'Because biology' is not a good argument

[spannablue]

A good summary of why the 'I have a PhD in science' gamete argument is redundant:

rosieswayne.blogspot.com/?m=1

'...I don’t know what it’s like to be trans, but I do have the relatable experience of having something integral to my life called into question “because biology”.

My adopted son is my son. I know it, he knows it, it is an unshakable truth to us. Yes, it is possible for a child to have two mothers. No, this is not because I ‘identify’ as being the actual person who gave birth to him and/or believe the sperm was conjured up with pure lesbian enthusiasm. But our children have two mothers and we have two sons - this is a reality, and we expect the same legal protection and respect as any other family.

However, if we apply “because biology” to my family (and there are plenty who are keen to), it isn’t actually a family at all - we’re just a couple of single mothers with bastard only children in an unusually cosy house-share situation.

Luckily for us, we live in a time and place where the law actively protects our family from this wilfully ham-fisted interpretation of how biology relates to actual human people. It is not something we take for granted.'

It's a piss poor argument which has nothing to do with biology. You can't change sex. HTH.

Well put.

Why has OP not come back I wonder

I'm an adoptive mother. I agree with what everyone else has said.
Using adoption as an argument for self-id is insulting and ridiculous.

Because I'm at work. Will respond later after DS3 bedtime

Ps I'm interested in thoughts on the other arguments in the article

Anyone can perform the act of mothering, including a man but only one person is a child’s biological mother, because biology.

Not having given birth to and mothering a child are not mutually exclusive. Your analogy is bunkum.

I'd rather be interested in that 'genetic female with a natural penis' paper you mentioned tbh. The rest of the article you linked here in the original post has no bearing on your hypothesis that the ''I have a PhD in science' gamete argument is redundant'. (I'm the one with the Biochemistry PhD making that argument, remember?).

The rest is just a bunch of bollocks and willful misrepresentation. For example:

'The assertion that there is a risk of cisgender men abusing this legislation in order to cause harm overlooks the fact that a) there is little to no evidence to support this proposed scenario as being a legitimate concern and b) denying the trans community beneficial reforms because of a perceived potential of abuse perpetrated by cisgender males is not rational or fair - the government should rather address that risk though appropriate channels such as existing criminal law.'

The person writing that must, frankly, have lived under a rock, if they don't know about Jess Bradley, Karen White and Jacinta, to name but a few. Last time I checked, none of them were cis.

But, to be fair, you are now only interested in discussing the rest of the article, because the point you tried to make does not hold water, just like your assertion that sex is very complex and spectral and there are females with natural penises did not hold water. So you are shifting the goalposts again. Oh well...

I think I know the case OP means. That case happened as a result of misogynistic marriage practices that result in a very restricted gene pool (because men must make the rules and still have sex and children), and as a consequence a very high rate of birth defects.

I think that using people who have a genetic defect as a 'gotcha' is disgusting.
A gene defect as a result of misogynistic marriage practices isn't the gotcha you think it is, especially not in this context.

Can I suggest that this person goes and has a look at their adopted children’s birth certs. That should sort out their confusion.

I'm very clear, as is the law that I had a set of biological parents who died and was adopted via a legal process by an adoptive Mum and an Adoptive Dad.

They were legally but not biologically my parents.

The proposed GRA reforms are not yet law and in any case, legal recognition is not the same as biological reality.

Anyone can perform the act of mothering, including a man but only one person is a child’s biological mother, because biology.

Correct. My mother gave birth to me but she buggered off to do her own thing and left my father (wonderful man that he is) to raise my brother and me.

Totally agree with Elephantinacravat

"I believe that the advice with adopted children is to be very open with them about the fact that they are not biologically yours isn't it? Same with children who are born from egg or sperm donors?

Because that is the reality of the situation and the child deserves to know the reality. Because denying reality almost always leads to all sorts of fucks ups further down the line."

We had (unsuccessful) treatment with donor eggs and had to have counselling before-hand. It was absolutely important to be honest with any children about their genetic history. In the end we adopted and again it is really important for our son to know his history in child-appropriate language.

