Advanced search

Sex-change men will soon be able to have babies

(53 Posts)

MNHQ have commented on this thread.

whoputthecatout Sat 04-Nov-17 18:22:14

Jesus wept. Is there no end to this insanity?

*Post edited by MNHQ*

GurlwiththeCurl Sat 04-Nov-17 18:31:11

I posted I posted a thread about this in AIBU this afternoon. It is madness, isn't it?

MadameJosephine Sat 04-Nov-17 18:31:16

I’m getting a warning when I click on that link that it may be an unsafe site

FlissMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 04-Nov-17 18:46:14

Hi There whoputthecatout, sorry to barge in like this but we just wanted to let you know we've edited your OP to remove the link as it did seem to be an unsafe site, Please feel free to re post a new link if you like.


theaveragewife Sat 04-Nov-17 18:53:22

It's ok, when the gender reformation bill passes 'trans' will no longer be considered an illness - so this procedure won't be covered on the NHS.

Unfortunately we will be fucked, but there's a positive in there somewhere.

whoputthecatout Sat 04-Nov-17 19:02:27

That's really odd Fliss: it's directly from today's Daily Telegraph. I tried the link again and it came straight up, same story as the print version. confused

Sorry Gurl: missed it in AIBU. As there is already a thread up there I won't bother with a new link here.

theaveragewife Sat 04-Nov-17 19:08:34

If you find the other thread, could you link to it here? I can't find it.

UrsulaPandress Sat 04-Nov-17 19:11:10

If only they could go through birth ........

JKR123 Sat 04-Nov-17 19:22:16

It is very

JKR123 Sat 04-Nov-17 19:27:11

Oops pressed post too soon. This is wrong on so many levels. It is comparable to Frankenstein. Do any of the people pushing this agenda ever give any thought to the children that will no doubt be affected by this?

DJBaggySmalls Sat 04-Nov-17 19:40:23

Heres the AIBU thread;

nauticant Sat 04-Nov-17 20:03:21

I read about this story this morning in The Times. That article stated that in the view of the relevant experts the current state of medical science means that this procedure could be carried out now. I simply don't believe it and I'd be willing to bet money on that.

For some reason, The Times chose to report apparent science fiction as science fact. When anyone with a scintilla of critical thought would do a massive chinny reckon. Odd.

theaveragewife Sat 04-Nov-17 20:04:14

Thank you DJBaggySmalls

DJBaggySmalls Sat 04-Nov-17 20:08:21

Its bonkers, isnt it. People are claiming its fake to discredit trans people, but trans activists on Twitter claim its already possible. I cant eyeroll enough.

IndominusRex Sat 04-Nov-17 20:57:36

Hey maybe if they do, then we will stop getting penalised in employment for being women of childbearing age because any man could bear children. Although I'm sure they'd find another reason to subjugate us.

BelaLugosisShed Sat 04-Nov-17 21:00:26

It's insane. I've been having arguments on twitter for months with Trans idiots who swear its already being done hmm when I ask the for actual evidence - surgeon/ hospital / who granted the licence etc. They can never provide any.
It's only been successful a handful of times with actual women and given that male bodies just aren't equipped for the physical changes of pregnancy, over and above the actual transplant issues, I cant see the Human fertilisation and embryology board granting licences for such outlandish experiments. Dead babies would be very bad PR too.

nauticant Sat 04-Nov-17 21:08:53

Now that, BelaLugosisShed, is exactly why my spidey-senses went haywire on reading The Times article about this "scientific breakthrough". I've also seen these bizarre claims by trans idiots, my common sense has said "nah, that's bollocks", and now we seem to have a made-up story that the trans idiots will go bonkers over and will repeat endlessly until it becomes The Truth. And anyone trying to explain how it's nonsense will be shot down by the mob.

Why the fuck would The Times willingly provide this ammunition?

PandaPieForTea Sat 04-Nov-17 21:09:22

What does this mean for the proposed opt-out organ donor system. I’m all for saving lives, improving quality of life etc, but not really happy about providing a womb.

MrsDustyBusty Sat 04-Nov-17 22:05:01

I'm sure it's possible to transplant a uterus. This is only one aspect of carrying a pregnancy to term though.

It's quite shocking how trivialised we have allowed pregnancy to become that this thing of "stick a uterus in him, give him a few hormone pills, it'll be fine" is apparently a thing.

CocoaXx Sat 04-Nov-17 22:37:55

Pregnancy and childbirth scares the hell out of men because it is something women do that they cannot. And as it stands, the law favours female parents over men because of historic ideals of caring and nurturing. There are some men who hate women for that.

Also, for over a hundred years, childbirth has become the preserve of medical men, rather than women, obstetricians and reproductive science has taken over from community knowledge held by women. This has made birth safer, as technology has advanced. But it has also eroded the idea that childbirth was an exclusively female sphere.

So you can create an embryo in a lab, but it still requires a womb to grow. Natural biological women have wombs; so if you can harvest a womb, and put it in a man, you theoretically don’t need women to have children. So the one thing which women can do and men cannot, which is both a source of oppression and power, disappears.

I find it amazing that men can hate women so much that co-opting their biological functions, whilst erasing the means of discussing this and the need for women themselves, seems a reasonable thing to do. But they clearly do hate women. The question is why? That is what I don’t understand.

UrsulaPandress Sat 04-Nov-17 22:40:16

Amen to that

misskelly Sat 04-Nov-17 22:55:47

Is there no end to this madness or pure stupidity. It takes more than a uterus to sustain a pregnancy. You need a fuck ton of hormones, god knowes how they could be administered.

I'm surprised the prolifers aren't furious about this too as the number of fetuses that would be lost or damaged trying to do this would be high.

It's a bit weird that you would want to put your unborn child through this, but maybe this is more a vanity project that hasn't been thought through or the real ethical elements to this crazy idea.

hipsterfun Sun 05-Nov-17 00:51:35

Oh yes, I bet it’s simply a case of popping in a uterus; no other finely orchestrated miracles of physiology or anything. Nope, nothing more to it than that. What could possibly go wrong?

Wormulonian Sun 05-Nov-17 12:34:10

Womb transplants for women are still pretty experimental/cutting edge. According to the link 5 have been carried out successfully in France with the first soon to be tried in the UK.

Thetoothyteeth Sun 05-Nov-17 12:44:46

I haven't read about this yet (will read article in a minute) but i can see it happening. If not very soon, at least in our lifetimes. Regenerative medicine and tissue engineering are vastly expanding fields - so they may not even need a transplant eventually. Wakefield institute have already lab grown lots of genital tissues that can be tailored for compatibility.

It's also interesting to see the donations given to and the progress made by groups such as 'Foregen' who are utilising tissue engineering to reverse male circumcision. Sad when you think of all the millions of the girls and women who have had their clitorises removed and could also benefit from this type of research, much more than a man who is missing 10% of his 'parts'. Because even though work has been done to reverse fgm it doesn't get the same investment as male issues.

Buckle up ladies.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: