Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

TW and IVF

68 replies

CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 08:51

I'm pondering...
Would this be a surefire test of how indoctrinated a person is.

Say for example my DH John has decided he is now a woman. As TWAW (or so they would have us believe) he has decided he wants to carry a baby. So he is going to contact the IVF clinics and undergo the hormones, the egg harvesting etc.

If, upon hearing this story a person replies "but no, John can't undergo IVF!"...

Can I then say "ah but that reply makes you a T*RF in the eyes of the TWAW movement"

Is this a potentially peaking example?

I'm trying to think of a way to .. not even challenge friends, but to highlight the ludicrous nature of the TWAW brigade.

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 30/07/2023 10:27

Then, of course, you could say John doesn't have a uterus so can't conceive and bear a child. They might say some women don't have a (functioning) uterus, either. This is true, even if it's very rare.

So IVF might not be the best route for John but he's still a real woman. And you're a bigot.

That's how it works.

No women produce sperm though. A lot of these men have already fathered children pre "transition."

Muckysmucky · 30/07/2023 10:27

Sorry but that’s such a childish argument. It would also get very easily closed down in that John has no functioning uterus and ovaries the same as lots of other women who require fertility treatment and so they are all seeking help from the clinic.

I’ve seen lots of arguments about how having the female body parts doesn’t define womanhood else women post hysterectomy would cease to be women.

You can’t argue like that with Trans ideology

Original poster
CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 10:24

@ApocalipstickNow @Usedtolikefood @CaramelMac @Rightsraptor apologies if I've missed anyone
You all make valid points and I see how the argument can be made for John still being a woman!

Thank you all, it was something I had been thinking about and I can see where gaps around my logic can be found

OP posts:
Original poster
CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 10:22

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.

I have one extremely intelligent and empathetic friend who has a colleague who is a transwoman and she says that in her opinion this person is a woman.
I value her friendship greatly and was surprised

OP posts:
CaramelMac · 30/07/2023 09:30

It wouldn’t work because they seem to think that a woman is “feminine” rather than the type of body that can bear children, so lipstick and earrings = woman, but pregnant = could be either male or female depending on what is in their email signature.

Rightsraptor · 30/07/2023 09:28

They'd just say that not all women can get pregnant in the conventional way (true, as we know) so John is the same as one of those women. But still a woman. Do you think that women who need help conceiving aren't women? No, you don't, I'm sure. So John is a woman who can't conceive but is still a woman. Every bit as much a woman as you are.

Then, of course, you could say John doesn't have a uterus so can't conceive and bear a child. They might say some women don't have a (functioning) uterus, either. This is true, even if it's very rare.

So IVF might not be the best route for John but he's still a real woman. And you're a bigot.

That's how it works.

Weflewinstyle · 30/07/2023 09:28

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.

Usedtolikefood · 30/07/2023 09:27

CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 09:13

Ah ok I see what you mean.

But I'm thinking more of my friend Susan saying TWAW and me saying "yes indeed they are. In fact John is now a woman and he's going for IVF next week. We always wanted a third baby so it's his turn to carry"
Then I'm imagining the look of shock on Susan's face as she stutters "but that won't work, it's a waste of money, John can't carry a baby "
And I innocently say "oh really? Why not? He's a woman now"

Cue the cognitive dissonance

Show quote history

They’ll just say, ‘Not all women can have babies and they are still women’.

There is enough real life craziness in this movement without having to invent things that are not happening.

ApocalipstickNow · 30/07/2023 09:24

I’m not sure it works because in the topsy-turvy world of Gender Believers bodies aren’t as important as “essences/souls/feelings” (whatever) and therefore some women have penises some men have uteruses and some don’t. So your husband would be a woman without a womb and then you’d get a lecture about not all women have a uterus/don’t define people by their body parts etc and you’d never get a sensible answer.

Thighdentitycrisis · 30/07/2023 09:23

@MrsFButton I like that!

MrsFButton · 30/07/2023 09:20

I was thinking the other day that a simple response to TWAW might be "Oh okay, am I a trans woman then? No? Why not?"

Original poster
CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 09:13

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.

Ah ok I see what you mean.

But I'm thinking more of my friend Susan saying TWAW and me saying "yes indeed they are. In fact John is now a woman and he's going for IVF next week. We always wanted a third baby so it's his turn to carry"
Then I'm imagining the look of shock on Susan's face as she stutters "but that won't work, it's a waste of money, John can't carry a baby "
And I innocently say "oh really? Why not? He's a woman now"

Cue the cognitive dissonance

OP posts:
Weflewinstyle · 30/07/2023 09:10

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.

Original poster
CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 09:09

TangledRoots · 30/07/2023 09:03

You could say “Have you heard about this new surrogacy agency opening, where all the surrogates are trans women?”.

Act all doe eyed and waffle on about how amazing the science is these days.

🤣 oh the wonders of modern science

OP posts:
Original poster
CatandSpoon · 30/07/2023 09:08

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.

It's not an analogy. If TW are actually women, then why should they not attend IVF clinics? Biological women do. So it's the next "logical" step. Men are now "chest feeding" babies. Why can they not become pregnant? If TW are women then...

OP posts:
Florissante · 30/07/2023 09:05

TangledRoots · 30/07/2023 09:03

You could say “Have you heard about this new surrogacy agency opening, where all the surrogates are trans women?”.

Act all doe eyed and waffle on about how amazing the science is these days.

Ha. I like that.

TangledRoots · 30/07/2023 09:03

You could say “Have you heard about this new surrogacy agency opening, where all the surrogates are trans women?”.

Act all doe eyed and waffle on about how amazing the science is these days.

Weflewinstyle · 30/07/2023 08:57

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.