Famous men and surrogacy

GardenMan1 - I don't have any friends who have bought babies, no. Given I fundamentally disagree with surrogacy, that would be a bit hypocritical of me, no?

We are talking about surrogacy because there is a big push to make commercial surrogacy legal in the U.K.

I don't think that is in the best interests of the babies who are created to order or for the women who are putting their health at risk to bear children for those who can't or won't do it themselves.

Children are not commodities to be bought and sold.

GardenMan - any bloke who continues to use misogynistic slurs on the feminism board deserves to be ignored. Plenty of previous threads around here on surrogacy, feel free to educate yourself before bothering to continue pontificating. Bye.

MintyMabel, premie babies weren't conceived with the express purpose of immediate and complete separation from their mother. Premie babies usually have their parents visiting, talking to them, kangaroo care holds, sometimes expressed breast milk. Premie babies usually still have the woman who birthed them close by. The key is that decisions about being separated from mum are done in the baby's best interest, not because they were commissioned solely to fulfill another adult's desires. Premie mum's aren't celebrating not being able to do the 4th trimester things with their baby. Its about prioritizing the baby's needs.

Lol, not immediately submitting to your scolding =/= angry. Feel free to fuck off tho!

Laughs loudly and longly!
Good luck all!

Hi GardenMan, welcome to the feminism and women's rights board, where mansplainy males get their arses handed to them.

Hi all ... I've just read the comments above and it seems that there's a lack of acknowledgement that men in general can also be parents.
Just silly, so silly. Not a strong start. Men can be parents, they cannot be mothers, they cannot birth babies - they can only share them with, or take them from, women.
We don't do fawning caveats.

Some might even think that there's a slightly anti-male flavour in the thread.
if you read pro women and children as anti male, that says more about you than us, mate.

Unresolved anger perhaps?
Patronising misogyny much?

Additionally, the dismissal of gay-males as parents is homophobic.
They are not mothers. They are shit parents if they think removing a newborn baby from the only connection she has ever known is a triumph.

Perhaps even more importantly, I'm curious to know if those of you who have voiced such anti-Surrogacy views, have ever actually met a surrogate, or met parents whose child has been born through surrogacy, or indeed an actual person who was born through surrogacy?
I'm curious about why this is the more important question. Have you met any of the women forced into birthing farms in India or Nigeria? Maybe you've spoken with the family who lost their wife and mother to surrogacy (linked upthread)? You don't get to white wash exploiting women's bodies and trafficking their babies here.

Of course, each of us is entitled to our opinions on any matter. However, righteous indignation that lacks any meaningful experience of an issue, simply comes across as prejudice and discrimination against people whose lifestyles we don't understand. Thus, such opinion is ignorant and offensive.
We aren't ignorant just because you say we are dude. And implying that we should have an appropriate emotional response is manipulative bullshit.

she had been ripped from her mother's breast at birth. So she won't be getting breast milk which is the best start for her she won't be snuggled with her mum which is what all babies want for the first year of life

You realise this is the experience of many babies born sick or premature? And that many of those mothers are unable to breastfeed for a period of time, if ever.

You can have a problem with surrogacy, but don't you dare suggest that what happens to families all over the world, through no fault of their own, often in circumstances which are very traumatic will inevitably cause some kind of long term problem for the child. That's an added level of guilt preemie parents should never be expected to live with.

RedtoothBrush .. it's ironic that you're doing the very thing you're spouting with your trojan horses and straw men .... Happen much?
NOtTonight: I agree with your definition of exploitation, but argue that it doesn't apply to UK surrogacy, hence the questions I'm repeatedly asking around people's actual exposure to surrogate families.

Completed the consultation with the help of Nordic Model Now:

nordicmodelnow.org/2019/08/30/how-to-respond-to-the-uk-surrogacy-consultation-in-10-easy-minutes/

Anger is just another emotion and a very necessary one at times. Many people are angry that women's wombs and children are seen as commodities that can be bought and sold. I don't think your "aha'... angry women!" is the "gotcha!" you think it is.

Ah I see Garden when women care about other women and children we are angry and I assume should shut up and stop being so difficult?

There is no homophobia here, if you can't see that then it is wilful.

There does seem to be an incredible amount of anger in this thread. If you can't see it then it's willful.

As for the outrage at my mention of homophobia, I find it interesting that that is the main aspect of my much longer comment that you've chosen to argue against.
Have any of you actually had any contact surrogate families?
Do any of you actually know anything about the surrogacy process here in the UK?

Here are some examples of the anti-male stance on page 1 of this thread:
... She will then be brought up by two men who have bought her essentially and can have no maternal feelings towards her and no knowledge of what it is to grow up female.
... for example Tyra Banks - in her announcement said 'As we thank the angel of a woman that carried our miracle baby boy for us' - the baby and the mother both celebrated and the mother gratefully thanked. Vs. made invisible - the baby packed up in a box and wheeled away and no mention of the woman who risked her life to bring her into the world.
... picture made me so sad for the baby- selfish people who put their own wants before a baby's needs!!!! That poor soul just wants its mother.
... The picture really fucking annoyed me. A baby being removed from her mother at birth by men.
... Not that I think for a moment in this selfish consumer society we live in now that we will. If the men want to buy themselves a baby then that will be enabled.
... Stop using women.
... I don't know why they chose this image either, they aren't even cuddling her or anything, just wheeling her away from the woman who gave birth to her like a prize they have won at a fair or something.
It does seem like the need to be woke about gay men and surrogacy absolutely trumps the very obvious issues with it though.

Oh look a rainbow trojan horse which makes a straw man argument by shouting 'bigot!' to close down discussion of the subject.

To say that being against surrogacy =homophobic and there is no debate, ignores the fundamental rights of women and children in the process of asserting men's rights above women and children.

Honestly it's as if we've not seen this problem with the Rainbow MRAs before...

You might want to read some of the previous threads on surrogacy @GardenMan1 as we have discussed many of these issues exhaustively.

The 4th trimester should be with the mother. If it's with anyone else it can't really be considered a 4th trimester can it?

I agree KettlePolly and NotTonight.

My anti-surrogacy views are not anti-Male or homophobic GardenMan because I centre the child, mother and egg donor in my views.

I do think that surrogacy needs to be more regulated, similar to adoption, and we have seen that fail with the recent case of Elsie Skully Hicks. Men and women can be terrible parents. I know one single mother who has had 5 of her children removed and she is pregnant again. I know a gay couple (men) who dote on their child. I know an excellent single mother who had her child with an open sperm donor.

The consultation deals specifically with the laws around surrogacy and my response is not based on any anger issues, what an odd thing to assume.

It's totally obfuscating my original comment to have only picked up on the reference I made to homophobia.
Nurturing and care of a baby through the fourth trimester (and beyond) requires a loving adult; a child's primary caregiver does not necessarily have to be female.
You use the term 'exploitation' as if your opinion is fact. You also bandy about the terms 'for sale or rent' ... do you know anything about surrogacy in the UK??

It's one of those situations where I've changed my view over the years. It seems perfectly benevolent and nice all round... But who's needs are being met? The adults. The child's needs just are not paramount. Adoptees can find it distressing later in life to not have knowledge or a relationship with birth mother and as surrogacy is comparatively new we just don't know what the long term affect this will have on the babies as they grow in adults, and no one cares sufficiently to put a halt on the practice, because the adults needs are so profound (and primary).

Of course gay men are just as loving and capable as any other parent. Of course the children are loved. I feel the same unease at women who have a baby on their own via anonymous sperm donor. It's making a decision to remove a biological parent from their lives and these things do matter otherwise no adoptee would seek out their birth parents and we know many do.