I stand corrected Lilly M can get pregnant

[panjandrumpyjamas]

I asked for a thread to be pulled as I thought I had made a mistake and that Lilly Madigan was in fact just joshing about being able to get pregnant but no...

Lily Madigan Dec 28
‏Womb implants are now possible. It's quite exciting. Expensive currently but yes if I wanted to in the future, reasonably I could get pregnant x
"I think you are unintentionally being transphobic. I can get pregnant. Not right now, which is true of many women. Please don't single me out" Lilly s own words.

twitter.com/madigan_lily/status/946555952303570944

I don t want this to be about LM as such but I think that some parts of the trans community have no idea of the medical implications involved in transition....

I think for me, a better analogy for 'I'm not pregnant right now' would be:

I don't have an erection right now. If I did want an erection, it would be a simple matter of undergoing surgery to install a penis and the associated hydraulic machinery required for it to function. It would then function perfectly and with no additional medical assistance required. So to say I don't have an erection RIGHT NOW is, technically, accurate if you accept all of the above as gospel.

What gets me the most is all these transwomen think that being a woman is all about being pink, fluffy, having long hair and wearing dresses.

Some days I have my long hair in a bun and wear trousers, am I no longer as much of a woman??

I am 99% sure that "Lily" is a troll.

People thought this about Danielle Muscato, but it appears Danielle is entirely genuine

Lily is a petulant teenager who dislikes the grown ups having opinions. My 15 year old is just the same - he'd argue black was white given half the chance.

I suspect some of it is just a typical teenager trying to be clever. I cringe a bit looking back at how I was at that age (arguing mostly about religion and atheism in my case). It was all about winning the argument, showing off, being able to 'prove' anything I chose with clever logic. All completely detached from any useful purpose in the real world.

But the fictional womb transplants for men... it's like saying that someday, who knows, we might have a way to give people prosthetic wings, therefore I am a bird and can fly. OK, so I can't fly right now, but that's no different from being a bird with a temporary wing injury and anyway some birds are born flightless so WHO ARE YOU TO SAY I'M NOT A BIRD just because I can't fly?

With an added dose of being able to claim victimhood and transphobia if anyone points out the flaws in his argument, or course. We didn't have that when I was 19, though I suspect I wouldn't have hesitated to use it to my advantage if it had been a thing...

I can travel through the universe, using wormholes in the time and space continuum, and return to Earth in time to watch the 2017 Boxing Day Test Match. Not right now, as is true with other humans but in the future maybe..umm...Don't single me oooouuuttt!

Put you in mind of Stan/ Loretta's announcement in the Life of Brian🤔

The other option thrown around is that obviously women will have babies for them. Surrogacy is a huge feminist issue and probably not one to sidetrack the thread with. But the casual use of women's bodies / body parts, an assumption that they can have this, have that..

Like, where are all these wombs to come from? Women will be required to hand them over / harvest them from poor women in India / what is the idea here?

And it's held up as an "equality" issue.

So, because eg lesbian women or transmen can (often / sometimes) have babies without too much trouble, so must gay men / transwomen otherwise it's discrimination and furthermore snoffair.

The fact that semen is a substance that is startlingly easy to come by (ha!) with some men even generous enough to share it with women and girls on places like their coat while on a bus, is neither here nor there. Why should women have something and men can't? Women said they wanted equality - so they need to put their money where their mouths are and hand over their reproductive organs. Or something.

"As it’s NYE maybe a time for reflection. Rather than criticising (lily included) then a time for how individuals support other members of society. Potentially 2017 is the place for jokes about transgender people (knitting vs woodwork above) to be left in 2017. "

"PS OP Lily can not get pregnant, you were correct in the first place so why not again ask for this offensive thread against transgender people and a teenager to again be deleted."

Well it's still 2017 in our part of the world, so I think we can still say 'fuck off with that'.

