British 'man' becomes pregnant

[slithytove]

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-british-man-reveal-hes-9582789

Sorry, it's a mirror link

I don't usually post about this stuff, but it's really annoyed me this time.

Now 'men' can get pregnant? So 'men' will need maternity leave, 'men' will need maternity services, probably somehow different to women's.

Is it just me or does the fact they are calling this person a man instead of a transman, allow men (people born as men) to take even more from women under the trans rights umbrella?

Who would it hurt to call this pregnant person a transman?

I guess we should be grateful this person was born as a woman and is therefore socialised to not put themselves first.

So Beachcomber you are saying that it is entirely possible for men, overall, to value children and human life generally to the same degree as women?

"please identify which ones and explain exactly why."

Nope. Not your teacher, dude.

Helen I meant they're just like men in terms of how they have wielded power. Obviously.

Nope. Not obviously. Because that's not what you said

HTH.

Ok, it wasn't very well put Helen. I should have been more specific. Sorry.

Like everyone else in the world I have an opinion on what is right and wrong, and am gratified when people are persuaded to my view of things

Then make it clear that this is what you are saying (i.e. that it is your opinion only), because right now, and for the last xx pages of what was actually an interesting thread before you turned up, you have been behaving exactly, and without a shred of self-recognition or sense of irony, like the kind of patriarchal man that you also seem to be decrying. Practice what you preach. I very much doubt that with your convoluted reasoning and complete inability to treat with integrity what any woman has said here (by this, I mean actually take her words at face value, rather than impart your own meaning and interpretation) as well as with your attitude that you and only you as a man are right, (when talking about issues that impact women deeply and often painfully), that you will persuade anyone. All you are doing is making yourself the centre of attention and demanding women's time and energy in replying to you - as well as taking up women's space and telling us how to understand the very fabric of our lives and experiences. Sound patriarchal? Because it is.

This isn't debating society. This is our lives.

you believe that in spite of gender identity being embodied, a world is nevertheless possible where men and women are valued differently but awarded equal status.

No I don't believe that. I also haven't said that or even implied that. What you claim I believe above doesn't even make sense. I wouldn't use the term "gender identity" the way you are mansplaining to me that I do because I know what it means.

Do you think men are socialized into thinking they know better than women about everything including women's own thoughts? I do. And very successful socialization it is too. It is quite extraordinary how much they do it - sometimes it is quite funny, especially when they don't show much understanding of a subject whilst exhibiting a high opinion of their opinions on what they have decided women think. It is however very misogynistic behaviour, even when it is funny.

Sorry, I'm not going to agree with people just because they're women and I'm a man.

Sorry, I'm not going to agree with people just because they're women and I'm a man

Beachcomber, I don't believe anyone has automatic access to anyone else's thoughts. And I do not presume to do so as a man. It would therefore help if you could clarify what you are saying, because I am genuinely not sure I understand.

Are saying that it is entirely possible for men to value children and human life to the same general degree as women do?

If you're answer is yes, then you are not an essentialist; if your answer is no, then you are. Or at least that is how it seems to me.

I think qwerty must be trolling now

"just because they're women and I'm a man."

And, again, no woman on here said you should.

Apologies if I have ascribed views to you that you do not hold. Please put me right on any points.

Another aspect of misogynistic socialization is men thinking they have a right to women's time. On internet forums this manifests in a number of ways, one of which is asking women to explain things over and over again. Often if the woman does bother to explain, her thoughts will then be mansplained back to her with the inclusion of strawmen, misrepresentation, dumbing down of her ideas to the point of rendering them nonsensical and a good dose of telling her that she doesn't know her own mind.

Another is lots of long rambling posts that shit all over the discussion women are trying to have.

How right you are, Beach.

IMO, of course.

*Another aspect of misogynistic socialization is men thinking they have a right to women's time. On internet forums this manifests in a number of ways, one of which is asking women to explain things over and over again. Often if the woman does bother to explain, her thoughts will then be mansplained back to her with the inclusion of strawmen, misrepresentation, dumbing down of her ideas to the point of rendering them nonsensical and a good dose of telling her that she doesn't know her own mind.

Another is lots of long rambling posts that shit all over the discussion women are trying to have*

What is your answer to the question beachcomber?

Right back atcha YetAnotherSpartacus for this awesomeness:

Then make it clear that this is what you are saying (i.e. that it is your opinion only), because right now, and for the last xx pages of what was actually an interesting thread before you turned up, you have been behaving exactly, and without a shred of self-recognition or sense of irony, like the kind of patriarchal man that you also seem to be decrying. Practice what you preach. I very much doubt that with your convoluted reasoning and complete inability to treat with integrity what any woman has said here (by this, I mean actually take her words at face value, rather than impart your own meaning and interpretation) as well as with your attitude that you and only you as a man are right, (when talking about issues that impact women deeply and often painfully), that you will persuade anyone. All you are doing is making yourself the centre of attention and demanding women's time and energy in replying to you - as well as taking up women's space and telling us how to understand the very fabric of our lives and experiences. Sound patriarchal? Because it is.

What is your answer to the question beachcomber?

That if men spent half the time challenging patriarchal society as they do posting misogynistic wank on the internet we would all be living in a post gender fucking utopia.

Beachcomber

Are you saying that a world is possible in which men value children and human life as much as women do?

I already posted my thoughts on that.

Shall I get my DH to come on repost them under a manly MN name (perhaps something like ManHereMakeWayForMyTesticlesofObjectivity) so that they can be uncloaked from the incomprehensibility of ladyutterances?

qwerty

SHE HAS EXPLAINED HERSELF IN SUCH BASIC TERMS THAT EVEN I UNDERSTAND IT

YOU ARE NOT LISTENING

GO AND SIT ON THE STAIRS AND THINK ABOUT YOUR ACTIONS

Rufus, maybe it is my fault, but I do not understand. It would help clarify matters if the above question were answered with a simple yes or no.

I think we should decide on a distinction between 'mansplaining' and a man explaining something. Just because some men explain things to women out of a desire to cower them, it does not follow that a man explaining something is always mansplaining. As it were.

Moreover, at no point have I explained women's experience to them. If I was on here telling women what it feels like to give birth or get raped you would be entirely in your rights to object.

However, all my points concern the designation and construction of gendered identity in a patriarchal society. As I am a gendered person living in a patriarchal society myself, my input is as warranted as anyone else's.

So if some does suggest that women value the lives of their children more than men because they give birth to them, or that men are more aggressive because they are born with higher levels of a certain hormone, I am entirely in my rights to offer my objections to those views.

If those are not the views of the posters and I have misinterpreted them, then explanations of how I have misinterpreted them should be more forthcoming. Or at least none of the explanations that have been offered have been satisfactory in my view.