Jump to content

Can a man get pregnant?


emprworm
 Share

Recommended Posts

You've heard the news, right?  A pregnant man is being blasted all over the web and on newspapers.

Cmon, are people really so gullible?  I feel like this world is in the parable of the naked king who wasn't wearing clothes, yet everyone "pretended" he had clothes on.

I really found it humorous as I was reading and noticing how all the coverage about this person used masculine words such as "him" and "his" when referring to this pregnant individual, I literally laughed at the absurdity of it all.  I was reminded of the parable of the naked king whom everyone declared had clothes on, even though it was so obvious he did not.  The truth is that there was never a pregnant man; there was only a pregnant woman.  Excluding rare cases of genetic defects, men have XY chromosomes and women have XX (for my discussion, I am not addressing the defects of extra chromosomes on the 23rd pair). 

I hold firmly to the scientific position that, if you have XX chromosomes, you are a woman, you will always be a woman, and neither surgery, nor subjective reasoning, nor "gender reassignment", nor societal redefining will change that fact.  If you have XX chromosomes, you are, and will always be, until the moment of death, a female.  When you read about a

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's rather besides the point, but what if you have a mixture of XX and XY? Do you take a majority vote?

And how do you address someone who is XX but prefers clothes marketed for men, with a hairstyle marketed for men, who for all intents and purposes looks like a man, and given the choice of two prefers that identity? Sneer all you like, but you're going to use male pronouns. If they ever happen to mention that they have XX chromosomes, why do you suddenly need to start she-ing and her-ing the guy all of a sudden?

The fact is that while sex involves a number of biological states and processes, not all of which intersect at any given point, gender is a socially assigned role, and there is no need to try and impose essentialist framework on top of this. There are enough people out there for whom the conventional gender binary simply doesn't work. Recognising that the gender assigned at birth (and yeah, this isn't always obvious) is inconsistent with a person's gender identity is a step towards treating people as people, not as categories.

Another incidental point: in the UK and a number of other places, including several US states, gender reassignment is legally recognised.

I agree the media gets very crazy over transpeople, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's rather besides the point, but what if you have a mixture of XX and XY? Do you take a majority vote?

that is a completely seperate point.  genetic defects are NOT in play for the woman with XX chromosomes who is pregnant and calling herself a man.  if you want to talk about genetic defects on the 23rd chromosome pair, thats fine.  but id really like to talk about people who are genetically healthy, with normal XX or XY chromosomes, males and females, who attempt to cross-gender themselves even though their DNA is fully defined.

XY = male

XX = female   

the science is cut and dry.  people can try to trick themselves into thinking they are the oppositte gender, but DNA will always say otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The science is not cut and dry. The fact that there exist several 'nonstandard' chromosome configurations demonstrates this. If you don't want to talk about it, I'm not going to force you to, but your chromosomal fixation seems more than a little arbitrary if you won't. Oh, and intersex births without any chromosomal anomaly are certainly not unheard of.

"but DNA will always say otherwise."

DNA is DNA. There's no little instructions telling people they must wear dresses or trousers or use masculine pronouns in languages that have them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, this is an argument based on semantics.  Let me present my opinion in a specific manner, so as to avoid confusion.

Genetically, a man is a man and a woman is a woman.  If they choose to have gender reassignment through surgery or otherwise, then that's fine.  Society will adapt to this change by dubbing them by a different title, but no amount of operations or hormone replacement will change the fact that they are genetically either male or female.

To this end, I am infuriated by the media's portrayal of "miracle male pregnancies".  It's a complete misnomer - a mix-up in terminology.  The person who is pregnant may be classified by society as a male (and I am in no way saying that this is wrong), but they are not genetically so.

What makes me mad is that the press make it seem like a genetically male human being is having a baby.  It's not until you read the article that they grudgingly admit that the person used to be a woman.  They make only a passing reference (in most cases) that the person is still genetically female, with female sexual organs, thus a uterus and the ability to get pregnant.

Let me be extra clear: I am completely supportive of people who wish to change their gender, by dressing differently or using pills or having operations performed on their bodies, cosmetic or otherwise.  The only thing I oppose is that either these people (or the press reporting on them) try to fob off on us the ludicrous notion that a genetically male human being can become pregnant.  It's not quite a lie, because of semantics, but these people (or, again, the press) take advantage of that.  It's no better than saying that a woman got another woman pregnant, because she just happens to have a penis.  Oh, and she's still genetically male... but of course, that would be a minor detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dragoon and Nema hit the nail on the head, although I think Dragoon used slightly confusing language. The Way I see it, and it is a view which has been investigated by an anthropologist called Rubin Gayle (or Gayle Rubin, it's been a while), Males and Females are born genetics and genitals play their part and help us define that. There are certain grey areas but in general It is quite clear cut. Men, women, Boys and girls are a completely thing, they are the social construct which Dragoon alluded to.

In short men can get pregnant, males can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On terminology, 'she-man' and other similar terms are gerally used in order to be derogatory.

The consistent, aceped terminology is:

The man in question is a transman or ftM (female to male). The 'reverse' is transwoman or mtF. Trans individuals who do not identify with any gender are genderqueer, while individuals born with conflicting physical and/or chromosomal characteristics (e.g. indeterminate genitalia) are intersex, irrespective of their gender identity. Individuals of one gender who also ocasionally decide to present as the other gender, but do not desire to live as that gender are transvestites. Individuals whose birth/asigned gender matches their gender identity are cisgendered.

Sexuality is determined from the viewpoint of the assumed, i.e. target gender, so a transman married to a cis woman is straight, as is his wife, regardless of whether the man has had Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One note: Bodies are just bags of meat. If we had unlimited tech/power, we could perfectly well take an individual with the 23rd pair defining him as a male and give him all the organs required for pregnancy. Hence, it is hypothetically possible. Also, extreme mutation that still leaves the 23rd pair in a state defining the individual as male yet resulting in the growth of organs that could facilitate pregnancy is also possible.

Of course, people here seem to be excluding mutation/genetic damage/whatever and are also probably excluding other modifications.

Bleh... not much to say but thought I would post anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's a lesbian who had a sex change but kept her her womanly innards.  So what?

Anyway, I've read some articles about her and her wife, she likes to walk around with a t-shirt with "Define Normal" plastered across her torso.  She and her wife seem to be a pair of militant gays.  Some people seem to think their sexuality defines who they are, rather than just being a small part of who they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'd think that people involved in the newspaper industry would know more than to just read a headline and take it for the ultimate truth  :P (when often headlines and initial paragraphs can basically be utterly false with important details being sneaked in later on).

You would at least think that they would actually check what they copy  :P ;D.

Probably more likely they knew the nonsense of the story and decided to copy it in order to take advantage (as the first newspaper did) anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...