I did keep saying to him that although he had not been in my tummy it did not matter to me at all. Then I realized that it did matter to him! I'm now navigating the reality that it doesn't matter to me, it does matter to him (a bit) and how do we make sure he feels loved 100% without my forgetting that he knows our family set up is not the same as everyone else's.

The author of the article talks about her child having two mums so I am confused, does that mean her and birth mum, or her and her female partner?

How does this relate to trans issues? In my book not at all.

Anyone who is trans, and the definition is very, very broad now, much more than the old transsexual definition, is, of course totally worthy and equal as a person and needs all the usual protections and considerations.

However, being trans does not mean you get to run roughshod over anyone else's considerations and lives. If you are male you don't get to spend time in the female only spaces, because they are not for you, however you identify. You don't get to guilt trip lesbians into dating you. You don't get to insist everyone else use the pronouns you want them to (although if you are a trans person you should be protected from bullying etc, like everyone, and if someone is behaving in a bullying manner then that needs to be addressed).

Not using the words someone else wants you to use doesn't make you a bully.

The trans lobby and their 'No debate' has backfired because we cannot force people to do things with no discussion, because that indeed most definitely can be bullying!

spannablue

"Ps I'm interested in thoughts on the other arguments in the article"

I got stuck on the first bit because as an adoptive mum and birth mum, or just a mum if you prefer, that bit resonated (or in this case jarred) with me.

"There is a belief that so many teens assigned female are wanting to transition that it is causing ‘lesbian erasure’ (which is also the name of a tribute band I totally want to exist, btw - please make it happen for me). "

She's flippant, so I am guessing she hasn't actually listened to parents and their distress or young girls and their distress at being so unhappy to be female in unprecedented numbers!

She hasn't perhaps watched videos of young women in deep distress as they cut up their binder or talk about having their breasts removed and regretting it.

Presumably she doesn't want to speak for trans people but she keeps comparing the trans experience to the gay one! (As if there is one gay experience or indeed one trans experience!)

EG

"Dismissing LGBT lives as ridiculous: “enabling transgender people is like the emperors new clothes!” is the new “Equal marriage? we may as well let people marry their dogs!” "

"Interpreting growing LGBT numbers as contagion: “the Trans Lobby are turning our children trans!” is the new “the Gay Lobby are turning our children gay!”

So I find her quite tedious. By all means be supportive of trans people. But I don't see that the arguments here are standing up to the breakthrough she thinks they are. That is because biology does matter.

Two lesbians or two gay men do not stop being female or male, because they come out as gay or bi or whatever. They don't require surgery or hormones or require others to change how they think or feel about anything. Many, many women are supportive of gay people and supportive of trans people but deeply concerned about what we are saying to our young women who feel desperately unhappy about being female, and are deeply worried about self id.

This is not one issue, trans or anti-trans it is numerous issues and no debate doesn't cut it now the cat is out of the bag and people are beginning to realize what this could mean.

Interesting that the OP never returned....

DisrespectfulAdultFemale - Correct. My mother gave birth to me but she buggered off to do her own thing and left my father (wonderful man that he is) to raise my brother and me.

I’m glad you had such a loving and capable father but that must still have been a traumatic event in your life, so for you.

That's very kind of you, Luggsays.

My dad is so wonderful that he makes up for anyone deficiencies in the maternal department. He was a great role model for my brother, who is a very hands-on and involved dad with his own children.

As gay rights have found a foothold, the gay population has not changed drastically in terms of demographic. As trans rights have found a foothold the population has exploded exponentially especially in the young female demographic. A change that is a complete 180 degrees from the patterning we have historically seen in transsexualism.

The patterning clearly shows social contagion and is nothing like the gay rights movement.

Disrespectful - He sounds wonderful, big up to those amazing gnc men, the ones that really challenge the stereotypes.

So the OP never did return then. Cringe.

We had this discussion before. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3313145-Trans-argument-comparing-adoptive-parents-to-trans-people