Adult Content Warning

This community may contain adult content that is not suitable for minors. By closing this dialog box or continuing to navigate this site, you certify that you are 18 years of age and consent to view adult content.

When a Man Gets Pregnant...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dcc001, Oct 6, 2021.

  1. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    Binary edit: I have moved the posts from the other thread into this one so the conversation can continue. @Dcc001 provided the below "starter" post for this thread, but posts are inserted in chronological order so I've edited the first post in the thread to duplicate the one that now appears below:


    I'm splitting this off from the Coronavirus thread, just in case it has legs...

    TOPIC: Is "male" and "female" a biological fact, or is it something the individual determines for themselves?

    Alternate Topic: How inclusive should the world become, in light of the expansion of transgendered rights?



    ------------------


    A complete aside: when I googled the CDC for the pregnancy vaccine links, I noticed that their wording is now, "Pregnant people." Because, I suppose, men can also get pregnant. If you want to know why some people dismiss the CDC, ideas like "Men can also be pregnant" are part of the problem.
     
    #1 Dcc001, Oct 6, 2021
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 6, 2021
  2. dixiebandit69

    dixiebandit69
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    835
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    4,239
    Location:
    The asshole of Texas
    Careful with talk like that.
    You might get labeled a TERF.
     
  3. tweetybird

    tweetybird
    Expand Collapse
    Experienced Idiot

    Reputation:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    Location:
    SF
    In what way does the use of the word people invalidate the science presented?
     
  4. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    Because, as I said, I believe they picked a gender-neutral noun so as not to offend anyone by implying that only women can get pregnant.

    And if you don't think that women are the only gender capable of pregnancy, well, the rest of your science could be questionable.
     
  5. Aetius

    Aetius
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    778
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,510
    [​IMG]
     
  6. tweetybird

    tweetybird
    Expand Collapse
    Experienced Idiot

    Reputation:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    Location:
    SF
    People assigned female at birth can get pregnant. Not all women are assigned female at birth. Not all men are assigned male at birth. So yeah, not only self-identified women can get pregnant.

    The fact that trans people are being heard in our culture is new, and can be uncomfortable to some. But updating our use of terminology to reflect new knowledge and new voices is progress for science and does not detract from it, in my opinion.
     
  7. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    It does detract from it, in mine. This is a complete aside, and we may need to break it off as its own thread. In the meantime...

    I'm completely for whatever treatments and medical intervention an adult who identifies as transgender requires. I also think that it's entirely reasonable for them to be able to change their name, their prefix, and use the washrooms they feel are appropriate without any kind of harassment. I stop at allowing male-to-female athletes to compete in women's sports. And, to bring it back to this discussion, the idea that what you would like to be, or the thing you psychologically identify with, can override the biological facts of medicine is completely wrong. The very definition of female is "the sex that can bear offspring." If you're born with a dick and balls, sorry, that is not you. A male-to-female person, even post surgery, is still biologically male (and vice-versa). Yes, some females are born without the ability to bear offspring. Just like some people are born with six fingers on one hand, we don't allow a medical defect or anomaly to alter the definition of the standard human biological presentation.

    The vast majority of the world sees this common-sense fact and when a top government agency caves to the pressure of being inclusive and woke in the face of biology, it undermines their credibility.
     
  8. tweetybird

    tweetybird
    Expand Collapse
    Experienced Idiot

    Reputation:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    Location:
    SF
    How does inclusivity undermine credibility?
     
  9. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    When it overrides biological fact.
     
  10. Aetius

    Aetius
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    778
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,510
    In your first post you were using "men/women" terminology, and now you're using "male/female" terminology. I don't know why you're complaining about the CDC being more precise with their language when that's exactly what you're doing here.
     
  11. sisterkathlouise

    sisterkathlouise
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    173
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    854
    There are 2 trans men who go to the clinic where I work who have had babies in the 6 years I’ve worked there. They are definitely not women but definitely were pregnant. And now we get to see both cute little toddlers and their respective pairs of delightful gay dads.
     
  12. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    The CDC using gender-neutral wording in the most explicitly gendered thing in existence is my overarching point.

    Also, I'm not the CDC. That being said, and I can't believe I have to type this out, but men are males and women are females. One could argue that the terms could be interchangeable.
     
  13. Frebis

    Frebis
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    342
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,504
    Well, at least we know why you were listening to Joe Rogan now.
     
  14. Aetius

    Aetius
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    778
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,510
    But it's not gendered so much as it is sexed. Your own word choices bear that out, as you switched to explicitly sex-based language the moment you wanted to be precise about what you were referring to.
     
  15. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    I'm splitting this off from the Coronavirus thread, just in case it has legs...

    TOPIC: Is "male" and "female" a biological fact, or is it something the individual determines for themselves?

    Alternate Topic: How inclusive should the world become, in light of the expansion of transgendered rights?
     
  16. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    I just created a thread for this topic. Give me a minute to fiddle with the posts here and see if I can move them over.
     
  17. wexton

    wexton
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    358
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    3,276
    Location:
    North Coast BC
    You are either XX or XY, nothing you do will ever change that.
     
  18. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    This is not going to be the best transition; I seem to recall the old setup for this board made it possible to move posts between threads. I can't find where to do that right now. Just to move some of the discussions here until Nett or Binary shows me what a technical idiot I am:

     
  19. tweetybird

    tweetybird
    Expand Collapse
    Experienced Idiot

    Reputation:
    30
    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    244
    Location:
    SF
    So to be super clear, this is the language standard as I currently understand it:

    XX and XY are biological fact. The terms we use to refer to those are male and female. However, those are not the only categories. There are other chromosomal and biological possibilities, and the term we use for those is intersex.

    Gender is a social definition. The terms we use to refer to that include man, woman, non-binary person, etc.

    So, the CDC would be both grammatically and scientifically correct in using the term "pregnant people" to refer biological females/havers of XX chromosomes.

    Look, I get it. As humans, when we are unfamiliar with new definitions and terms, our first instinct is to say, I don't like this! Shut it down! But ask yourself: who gains by shutting down inclusive terminology? And who truly loses?
     
  20. Dcc001

    Dcc001
    Expand Collapse
    New Bitch On Top

    Reputation:
    434
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,736
    Location:
    Sarnia, Ontario
    It never even occurred to me that flipping between the two words gave a connotation of anything; to me, they are interchangeable. Male/female is perhaps more clinical and man/woman implies a fully-grown adult, but in terms of WHO CAN BEAR CHILDREN, I'll stand by the notion that childbirth applies exclusively to women/females.

    I mean, they definitely are women, because they have functional uteruses (uteri?). Now, I'm sure they've undergone some kind of medical treatments and procedures that allow them to present otherwise. The fact that they've altered their appearances and adopted other affectations doesn't change that they are, in their biology, female.

    Again, to stress the point: I think society should accept them in whatever form they ask to be treated. And it should be a crime to target a transgendered person the same as it is to target a gay or a black person. The point I disagree with is that their biology is separate from their gender.