Surrogacy

[Annasgirl]

So I'm here in Ireland listening to a national radio show where they are promoting surrogacy.

It seems as if we are all supposed to think it is ok. Now to be fair, the host is not really on board but the young woke roving reporter (a girl) really is!!! And apparently only religious people are against it (according to the woke young female reporter).

I've just found out that there is a bill coming through the Dail to legalise the process in Ireland, although just for altruistic stuff in Ireland. And guess what - they want to make it broader because no woman in Ireland would really want to do this, (why, if it so wonderful) so they want the US and Canada and Ukraine etc included.

Any thoughts?

I know we had a chat on here about it recently and many of us seemed to feel that surrogacy was really anti-women, and yes I really believe it is.

So it has all ended and there was no absolutely no discussion on any ethical issues or women's issues - because clearly that is all religion and we don't do religion in Ireland any more.

Sorry, just needed to rant to you all.

• Post edited at OP's request.

StopThePlanet
Thank you for sharing your experiences. It's so important to hear what you have to say.

@truthisarevolutionaryact

I take your kind words to heart, thank you. BTW, love your username (profoundly true and a fantastic reference).

StopthePlanet. Thank you for your thoughtful posts. It must cut to the quick when you see other people using surrogates without a second thought, being glorified for it (if they are celebrities) whilst sticking to your principles brings you nothing. I really appreciate that you have chosen not to go down this route for all the right reasons. I hope you are happy and at peace.

MenuPlant excellent post.

*So this in a way is like a modern version of that attitude. Rather than being given / obtaining a woman to control and to provide babies, whether literally or via social / religious norms, they can pay for a woman to do this.

This cuts across lots of modern supposedly woke stuff - taking attitudes that are seen as oppressive / regressive and repackaging them as choice and modern and marvellous. Same deal with "sex work". *

I was thinking the same thing but less articulately - women, historically, have been sold and bartered via arranged marriages, with the sole purpose of producing an heir and to bring wealth to a family. Now a man doesn't have to go to so much trouble. Just hire a surrogate. And yes, I realise of course that many women also use surrogates but isn't it another side of the same coin in many cases? The Kardashian who wants to keep their figure and stay the sexy wife while someone else has a baby for them. The older woman with a younger husband wanting to make sure he is able to have the family he deserves.

And who is thinking about the children? All these children who will grow up and find their parents bought them via the exploitation of some impoverished woman in the Far East? You can't exactly wrap that up in a narrative of "Mummy and Daddy wanted you so much and a kind lady agreed to have you for Mummy"...What will those children think when they grow up? The children of the Nepalese women left to take their chances in a post earthquake country while their fathers had them flown out via a chartered flight. I'm pretty sure I'd be appalled.

FermatsTheorem

You spoke about lesbian couples who decide they would prefer for the biological father to be involved in the child's life.

Personally I don't think anyone should start the process of having a child deliberately planning for the father to not be involved in their life.

My DH plays a hugely important role and for my sons is a role model in a way that I am not. I think children often find it difficult without a father in their lives. Now if Dad has upped and left as all too often happens so be it, but I don't think it's ideal or to be planned for.

And it's 100 times worse in my opinion to plan for mothers to be excluded from the child's life. Because of the biological bond but also the different behaviour of women. I don't know if it's socially or biologically constructed or both but women tend to behave very differently with their children.

This cuts across lots of modern supposedly woke stuff - taking attitudes that are seen as oppressive / regressive and repackaging them as choice and modern and marvellous. Same deal with "sex work".

I think a lot of the reason women/ liberal feminists buy into this stuff is because it gives them a free pass to not take any action towards it, which is overwhelmingly the position female socialisation wants us to take. Tackling the problem is hard, declaring that there is no problem is easy. It's the "you can't fire me, I quit" of feminist positions. Not just big things like this, but I know so many relationships where the woman says "yes I do all the housework/ cooking/ childcare/ gave up work/ took his name on marriage etc etc but that's nothing to do with the patriarchy, I choose to do those things". And sure, some people do freely choose to do those things but for a lot of people saying it's their choice means they don't have to face any uncomfortable truths or challenge the status quo. Exploitation through prostitution, pornography, and surrogacy are huge problems that we are making very little headway on solving. Re-branding those things as progressive, empowering, and freely chosen throws a blanket over the lot and says "there ya go, fixed it".

Yes I agree with all of you fabulous articulate women. But why do so many women give up and buy into it? I spend my life being an activist, I cannot see how I could just stand aside and watch, but so many women do. Why are more women not angry? Why do we fight against each other instead of against our common enemy?

In most ways I'm politically left-wing but surrogacy is one of those things that 'woke' people seem to assume I'm fine with that I'm not (same as calling biologically male transgenders 'women' and thinking of abortion as something that is acceptable in anything other than a truly desperate situation).

Surrogacy exploits the woman who carries the child. It separates the child from the woman who carried it in a cynical, completely intentional way. It allows women with faulty reproductive systems to pass on their genes for a faulty reproductive system to the next generation.

I can accept the 'laziness' of wanting to have a baby without having to go through pregnancy/birth, since many don't enjoy the experience of being pregnant and giving birth. Everything else about it sickens me.

@Iused2BanOptimist

Thank you, and yes it cuts deeper than I knew was possible.

