U.K. first womb transplant

[VestaTilley]

The BBC has reported today that the first womb transplant has taken place in a hospital in England. A 40 year old woman donated her womb to her sister, hopefully enabling her to have children.

AIBU to be concerned about a potential dystopian future where women’s reproductive organs are harvested like car parts?

Journalists are treating this like it’s a positive, with few questions being asked about how the donor is recovering, how the foetus (if the recipient does conceive) will fare if the woman has to continue taking immuno suppressive drugs? Whether there is increased miscarriage risk?

Transplants are supposed to be life saving, not about wish fulfilment. Apparently 10 brain dead women are being lined up for future donation!

To me this all seems part of a bigger picture of surrogacy, synthetic embryo creation (reported earlier this year) and a drive to disassociate women from reproduction and the biology of our sex.

Am I alone in being bothered by this? I wish journalists would look more at the bigger societal picture.

Link here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-66514270

@SunsetBeauregarde

If you want to call males "she" that's up to you, it doesn't preclude you being critical of gender or even "gender critical" as the label that most people understand it as - there are plenty of people who do and although I don't agree with you I respect your right to do so.

But sneering at other gender critical women and calling them "the anti trans brigade" and "terf" for bringing up gender critical feminist points they personally consider important, regardless of what you think. That isn't "gender critical" in the way most people understand it, which is as a feminist or feminist ally label.

I agree - I think the vast, vast majority of trans people would very much like to be left alone too and have no interest in changing language for anyone not directly refering to them personally. I have only ever met 2 trans people I would describe as TRA's, both chronically online and spoke entirely in memes, even in person. As I've mentioned I meet probably more trans people in person than is typical, and most have been just the other side of the centre of the argument to me - meaning there's often a lot of middle ground we meet on.

I think the problem often with the perception of trans people is that the only voices we hear are the ones shouting loudest and they're almost always on the very extreme of the argument. So many trans people I meet absolutely HATE TRA's for how much damage they do to the community as a whole. Many don't really see them as genuine trans people.

I think the problem often with the perception of trans people is that the only voices we hear are the ones shouting loudest and they're almost always on the very extreme of the argument.

If it's them calling the shots, and it is, then they are the problem for women.

I listened to the interview with both of the main surgeons who performed this , I think whilst it's noble and very brave of the woman to donate her womb to her sister , the surgeons definitely seem to have a Frankenstein type vibe about them...

Thinking back to my time dealing with infertility before I really questioned much around womens reproductive rights, if you had told me a womb transplant would have cured me, and I could have had a child I'd have bitten your hand off immediately and twice on Sundays

I recognize that feeling of desperation from friends who are suffering fertility problems.

Now having looked at the womb transplant Charity more closely I can see their major funders were individual donations and pharmaceutical companies. Is all this innovation helping or exploiting vulnerable and desperate women and who is really benefitting? I can’t see this ever being provided by the NHS but private surgery with expert surgeon teams (who are basically all the trustees) and the ongoing medical support would be in great demand.

I am a feminist and I'm not calling other gender critical women 'the anti trans brigade' - i'm calling the anti trans brigade the 'anti trans brigade'. Specifically, I'm referring to people (not just women) who weaponise the extremes of the trans debate to rile up anger towards trans people. Or, more specifically in this case the people who take a news story like this, that has absolutely nothing to do with trans people in its content and use it as evidence that trans people are somehow an even greater threat to them today than they were yesterday. It's the relentless beating of the anti-trans drum, not the gender critical drum that I cannot abide. There are real and present threats to womens rights brought about by SOME trans issues that SOME TRA's are pushing for, but the mental gymnastics required to turn any discussion about women into a trans debate has nothing to do with being critical of gender ideology, it crosses the line into bigotry. I feel this is a legitimate critisism but an important distinction I recognise probably wasn't clear, and that my original reply was probably a bit pithy to make it so.

I agree it is the extremists and not all trans people who are the problem, yes.

I agree and this is another point we've probably ended up distracted from here - the exploitation of people made vulnerable in their desporation for a cure is a real problem with the commercialisation of healthcare. That's not just fertility, i think it's all medicine.

- i'm calling the anti trans brigade the 'anti trans brigade'

You were calling women in general on the thread who were raising this issue the anti trans brigade. The disingenuousness is really tiresome.

I agree it is the extremists and not all trans people who are the problem, yes.

And the extremists are running the show, and getting ethics papers published in journals about who should fund MTF trans womb implants. And round and round we go.

Relevant current thread for anyone interested.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4877653-should-uterus-transplantation-for-transwomen-and-transmen-be-subsidized

Follow the money, it always gives a clearer picture than anything else. In my opinion research into the root causes of infertility would be far more beneficial to a much larger cohort of women than the major intervention of this type of procedure - but research like that isn’t groundbreaking or sexy is it? Or probably doesn’t come with the $$$ signs. They don’t give a shit about female reproduction or health care, I think women would be naive to think they do.

