Is this parody? I hope it is. (Reproductive rights for people with testicles. What?)

Well, that if everyone adopted regardless of their ability to have children then the biological link wouldn't exist and we'd all gave children on the same terms as people who want children but not in the way nature intended for them.

They think that having kids is some kind of civic function to stock a kiddie supermarket, and anyone can then go pick one, regardless?

When I read these young TW I am often left with the impression of very angry, unreasonable, deluded, narcissistic men (and they do sound like men) with a bucket load of mental health problems. I don't know whether the mental health issues are caused by feeling different at an early age and the attendant issues or whether gender dysphoria is more likely for people with delicate mental health?

But yes Luna comes across as completely bonkers and I can't help feeling a cold dose of reality would help her much more than "validating her womanhood "

I was a bit confused about whether the author thought that having used the sperm of a man to become pregnant and gestate a baby I'm now a father, but apparently not. The Facebook discussion suggests they want uterine implants.

I don't think they get that a uterus won't just host a baby without a load of supporting biology.

But there again, they also seem to think that everyone should adopt to even the situation out between trans people and everyone else regarding having children in the manner that your biology dictates. Good old useful children. They don't speculate on where these children should come from.

Sort of like this, you mean?

Like that!

I went down a bit of a rabbit hole reading the gender critical version of that article but came across this fantastic term in the comments section:
Manomenon: An act of which a woman can say something, but it has no credibility until a male says or experiences it

I think I went over this with my son when he wa about 5, ds: " mummy, will I be able to grow a baby in my tummy when I grow up?"
Me: "No darling, only ladies can do that, but you can be a daddy"
Ds: "ok"

They really do have an article about marginalising disabled asexual people

Which I have just read and will summarise as:-

"Some people with physical disabilities experience sexual desire and enjoy acting upon that desire- just as some fully abled people do.

Some people with physical disabilities aren't in the least bit interested in sex- just as some fully -abled people aren't.

All of which is fine and basically it's fine to want to have sex and it's fine to not want to have sex and , other than the person with whom one is having sex, it's really no-one else's business."

About 10th of the words and, even if I say so myself, infinitely more coherent.

Iirc if IVF produce more viable embryos than can be implanted, the couple must choose whether to pay for storage and periodically renew and pay if so.

It's not a surprise that a 17 year old didn't know this / what is a surprise is that no one brought these points up to give a full picture before agreeing to posting this about "centring"

And freezing eggs/Sperm/embryos:cord blood etcis expensive. There has to be fail safes.medical privacy. Guaranteed Safeguarding of sample identity etc clinically clean conditions.

Apparently it is also cissexist to ascribe a sex identity to a child until it is old enough to decide for itself. Seriously. Referring to a fetus / baby / toddler as a boy or a girl is discriminatory.

So sad that many valid points on the real discrimination that transpeople face are hidden amongst this deluded whine-arsery.

If this adolescent wasn't listening in biology class and the doctor did not explain the major side effect then the doctor is a bit shit.

Otherwise I agree with Lass about the point at which the writing should have stopped.

Read it and weep:

www.salon.com/2014/10/15/a_transgender_mom_becomes_working_mother_of_the_year/

You'd be forgiven, in this ridiculous fawning article, for thinking that Meghan was a single mother i.e. had a child via a surrogate who was contracted similarly to what this other idiot thinks feminists should be promoting (volunteering for...?) . And in a way, Meghan did. Meghan's wife was the surrogate. Yes, Meghan's children's natural mother gets not one single mention. She's completely erased from the story. But I'm sure she comes in handy while Meghan goes about being an important marketing executive.

The (very!) gender critical version:

twanzphobic.wordpress.com/2014/10/16/glass-ceiling-not-a-problem-for-working-mother-of-the-year-2014/

Fucking hell.

They really do have an article about marginalising disabled asexual people. Sorry, Slugs, I thought you were joking.

Listen up people! Apparently showing off your baby photos is cissexist! Who knew?

I fell down the Everyday Feminism rabbit hole after reading the original article and found all sorts of whatthefuckery. Is the "everyday" in the name supposed to be ironic?

I am currently on the mount everest of peaks

Life of Brian was my first thought opening this thread too :)

Sorry that was for whatdoIget

Not in the slightest offended, the nearest I've got to a giggle all day.

But I think it might be my peakiest trans.