to be offended by this T-shirt?

[parklife1]

I saw a post on social media today. It was about two gay men becoming fathers of twins via surrogate. There was a picture of the two men in "DAD" T-shirts. The pregnant surrogate stood in between them with a T-shirt saying "NOT THE MOMMA".

I'm not even against surrogacy perse, but I found this picture offensive.

I understood why she was wearing it - she wanted to display that she doesn't want to have a mothering role in the children's life.

I still think it's a slap in the face of women, we go through so much during pregnancy and labour. Giving birth can be life-threatening, I lost 2.1 litres of blood during my first birth and 1 litre of blood during my second birth.

Many women have postpartum depression after birth and the hormones are on a roller-coaster.

My body will be forever marked by giving birth (stretch marks, C-section scar, mum tum).

To me this picture is just offensive, because it sort of portrays women and our bodies as a commodity.

AIBU?

Because that would be nonsense. About 90% of negative commentary about surrogacy is focused on examples of gay couples, even though they only make up about one third of cases of surrogacy.

Why do you think that is?

I would hazard a guess that we only talk about ones that are published in the media for some reason - famous people, or those who post distasteful photos on social media. People who quietly buy a human and get on with their lives, we have no way of knowing about.

I think that gay men are maybe more open about surrogacy because there is no expectation that they can birth children.

There are expectations on women about the ability to conceive and carry babies. There can be a strong sense of shame if they are unable to do this or even don't want to.

Therefore gay men are likely to attract more publicity and therefore criticism regarding surrogacy.

But this is again focusing on adult wants rather than what is best for babies.

There is no problem with a child having two Dads. They may be brilliant parents. The problem with surrogacy is that it is arranged to intentionally deprive a baby of its mother.* *Gay men who want to become parents can consider adoption or perhaps a co-parenting arrangement with a woman. Nobody (whatever their sex and orientation) should be paying someone else to make them a baby, because babies should not be commodities.

I didn't know sperm donors gestate babies (and give them away).

That's great, except it's not, because people here are anti surrogacy for all, not anti-gay dads. Had they adopted or had a previous child, nobody would care. It's surrogacy they object to.

I meant, it's a quote from a TV show so I can't get worked up by it.

I think what should be paramount is the CHILD.
The wishes & feelings of that child as they get older.
The fundamental right to know your parents (ALL of them, if birth & adopted)
so you know (all of) who you are which is very important developmentally.

The 'rights' and wishes of the adults are usually talked about but rarely the child.

After much thought, I had Icsi IVF as my husband turned out to be sub-fertile.
He was clear he didn't want to adopt as both his cousins were &, despite their adoptive parents being lovely people, they'd both found it hard at times.
I was clear that I would only 'do IVF' if we were using our own genetic material only. That is because I never knew my Father (& it was handled v badly) so I didn't want that for any child I helped to create. We all bring our experiences to the table but I do think the rights of the child (who will grow up) are overlooked.

And 'baby ownership' T-shirts are surely crass whichever way you look at it.

I find everything about surrogacy offensive so a tshirt is the least of it

I explained where the 66% comes from.

straight couples make up two third of people in the UK using surrogacy.

so if opposition to surrogacy is genuinely blind to sexuality then we should see two thirds of negative views of surrogacy arise in respect of straight couples.

and yet it is the case that whenever an example is given of a specific case of surrogacy that people want to oppose it is almost always gay men, despite them making up only about a third of surrogacy cases.

why is that?

I see. So you just think gay people are more likely to post ‘distasteful photos’.

Lol it's not about you

Any woman wearing that t-shirt is more than likely to have had a choice in becoming a surrogate. She's unlikely to have been exploited. I find maternity shirts with baby-related slogans on quite crass, regardless, but I don't think it implies what you say it does.

@TeaKlaxon did you not seem the multiple threads about Priyanka Chopra and Joe Jonas? Or the many Kim Kardashian and Kanya West threads.

Not to mention the Baldwins? Hilaria was pregnant when they commissioned their surrogate.

Also all the general threads on this topic not in response to a particular couple?

I have. They do not constitute two thirds of the discussion on this subject though.

She maybe didn’t sell her own baby though, did she? She might have rented her womb and carried someone else’s baby…it’s her choice. Maybe she does not want to be the ‘momma’ and is happy with that. I know a few women who have done this and all for altruistic reasons. And the male couple I know who had a baby this way are fantastic parents to happy kids. My own heterosexual parents were batshit and had many children (who they fucked up) by ‘traditional’ means.

OP I think you are projecting here and YABU to be offended.

1. Surrogacy isn't solely about payment. Not all surrogacy is commercial surrogacy.
2. It's an odd way of looking at it to think that a specific child would be better off not existing than to exist but with a less usual relationship with their biological mother. Essentially that is what calls to ban surrogacy amount to (notwithstanding the fact that a ban is entirely unenforceable).
3. Everyone seems to be labouring under the assumption that the fathers and surrogate in this situation (or indeed other situations) haven't thought long and hard about what role the surrogate will play in the child's life and how their life story will be handled. Many parents having a child through surrogacy consider this extensively, with detailed plans as to how the surrogate will be referred to, any contact she might have with the child etc.

@NotExactlyHappyToHelp

Is that what that thing was saying? All those years I thought it was saying “knockamama” for some reason. And I’ve seen quite a bit of that show (kids right age at right time).

so if opposition to surrogacy is genuinely blind to sexuality then we should see two thirds of negative views of surrogacy arise in respect of straight couples.

Did you not see all of the discussion around this at the start of the war in Ukraine? Tbh I'm not sure if all of those couples that were concerned that the war would interfere with their 'commissioning' a baby as you so nicely put it were straight but all of the couples I saw looking for sympathy and trying to dictate how their surrogates react to a war that is tearing their country apart were straight. How anyone can look at that situation and say surrogacy is all fine and dandy is beyond me.

Incidentally, everyone doing the 'they could just have adopted' routine really need to learn a bit more about adoption.

Maybe they could have adopted. But maybe they would not be particularly well equipped to meet the needs of an adopted child. Most children adopted in the UK will have some sort of trauma and very many of them will have additional needs. That trauma may be in utero exposure to drugs and alcohol or domestic violence, birth trauma, or neglect, abuse and violence post birth.

Anyone claiming to care about the wellbeing of the child they are about to have, while also doing an off the cuff 'they can just adopt' is someone who perhaps doesn't care very much about adopted kids if they think just anyone should adopt. Perfectly good parents to non-adopted kids could be absolutely dreadful parents to adopted kids.

If these guys decided it's not right for them to adopt, then that is absolutely the right decision. Going down a parenting route that they are not well positioned to undertake just to satisfy some mumsnetters would actually be damaging for a child.

@SoftSheen So does that also apply to lesbian couples (or single women) who use sperm donors? If this is depriving the baby if the mother then likewise they are depriving the children of a father.

If you're going to lie about what I said (I never used the term 'commissioning') then you're not worthy of a substantive reply. Jog on.

why is that?

It isn't. You just made it up.

Who actually cares about a t-shirt? Don’t you have anything that requires mental effort in your own life?

This is exactly what I was going to post. If they are American they possibly thought it was funny - the irony is that the baby dinosaur always wanted the momma and not the daddy !

Hear, hear!