable "talks" from both mom and dad.
No actual experience, mind you- but,
still...?
BTW, if almost half of all "big-city" HS students are unable to
pass a 9th grade level achievement test- why does "sex education in
schools" really matter?
IMO, the "smart" kids already know "the facts"- and the
rest are probably too dumb to learn anything...
|4.10.08 @ 7:09PM|#
joe-
If I had surgery that lengthened my tibias, fibias, and femurs
so that I was 6'5", would I still be a short guy who mutilated
himself, or would I qualify as tall?
If I sat my naked ass in a bowl, and poured hot fudge over my hair,
then added whipped cream and a cherry- would I be a "hot fudge
sundae"?
|4.10.08 @ 7:15PM|#
No, because you would merely be putting foreign materials on
yourself, not actually changing your body's function, organization,
and make-up.
You see that facial hair in the picture? He didn't glue that on.
His body actually does that now.
Vermont Gun Owner|4.10.08 @ 7:17PM|#
No, because you would merely be putting foreign materials on
yourself, not actually changing your body's function, organization,
and make-up.
You see that facial hair in the picture? He didn't glue that on.
His body actually does that now.
I would suggest going with something other than facial hair to make
your point, as (unaltered) women can do that too.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 7:29PM|#
"These procedures makes them feel better. "
Can you show us that this is always the result? To believe it is,
is somewhat (somewhat) analogous to saying that if we only spend
more money on education, the schools will be better. Pie in the
sky.
All you have to do is look into it a bit. There are documentaries
of people going through the reassignment process and it is clear
that often, very often, there post reassignment buyers remorse.
Post reassignment people are often no better off that they were
pre-reassignment and frequently, are less happy than they
were.
Les Feinberg, if I recall correctly, endured some nasty side
affects to taking hormones (I think she died from complications). I
mean think about it, there are concerns about WOMEN taking estrogen
(sp?). Given that, it would be folly to suggest that bombarding a
female body with male hormones produces a positive outcome in a
majority of cases.
Surgery, is even worse. Having one's breasts or male genitalia
removed is major surgery. It often does not turn out well, and
again, it would be folly to contend that surgery produces a
positive outcome in a majority of cases.
To reiterate, if people wish to take hormones, opium, or crack, it
should be their right to do so. If people wish to remove their
breasts, genitalia, arms, or legs via major surgery because they
believe it will make them feel complete, again, they have a right
to do so. It goes along with that pursuit of happiness thing.
However, to think that happiness is the given outcome of major
surgery or hormone treatment, then you really have not looked into
this too deeply.
|4.10.08 @ 7:29PM|#
BTW, if almost half of all "big-city" HS students are unable
to pass a 9th grade level achievement test- why does "sex education
in schools" really matter?
IMO, the "smart" kids already know "the facts"- and the rest are
probably too dumb to learn anything...
Handicapper,
I didn't propose the public schools take up this task. Since you
quoted me, and you were one of the "smart kids" you should realize
that.
Mark|4.10.08 @ 7:41PM|#
"Camille Paglia has said she's glad gender reassignment wasn't
available when she was young, or she would have done it."
I didn't read your post until now and yes, I agree with what you
say, and with Paglia (I am happy with the body I have). I am a huge
Camille Paglia fan. Though I'm not sure she's right about Obama
being our best choice for president, but she's spot-on with most
everything else.
I guess what bothered me most about Episiarch's posts is that he
chose to project his ignorance onto me (I have enough ignorance of
my own to contend with) as if I had no idea how a transgendered
person feels. I have enough ignorance of my own to contend
with.
Brandybuck|4.10.08 @ 7:57PM|#
Odd that a god would confuse opinion with dictate. Really, very odd.
It's the cosmotarian way: You are free to do whatever you want,
just so long as you don't make anyone feel bad about
themselves.
David McElroy|4.10.08 @ 11:56PM|#
This pregnant person isn't a man, despite the fact that every
news story says so. This is a woman who has taken some hormones and
made other changes to her body in order to look like a man. She
might look like a man, but her genes haven't changed. She can say
that she FEELS like a man if she wants. It doesn't bother me one
bit if she wants to indulge in this fantasy. But don't expect the
rest of us to pretend that it's reality.
If I take a white dog and dye little black dots all over its body,
it doesn't suddenly become a dalmatian. It's just a white dog with
fake spots. The same is true for this woman. If she wants to live
this way, I don't have any problem with it. I couldn't care less
about her or about how other people live their lives. It's not my
business. But it's goofy to insist that the rest of the world join
in the fantasy by referring to her as a "pregnant man." She's not a
man and nothing can make her one.
zoltan|4.11.08 @ 2:08AM|#
Cesar, one of your comments really stuck out at me:
"If you have an x and a y chromosone, you're a male.
If you have two x chromosones, you're female.
Period."