Our love is bigger than we are - it helps keep us honest. We could not look each other in the eyes knowing we compromised who we are to become parents. After all, what kind of parents could we be if we would compromise our principles before getting started? We can't rationalize away such a means to get our desired ends.

We are happy, we create it ourselves. Peace is harder and out of reach for now, we find solace in hope and in sharing this journey. We have one more 'official' try in us and then we will celebrate or seek peace.

StopthePlanet Good luck with the next round of IVF. Wishing you success.

@Jessy85
... abortion... is acceptable in... truly desperate situation[s]

What do you consider to be a truly desperate situation?

It allows women with faulty reproductive systems to pass on their genes for a faulty reproductive system to the next generation.

So... Infertility = Faulty Woman-genes? That sounds like my 66yr old father. "You can't help it that your body is defective", without knowing why we are struggling with TTC. FYI, genes often have nothing to do with fertility issues and often it isn't primarily the female body that fails (or at all). Chew on that a minute... I'll wait. Two healthy fertile people (one m and one f) can have sex and not yield a pregnancy - 50% of all fertilized eggs are lost before a missed menses. Infertility is a generic all-encompassing term for those TTC who haven't been successful over a two-year period.

@Iused2BanOptimist

Thanks!!!!

I have just commented on the other thread. I would only be a surrogate for my child, if they needed me to and I was able to.

So... Infertility = Faulty Woman-genes?

Infertility which could be 'solved' by surrogacy would be due to the woman's genes, yes, since the variable that is being changed is the woman's reproductive system. Similarly, infertility caused by age (which is similarly due to genetic and biological degradation of the reproductive system) could be partly addressed by surrogacy and infertility caused by injury to the reproductive system (which would be rare).

Infertility which is due to the man, or a combination of the man and woman, would be addressed with treatments such as IVF. Surrogacy would not be needed.

So I'm unconvinced that all of the abusiveness of surrogacy is acceptable given that the reasons for a woman needing it are:

• Being old = Too disorganised to be ready for pregnancy in 20s or early 30s.
• Underlying fertility issues = Flawed genes.
• Injury to reproductive system = Clumsy or careless.

I don't think it's ok to coerce vulnerable women into carrying somebody else's baby to solve some of the problems of the disorganised, clumsy and genetically-flawed women who would use/abuse them to get a child.

One of the basic reasons so many nice liberal people go with it is because people who oppose surrogacy are routinely accused of homophobia. Celebrating gay men with babies feels wonderfully progressive to them and they allow the warm fuzzy feeling from being accepting of gay fathers to override their critical thinking about where the baby actually came from.

To be clear, I have absolutely no problem with gay fathers. But I do have a problem with people who buy babies or even accept them as presents. A gay man I know recently became a father with his lesbian friend and I am very happy for them. Another gay man I vaguely know is in the process of buying a baby in America and I think it's horrifying.

MagicMix - that's exactly what I was accused of on a gushing thread about Daley and Black's baby. I'm not remotely homophobic. But it's a good way of shouting down dissent and questioning.

Jessy85

I strongly disagree with your post. I am against surrogacy because it is wrong. A women might need a surrogate because she had cervical cancer as a young women and had to have her womb removed. I don't consider whether she is deserving or not to be relevant.

Some one might get kidney disease through no fault or their own. I still don't think they should be able to buy a kidney.

Black and Daley are quite clear - anyone who criticises them does so because of homophobia. It doesn't occur to them that making use of women's bodies as gestation factories is actually rather misogynistic.

Black's blogs repeatedly refer to making the process "safer", protecting the (commissioning) parents (incase the surrogate changes her mind). He is appalled at the risks parents take if they use the surrogate's own eggs rather than use an egg donor, as this of course means the surrogate really is the biological mother and all the legal rights she would thus enjoy.

Women are just a means to an end, give us the eggs, rent your womb, give us the baby.

But criticise that and you are homophobic.

But criticise that and you are homophobic

I am opposed to all assisted conception regardless of the genital configuration and sexual predilection of the parties..

And yes, I realise of course that many women also use surrogates but isn't it another side of the same coin in many cases? The Kardashian who wants to keep their figure and stay the sexy wife while someone else has a baby for them. The older woman with a younger husband wanting to make sure he is able to have the family he deserves

What utter infantilising nonsense. These are grown-up, wealthy women. They are also selfish and arrogant. I can't stand this idea that no matter how badly a woman behaves some excuse has to be found for it.

Are there any women’s groups speaking out against surrogacy, do we know?

Jessy what on earth is this?

"- Injury to reproductive system = Clumsy or careless."

I am not on board with your posts they seem to focus v heavily on women and how they are doing it all wrong.

Discalimer
I know nothing about kardashians

The assumption that she (and her husband/partner - it's not just her making these decisions alone but once again the man is invisibilised it's all on the woman) had a surrogate for vanity reasons is an assumption, isn't it? Has she said that she used a surrogate to keep her figure etc? If not then assuming this is the reason rather than anything to do with health etc is misogyny.

Same as women who have sections are regularly labelled "too posh to push" etc although that narrative seems to have died down as women start to talk more about the risks and consequences of both VB and CS, where before talking about risks and issues with VB was not really done.

I think the Kardashian’s used I surrogate for ‘health’ reasons. I also object to that. See Barrackers posts.

Besmirching - yes, OBJECT are..

Oh. We had a recent thread on ‘Radfem online spaces’ that I was going to link to for women’s groups but that thread seems to have been taken out by the ban hammer. Odd.