Anyone fancy co-parenting with LOJ?

strongly dislike how OJ seems to equate mtf transitioners with infertile women

That was simply his fall back excuse having been found out. He's not really thinking for himself...he's relying entirely on 'party' one-liners; as do all gender ideologues.

It's really nasty and offensive.

“he still thinks he’s the cleverest boy in 6th form”.

I doubt he ever was.

I strongly dislike how OJ seems to equate mtf transitioners with infertile women

That was simply his fall back excuse having been found out. He's not really thinking for himself...he's relying entirely on 'party' one-liners; as do all gender ideologues.

However, I strongly dislike how some trans activists seem to appropriate the struggles of infertile women for their own ends

.....along with the struggles of other groups too........everything is appropriated.

It's just, whatever THEY say must be evil and so let's find any old argument to say why, even if it directly contradicts what we said last week.

A post from BuntingEllacott last week was very illuminating - this is about creating a group and 'othering' anyone who is not in it. To paraphrase (and hope I've not messed it up): The language, buzzwords, mantras, flags, symbols, etc are all identifiers. They don't actually mean much or have to be true, they just have to be displayed so that members of the group can tell who is 'one of them' and who is 'one of us'. It's about displaying allegiance and affirming the group.

So OJ can tell us we are transphobes one week for wanting to observe the word 'lesbian' to mean 'woman', and then use the word 'lesbian' to mean what he wants the next week but he retains, in his mind, the right side of history at all times, because he knows he is on the right side.

I suppose it's the same as Damian Barr making a horrible joke about a transwoman's failed suicide attempt. He gets a pass and remains on the right side of history because he's in the right group. No matter what Damian Barr says he will never be described as a transphobe because he knows to chant the right slogans and show public contrition as penance, etc.

JKRowling makes a mild joke about the word 'woman' and has her books burned. Effigies of women are hung in Spain, and everybody shrugs. Graffitti on a wall in Spain and someone comes on a UK feminist board to berate us for it, somehow.

Probably purely coincidental that most of the ones on the 'right side' are males.

(FWIW of course there isn't a 'right side' of history. History isn't a binary, it's not even a fucking spectrum, it's a big old uneven mess that changes as we even look at it from different angles. Simplistic nonsense like this is what gets us into these messes )

Edgeofacoin
I totally agree. Everything about woman is appropriated. Fertility struggles equated as the same and being able to get pregnant, c*s privilege... ffs.

I strongly dislike how OJ seems to equate mtf transitioners with infertile women. Many men transition later in life, after they have been married and have children. How is this in anyway comparable to the heartbreak of a woman who desperately wants her own children but can't? I've been to the conception boards on Mumsnet. I've had friends and family members go through IVF. A male body that cannot gestate and bear a child is normal. Unless there is an issue with sperm production, it is not infertile!

Similarly, an ftm transitioner who may have had a hysterectomy and is unable to impregnate a female partner is not an infertile male.

I do not mean to be flippant and I hope this post does not get deleted, but the ludicrousness of this occurred to me yesterday. Cats are not infertile penguins because they are unable to birth penguins. Crocodiles are not infertile lions because they can't hatch lions. Elephants are not infertile hamsters etc.

Yet saying a male-bodied person is like 'other infertile women' is not treated with the same level of incredulity that I think it deserves.

I want to make clear that I have every sympathy for someone who is struggling with their gender dysphoria. I especially feel for those people who transitioned young and who gave up their fertility via puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. However, I strongly dislike how some trans activists seem to appropriate the struggles of infertile women for their own ends.

And what irritates me. Having just looked at his Twitter.

Is his unashamed rewriting of what he said

What he said was awful. Hypothetical and totally horrible about lesbians.

Those who follow him say yes those who objected are transpobic homophobic bastards.

They can see what he said! How does it work then?

I am continually trying to understand other views. Constantly thinking. Have they got a point? Why are they saying this? What is the driver? Am I wrong?

Gay men were notable on the responses to the original thing he said. Saying this is bang out of order.

How do people not notice this and think, hold on. Why is he saying that? What have I missed.

But they don't. It's weird tbh. Confirmation bias writ large.

I have to thank MN again for hosting this open conversation.

How much research is being done on how to get females to ejaculate semen in a way that could impregnate a female?

Out of interest...

It also contains ethinylestradiol and acts (though no longer prescribed as) a contraceptive; it comes with similar warnings re pregnancy and feminisation of male foetuses.

