American man gives birth Watch

Garden_Gnome
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#1
What do you all think of this. Born a woman but had a sex change, he has given birth to a baby girl: -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7488894.stm

I'm generally quite liberal. However, I felt just a little uneasy about this. I have no problem with the sex change itself and I have no right to judge how good a parent he will be. But, I don't know, I just don't really like it.

I've heard it defended on the grounds that everyone has a right to have a child. This is a very mistaken belief. There is never (and never will be) a "right" to a child.
0
reply
thomhayden
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 10 years ago
#2
I feel sorry for the child who will more than likely get badly bullied at school.
0
reply
angel_sista
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 10 years ago
#3
I feel sorry for the kid, who is almost destined to fail biology.
0
reply
Sincerity?
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 10 years ago
#4
Changing sex is going against nature, in my own idealistic opinion.
0
reply
zeropoint
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#5
Report 10 years ago
#5
I had to double read the gender identifiers in this article. It was most confusing.

Also I can't really understand why someone would want to become male, and then become pregnant...Oh well.

I believe people have the rigth to have children if they wish, but more importantly the children have a right to a stable upbringing, if this cannot be provided then I think people should not have children. I don't know about this case, I don't know about the domestic situation, but for now it just confuses me.
0
reply
Muppety_Kid
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#6
Report 10 years ago
#6
(Original post by Garden_Gnome)
What do you all think of this. Born a man but had a sex change, she has given birth to a baby girl: -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7488894.stm

I'm generally quite liberal. However, I felt just a little uneasy about this. I have no problem with the sex change itself and I have no right to judge how good a parent she will be. But, I don't know, I just don't really like it.

I've heard it defended on the grounds that everyone has a right to have a child. This is a very mistaken belief. There is never (and never will be) a "right" to a child.
I think you're right in that nobody has the "right" to a child, but I don't really see any problem. I mean, the girl will have a mum (his wife Nancy) and a dad - she doesn't need to know where babies come from straight away.

The only part of this I objected to was calling him a "pregnant man". The fact that he was legally a man, and was also pregnant, does not necessarily make him a "pregnant man" (it's deductively invalid - all cows have four legs, that animal has four legs, so it must be a cow). He was carrying the child inside his female reproductive organs, which is something any other man couldn't do.

I guess I was being pedantic. Either way, I'm perfectly comfortable with this man having kids.
0
reply
alex-hs
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report 10 years ago
#7
(Original post by Garden_Gnome)
What do you all think of this. Born a man but had a sex change, she has given birth to a baby girl: -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7488894.stm

I'm generally quite liberal. However, I felt just a little uneasy about this. I have no problem with the sex change itself and I have no right to judge how good a parent she will be. But, I don't know, I just don't really like it.

I've heard it defended on the grounds that everyone has a right to have a child. This is a very mistaken belief. There is never (and never will be) a "right" to a child.
Er, no... born a woman; he has given birth.

So not quite such a feat of biology.
0
reply
Garden_Gnome
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#8
(Original post by alex-hs)
Er, no... born a woman; he has given birth.

So not quite such a feat of biology.
I know, I realised the mistake just after I posted. It's too early in the morning I shall change it.
0
reply
juicyfruit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#9
Report 10 years ago
#9
There was a post on this a few weeks ago.
0
reply
LazyLuke
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 10 years ago
#10
I have no problem with it, I won't be joining a picket line outside this bloke's (uh...wait) house anytime soon, but it would be difficult to admit that it's not incredibly weird.
0
reply
cantthinkofaname
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#11
Report 10 years ago
#11
he's not a man, hes a ******, its completely wrong these ppl are just freaks.
0
reply
Charlski
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 10 years ago
#12
I don't understand what's so amazing about this. When it very first hit the headlines, I think it was the Sun who were proclaiming that it was a medical miracle, a MAN getting pregnant, and how their experts said it was impossible. I then read the article, and was frankly hugely disappointed. There's nothing miraculous at all - SHE kept her reproductive organs when she had a sex change. She isn't a man, she just looks like one.
0
reply
Mrgd291190
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#13
Report 10 years ago
#13
Done before but still...

I object to him being called a "man". I don't have a problem with those who want to have gender-reassignment treatment but I can't consider him a "man" until his sexual organs, the main objects of gender, have been changed, thus rendering him unable to have a child.

Personal opinion, not the law or anything.
0
reply
CHAMON
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#14
Report 10 years ago
#14
Thing
0
reply
-M$ [email protected]
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report 10 years ago
#15
seriously ewww,
this guy/girl even came on the Oprah winfrey show and was bragging about it. its nothing to be proud of. its really a crime aginst nature.
0
reply
Edvics
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report 10 years ago
#16
The male seahorse has the baby - so shouldn't it be called the female seahorse?

Anyways, what some people are missing from this story is this part:
"Beatie's wife, Nancy, 46, whom he married five years ago, was unable to conceive because of a prior hysterectomy. Otherwise, he has said, "I wouldn't be doing this." "

but what REALLY has me curious is this:
"He told the magazine that contrary to published reports, the baby was not delivered by Caesarean section, but no other details about the birth were given." ... makes you wonder what the hell is still intact down there.
0
reply
Bateman
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#17
Report 10 years ago
#17
I think it's wrong and selfish.
It's unfair for the child, and i don't think that people have the right to have children, they should only have children when they have it's interests in their minds and not their own.
0
reply
Garden_Gnome
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#18
(Original post by Edvics)
The male seahorse has the baby - so shouldn't it be called the female seahorse?

Anyways, what some people are missing from this story is this part:
"Beatie's wife, Nancy, 46, whom he married five years ago, was unable to conceive because of a prior hysterectomy. Otherwise, he has said, "I wouldn't be doing this." "

but what REALLY has me curious is this:
"He told the magazine that contrary to published reports, the baby was not delivered by Caesarean section, but no other details about the birth were given." ... makes you wonder what the hell is still intact down there.
He still has female genital organs.

I don't mean to open myself up to attack and I have great sympathy for his wife. However, as I said in my original post, it has never been a right to have a child. The reason why some couples are infertile (I know this wasn't the original case in his wife although I still feel it applies) is nature's way of controlling the population. Fertility treatment goes against this and gives people the belief they "deserve" something that no one really does.
0
reply
Edvics
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report 10 years ago
#19
(Original post by Bateman)
I think it's wrong and selfish.
It's unfair for the child, and i don't think that people have the right to have children, they should only have children when they have it's interests in their minds and not their own.
Right, and I'm sure the thousands of pregnant teenage mothers had the children's interests in their minds when they accidentally became pregnant. Most pregnancies are accidents - since this was planned wouldn't you think that they should and would be better prepared to raise the child?
0
reply
Formica
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#20
Report 10 years ago
#20
She's a man in the same way that my computer is a pineapple. If they have a womb, a vagina, produce eggs and can give birth, they are not a man - no matter how much they pretend to be one. Until the equipment gets changed she is still a woman, and no amount of dressing up will change that.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (269)
38.48%
No - but I will (48)
6.87%
No - I don't want to (51)
7.3%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (331)
47.35%

Watched Threads

View All