KJK opposing fertility treatment for gay couples

The important question for me when it comes to the new argument that people, even single people with no partners, should have a right to procreate is how many additional people are required to do certain things for this argued right to be achievable. (I don't believe any of us have a right to procreate, though I do believe that we should have the right not to procreate).

That's because those additional people (egg and sperm donors, the woman who gives nine months of her time and her uterus and who takes on serious health risks) also have rights and should not be forced either directly or indirectly (the world's poor women forced to become a breeder class for the wealthy due to absence of alternatives).

The risks to those other people differ. Sperm donors are unlikely to get sick or to die from donating sperm, though they may carry psychological costs, but egg donors may be taking on medical risks given the strong hormones they are given to get the multiple eggs to be matured and released. The greatest risks are to the surrogates.

Those are the groups we should centre in our debates. I see them rapidly becoming marginalised in actual public conversations.

You realise that she is not directly responsible for the tweets of others, yes?

I've always thought it was obvious what KJK is trying to achieve. Safety for women and girls.

You said you are against anonymous donors, and that the NHS shouldn’t be allowed to create babies who don’t know who their biological parents are. That strongly implies to anybody who doesn’t know the law in this area that the NHS can use anonymous donors. Perhaps this was accidental. Glad to have cleared it up 👍

I won’t get dragged into an argument on the impact of donor identities being known in full at 18. Suffice to say that there are paths to using donor sperm where the details known on the donor from the date of conception far, far outweigh the information that many children born by sexual intercourse will ever know about a parent. There are many choices to be made through the whole journey of conceiving and raising any child that can have all sorts of positive and negative impacts on them, and the blunt implication in your messages that donor children will be fucked up purely because they are donor children is both offensive and inaccurate.

Perhaps Sapphos could ask Mumsnet to edit the title to something less libellous?

Agree. Where do you get that statement from @SapphosRock because it’s certainly not from that, factual, tweet.

Oh yes, KJK is being interviewed by the police on Friday, isn't she? [Bites nails]

The thread title is, arguably, libellous.

All the best to KJK for the 24th. Jic she reads this.

Ah yes, of course stating facts make's her responsible for other people's homophobia. Go take it up with KJK, I'm sure she is more than able to give you an answer but that isn't really the point of this thread is it.

Ask her? Bit weird to ask Mumsnetters to speculate rather than just tweet her directly.

I’m gonna make a guess that her aim is to prevent women being used as wombs for hire or as a spare parts supplies resource.

Yep go on Twitter and ask her

we can’t speak for her and if you want the answer go and ask her

The WHO define infertility as follows:
‘Infertility is a disease of the male or female reproductive system defined by the failure to achieve a pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sexual intercourse.’

Lesbians couples cannot reproduce without the assistance of a male, but its not as a result of disease.

If a woman's husband had no sperm would she just pop out and find a donor and a syringe? Or would they seek proper medical fertility assistance.

I would imagine that once they have discovered the cause of the infertility they would consider their options and take least complicated route to conception, for some that will be donor sperm.

Sapphos, if you want to know what KJK thinks go onto Twitter and ask her. Posting here about it is manipulative. You know she is banned, and no one here is her mouthpiece.

Why don't you ask her? It may be in relation to something that has been posted about her, or an accusation, or even just a topical news item.

I would also like to point out though, that using donor eggs is exploiting women's bodies also.

I am still not sure where I stand on sperm.

I do support that a child who has a biological parent that is unknown to them should have the capacity to contact that parent in the future though. And that if possible, a 'sperm donor' has some kind of relationship with there child.

The testimonies of children of adoption, and donor situations have told us this should be carefully considered.

😆

So you're now manoeuvring from 'taking a swipe at lesbians' to 'tone deaf'?

It would be helpful Sapphos if you could tell us where you're going with this thread because 1) I've already spent far too long on social media for one day and 2) your analogy with infertility is seriously pissing me off.

Two women having a baby isn't a fertility issue. It's not having the right gametes.

But nice attempt at trying to make our KJK is homophobic 🙄

That’s not infertility 😂 Two men can be perfectly fertile and still not make a baby together, because thats nature. It’s the same reason a sock doesn’t get pregnant every time a man wanks into one!

Oh and also the NHS DOES NOT just give out IVF for free. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Sooo tempting to say 'educate yourself'.

I think you'll find straight couples with infertility spend a lot more money on IVF than lesbian couples. How many of my 10x ivf failures do you think the NHS funded, Sapphos?

KJK is, as usual, completely correct. She is simply stating a basic fact.

If someone manages to take offense at this, it is very much a problem with them and not her!

In short this is yet another, very boring, KJK hate thread. I swear her haters spend far more time thinking about her than I do and I'm full of admiration for her.
This

Being tone deaf isn't a crime.

You're being tone deaf to infertile women Sapphos but as one of those I'm not going to create an entire thread berating you about it.

while straight couples are routinely offered it for free

I think you are overestimating what the NHS actually funds.

Nothing ‘routine’ about it.