Here we see how "research" like the Imperial college paper is used to astroturf the pie in the sky idea that males are women in every way and deserve to have equality in being able to gestate their own children in their own implanted womb.

"Transwomen who want to gestate children. Even though there has been no uterus transplant to date in transwomen that we know of, some clinicians have maintained that there are no absolute barriers in anatomy, hormones, and obstetric considerations that would rule out the possibility of successful UTx in transwomen.11 Transwomen wanting to gestate children can plausibly justify subsidy of UTx on a number of grounds, as mentioned above. Transwomen lack a trait (the ability to bear children) that may cause them to experience psychological dissonance in a way that undermines their health and well-being. The lack of a uterus also closes off the prospect of gestating a child in a way that is available to women as a class. It follows that lack of a uterus is an obstacle to full participation in the social goods attached to women’s identity."

Again you’ve asked me for clarification on a statement I made, I’ve given you that clarification, I have explained my views, my history and my politics and you have ignored it and continued to interpret me any way you like. Being able to disagree agreeably is vital if we’re ever going to make any kind of progress in both the trans debate and any other societal divides we are experiencing at the moment, of which there are many. I have agreed with you that my initial approach was probably a bit pithy, I’ve clarified my meaning and again you have chosen to override and stick with your own interpretation rather than my clearly explained intention. With respect it’s not me being disingenuous here.

Completely agree. All the media coverage reads basically like a massive marketing campaign.

Being able to disagree agreeably

Happy to disagree agreeably with people who don't call me slurs like "terf" or "the anti trans brigade" or approve of people who do. It's not up to you what I consider important, I said very early, you do you, I'll do me.

Yes, and it is a misinterpretation of the research and the discussion section, in the same way that people here have misinterpreted it to mean the same thing. People misappropriate research all the time (bacon causes cancer, the covid vaccine causes infertility, smoking cures heart disease, vaccines cause autism and many more mental daily Mail style headlines spring to mind as examples of this) for many reasons on all sides of every debate. It’s why I believe coming to threads like this and explaining why the statements in the discussion section of a research paper don’t mean what you think it means on the face of it is so important in the absence of an education system that’s capable of teaching critical thinking effectively. People are not taught to interrogate information properly early enough in their education and for a society where information is so abundant it’s massively important we correct this, but of course not at all in the governments best interests to create an electorate that can think for itself.

I apologise profusely if you have at any point been offended by anything I have posted. Please credit thst that was at no point my intention.

Agreed. It’s a massive issue that female health in general is desperately underfunded. It’s because it’s so difficult to make it profitable.

Your opinion of my intellect and ability to read scientific literature notwithstanding, the astroturfing of the idea that males will have womb implants some day is a problem for me and others on this thread and I feel it is a relevant point, so it's like we're talking at cross purposes. You won't drive me off the thread, no matter how patronising and sneery you are to me.

Thanks for the apology, @SunsetBeauregarde I suggest we don't engage further. We're obviously not on the same wavelength on what we're talking about or our priorities. No hard feelings. PS I know what infertility feels like too, I'm not prosecuting a "culture war" or any other lazy stereotype. I have been engaged in a fight for the rights of women and girls as a sex since before this issue was in the mainstream media.

I have a very high opinion of your intellect, and at no point have I attempted or wanted to ‘drive you off the thread’. I’m not sure why you’d interpret my replies to you (in direct reply to your responses to me) as anything other than an attempt to engage you rather than the opposite.

Me explaining to you that a discussion point at the end of a study doesn’t mean the researcher wants to progress that discussion point to full blown research and is not evidence that womb transplants into men is at all imminent was because you presented it as if it was a smoking gun. That’s absolutely no comment on your intellect whatsoever, it’s ensuring we’re both approaching the argument from a position of understanding and not misunderstanding what we’re looking at. If you felt patronised by that I’m not sure that’s my fault? I’ll happily apologise for that too though if you’d like.

As far as I’m concerned we’ve found some substantial and solid common ground, that’s a good thing.

I’m far more interested in talking about this issue from outside the trans debate as I think there are much more applicable and likely implications from this story than the idea a man might receive a uterus. I’d encourage you to engage in that conversation too rather than continuing to reply to me if you find my tone, manner and content disagreeable. You are under no obligation to keep replying and engaging with me if anything I am saying is causing you distress.

Personally aside from a few barbed comments I’ve found our conversations really interesting and I’ve learned a lot, so if you do decide to disengage, thanks for talking for so long.

Cross posted, thanks for discussing :)

No problem, again, no hard feelings.

Yes
Not read up on this particular case, will do so but am also seeing similarities with Nazis lately and it really doesn't sit well ( to put it mildly!)

@SunsetBeauregarde believe also that if you, as a man, would like to fanny about in a dress and wig and call yourself Joan you are absolutely welcome to, just like I, as a woman am welcome to, too. I'll even call you by your woman's name and she/her if you want me to
That's where you're going wrong arguing with the poster you are as they'll never agree with you there.