While this is true, there is a rare and stunning condition that can
occur in males. A gene on the X chromosome called DAX and a gene on
the Y chromosome called SRY are antagonistic to each other, and one
SRY defeats one DAX. Rarely, the DAX gene is copied twice on the X
chromosome which stops the SRY gene from producing testosterone and
other "masculinizing" hormones during gestation. So although these
people are genetically male, they are phenotypically female. Weird,
huh?
Mad Max|4.11.08 @ 2:38AM|#
I identify as Napoleon Bonaparte, but through a tragic accident of birth, which isn't my fault in any way, I have the body of an H&R commenter. Who can speak to my pain?
|4.11.08 @ 5:20AM|#
I was born in a male body (my own) but sometime in the 1980s I
came to realize that I had powerful feelings that I really should
be in the body of a female.
Specifically, Heather Locklear's.
Not all the way in, just a little bit. A few inches.
And not all the time, just a little while, every now and
then.
I appreciate everyone's support of my heroic struggle as I strive
to realize my true nature.
|4.11.08 @ 9:02AM|#
The dalmatian example doesn't work, either.
You would have to give a dog a course of treatments that caused it
to start growing its own black spots. Then do you have a dog whose
coloring is white-with-black-spots? Yes, you do.
|4.11.08 @ 10:35AM|#
If I had surgery that lengthened my tibias, fibias, and
femurs so that I was 6'5", would I still be a short guy who
mutilated himself, or would I qualify as tall?
You would be a short guy who mutilated himself so he could be tall.
Of course, the defiition of tall is pretty straightforward - above
a certain height.
I am aware of no definition of "man" that includes (a) having
female chromosomes (b) having female genitalia, and (c) having a
womb.
Bronwyn|4.11.08 @ 11:30AM|#
Joe, the thread's so long, I've lost the point you were trying
to make about gluing things on.
Anyway, I was just going to be redundant and add that Timothy had
it at the beginning.
For those who are confused on terminology...
"sex" refers to one's chromosomal complement (XY male, XX female).
The biological confusion begins with those who wind up with XXY or
other sex chromosome duplications.
"gender" refers to one's psychological self-identification. This is
why medical forms should ask for "sex" not "gender" because "sex"
is what's relevant when it comes to one's biological/physiological
condition.
The hormones (which TB stopped taking several months prior to
conception) do not confer a "sex" change anymore than surgery
would. What is altered are merely the secondary sex characteristics
(breasts, hair growth patterns, patterns of fat deposition, depth
of voice, etc.)
It is polite to refer to TB using the male pronoun, but as far as
science and medicine are concerned TB is female.
Ergo, appearances and gut reactions notwithstanding, there's really
nothing newsworthy here.
Making a big deal of it only causes more difficulty for those who
have to deal with gender identity issues.
Also, I'll point out that there is some data (not all of it good,
but the correlations are strong) supporting a genetic basis for
both homosexuality and gender identity. Not that all homosexuals
would exhibit the genetic variation, but perhaps those that appear
to exhibit the stereotypical characteristics (the swish and lisp
that some love to mock) are merely the behavioral manifestations of
a genetic difference.
|4.11.08 @ 2:36PM|#
I am aware of no definition of "man" that includes (a)
having female chromosomes (b) having female genitalia, and (c)
having a womb.
There have been men that have had each and every one of those
things.
Every single man in existence has "female chromosomes," as the
genes for female sex are encoded on the X chromosome, which every
single male in existence carries. As a matter of fact, the XXY
mutation - XX being the standard chromosome pairing for a female -
is not unheard of, and people carrying it often go through their
entire life as males, without knowing they have a genetic
abnormality.
As for "womb" and "female genetalia," there have also been cases of
genetic or pre-natal abnormalities that have led to males being
born with vestigal lady parts.
Brownyn,
My point is a straight-forward one: what you put on, but which is
not a part of you, does not change your essential nature. I am the
same person whether I wear a shirt, a blouse, or some llama
fur.
But if you change your actual, physical self, those changes are a
part of you.
|4.11.08 @ 2:37PM|#
Making a big deal of it only causes more difficulty for
those who have to deal with gender identity issues.
You're right. People who insist on saying "Nuh-uh" and haveing
lengthly discussions about the individual's anatomy probably do
make it more difficult to deal with.
David McElroy|4.11.08 @ 4:01PM|#
joe, you're not making sense, but there's no use in discussing it with you since you're determined to ignore reality. The only way you can call this person a man is to redefine the word. You can craft your own special definition to make any word mean anything else, which you're doing here. It still doesn't change reality. By any reasonable definition, a person who is born a woman remains a woman, despite surgical and other artificial efforts to create another impression. You can join in her fantasy by calling her a man, but it's goofy to expect others to join in the fantasy.
Bambi|4.11.08 @ 4:53PM|#
She is not a man because she doesn't uriniate through her hormonally enlarged clit.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245