So sorry not to have a new year's resolution to support state-enforced Emperor's New Clothes for teenage male 'lesbians'

I think there is a real problem with understanding female anatomy. If you can bear it ask as many men as you can wear women pee from and where babies come from. Answers are astounding. This kind of tweet is born of this I am sure. I would think that anyone wanting to change into a female would know the anatomy in and out.
Over simplification but some more education on sex and gender roles would go a long way.

jokes about transgender people (knitting vs woodwork above)

I posted the "joke" but it's not exactly a joke when we can hear someone such as James O'Brien on LBC saying that if someone likes pink and dolls they need to be a girl, or if they like cars and tree climbing they need to be a boy.
(Not a direct quote but definitely the general gist of what was said).

The moment my womb could be transplanted into a fucking deluded, self centred bloke is the moment I remove myself from the donor register. Full. Stop.

Yes, regarding equality- it is like by wanting equality, women are supposed to have also wanted sexual difference erased.

Whereas feminists have ALWAYS recognised sexual difference - not only by advocating for access to contraceptives and abortion, but also family allowances and decent maternity provision. What feminists have previously criticised is the hierarchical gender roles built on the back of sexual difference.

Yes, regarding equality- it is like by wanting equality, women are supposed to have also wanted sexual difference erased.

Another thread (I think - I lose track!) was suggesting we should ditch feminism as a term and go back to women's lib as that actually described what feminists want much better.

I would totally donate my uterus to a male!

It's in a medical waste skip round the back of the Spire hospital, and it was full of adenomyosis.

What, you don't still want it? Why on earth not

Ah, I did not read that thread. Women’s liberation is much more specific, and doesn’t get messed up with all the waves of feminism. It is from the 1970s/80s, I think, if one wants to date it, but seemed to get lost with the choicey-choicey, gender is a performance 1990s feminism.

I would happily call myself Women’s Liberation, as long as Liberation did not get confused with Libertarianism. Feminism is a broad Church, I think; there is not one feminism but many.

Is it the Reclaim Feminism thread? It has got side-tracked when I looked at it, I will go back and read again.

Still wondering from Jepthah what my gender is and what the two definitions are...

Agree 100% with IcedCocoa

Too many men using "equality" as a "gotcha". Some were doing it at work the other day. They get this earnest look on their faces and start saying "well why don't women compete against men in sport then?".

I am bored of explaining that the 'radical' in radical feminism means 'root' and not 'terrorist'. I think women stopped using 'women's lib' because men were using it as an insult. Maybe its time to resurrect it.

But ultimately it doesn't matter what we call it, many women will try to distance themselves from it, and men will misrepresent it.

Misogynists never bother to educate themselves about the reality of women’s bodies and capabilities because it suits their politics not to.
I agree this claim is insulting to women and laughable as a basis for a claim to womanhood, but it entirely fits with how much this lobby ignores science and reduces women to seperable commodifiable parts.
This tweeter eg not being able to tell the difference between a ‘womb implant’ and a womb transplant pretty much tells me all I need to know about the level of thought that’s gone into this... so in that way I am not as it happens SINGLING THEM OUT but just pointing to their predictable thinking as part of the wider misogynistic view common to their lobby-mates.
It’s interesting to consider the similarities here with pro lifers who also IME understand little about female biology and are also against women having agency.

“I am bored of explaining that the 'radical' in radical feminism means 'root' and not 'terrorist'.”

Oh, god- me too!

I am interested in language; radical feminism and radical atheism get bandied about as if these are the most extreme versions.

What does rad feminism mean in the context of "root"?

Radical feminism simply means the belief that equality/liberation can only come if there is arsdical shake up of existing structures- tinkering at the margins will not worl.

Summed up by Smash the Pztriarchy!

That the root cause of women’s oppression is patriarchy, which is the historical social and economic hierarchical structure which benefits (mainly) white, middle class older men at the top.

The lie is that women have equality, therefore patriarchy no longer exists. Whereas patriarchy constantly reinvents itself as men (as a class) think power is a zero sum game, and if you give women too much of it, they lose.