Now waiting for the ‘paper’ from our usual suspect that this is the future and will be the über-transmedicine to replace puberty blockers. They will employ Layla Moran to see into the soul of the embryo so no mistakes are made. 🤓

The responses are polarised.

It's how everything now is, it seems.

I do read the things linked etc and keep thinking, have I missed something? What are others seeing that I am not? Why do some people I think are sensible have different thoughts to me.

There must be some of that the other way but I think that the internet especially Twitter really suppress that.

The thing I'm finding really interesting at the moment is the constant co-opting of the language/ ideas/ arguments of other movements/ issues with seemingly without a second thought

And the way they just get dropped and moved onto the next one.

On the thread in question there's some stuff about the criticism being exclusionary to infertile women. But I thought the words had to be, people with (functional?) uteruses, women and trans men, menstruators etc.

But then he says hunting for broody lesbians (thus indicating that lesbians are female, same sex attracted, and also overlooking that some lesbians are infertile) and suddenly all the women going ??? are using the wrong language and somehow excluding infertile women...???

There's no logical consistency.

It's just, whatever THEY say must be evil and so let's find any old argument to say why, even if it directly contradicts what we said last week.

Impossible to argue really.

The number of gay men and lesbians saying it was dehumanising was good to see.

The response from many was 'it's a joke'... Okaayyyy.

I’m feeling a teeny bit guilty for enjoying all this. Ok, I’m lying, not feeling guilty one bit.

Whenever I hear mention of lil OJ, I remember a comment by a very smart and funny MNer, saying “he still thinks he’s the cleverest boy in 6th form”.

Any update from LOJ suggesting he may have realised what an utterly inappropriate tweet that was? Or more whining at having been challenged for it?

I think this thread has been totally derailed hasn't it?

And away from the tweet about 'hunting broody lesbians'.

Thanks for the link Errol.

So it seems Spiro is the actual blocker used by some transwomen!

It makes no sense that women on this medication are told, very strictly, not to become pregnant. And to wait months after coming off it before trying to conceive.

How would that work with transwomen? The same rules should apply. They either stay on it and risk harming a baby. Or come off it and their body producing testosterone harms the baby.

I can't get my head around it!

'
Yes. I remember this. It was posted on another thread fairly recently. I think it was also something about male breastfeeding too when Spiro was involved that caused issues.'

But WHY? Why this ongoing desire to replicate (usually badly) what an enormous % of women on the planet are capable of (and do) at some point in their lives?

The answer is- because some men want to. It's not fixing a problem. It's fraught with ethical issues. And look at what happened with formula. The assumption that it was easy to copy. The arrogance.

Meanwhile over the world pregnancy and childbirth which cause a host of issues for women- mental health, physical health. Are seen as, well women do it every day that's what they're for. It has risks that's the nature of it. (more or less).

www.verywellhealth.com/testosterone-blockers-for-transgender-women-4582221

I suppose it's seen at the moment in the surrogacy arguments. The fact that only women can grow babies is a bit of a problem. It reduces the freedom of some people to have babies.

To be able to get babies without the interference, necessity of a woman would be really good.

In fact the whole mother business can be a PITA, with their opinions on lots of things around children being given too much weight.

If babies could be grown in jars, a la brave New world, what would happen in society?

I assume transwomen take testosterone suppressants? (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong). It was stressed so much that you absolutely should not get pregnant when on Spironolactone, because it causes birth defects in baby boys. I think their penis doesn't develop properly, amongst other risks. You have to come off the medication for months before trying to conceive. Same with Minoxidil, a foam you rub on your scalp to stimulate hair growth. Birth defects have been reported the same as with Spiro, because it's an anti-androgen.

Yes. I remember this. It was posted on another thread fairly recently. I think it was also something about male breastfeeding too when Spiro was involved that caused issues.

I will see if I can find it.

For men to unlock the reproductive power that they have resented us and needed us for, forever.

And what about the ethics for experimenting on unborn children? Are posters who post this stuff prepared to also take on the responsibility for allowing unborn children to be experiment ‘material’.

I was wondering about that too. All that risk, just for... what?

I also note that the experiments around artificial wombs involve animals.

There's no way that a womb transplant into a male would be tried on humans first.

So that's a lot of animal experimentation which is not really necessary, given that it's not solving a medical issue. IE males not being able to grow babies is not an abnormality etc.

Just thought, what happened to the trans human crew or whatever they were called. The cyborg people.