Transgender "father" sparks GC editorial

[BiologyIsReal]

It's a cliche that sunlight is the best disinfectant but the absurd attempt by Freddy McConnell to be named their child's father after having giving birth to the child is giving the TRAs cause a prominence they might regret.

The Daily Telegraph today has three articles on it - reporting the case, an opinion piece and, at last, an editorial.

I'll link the three articles in a separate post.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/09/25/high-courts-transgender-ruling-spells-rare-victory-sanity/

www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2019/09/26/high-court-right-rule-against-motherless-birth-certificates/

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/09/25/transgender-man-gave-birth-loses-high-court-battle-make-child/

Conclusion from the editorial

"The Commons, which is back in session with little to do, could usefully debate difficult social issues like this rather than shy away from them for fear of being targeted by activists whose support in the country is vanishingly small."

I also noted that the twitter thread on Sky News was nearly 400 comments by early evening yesterday, and 1% at most were not some variation on 'quite right too'.

Maybe the MSM is catching on that the silent majority who actually buy papers, aren't buying this?

My only concern is that maybe this is only happening because this is in fact a female person, and that we could end up with a situation where transmen can't be their child's legal father but transwomen can be their child's legal mother, somehow. That's how the rape by deception (about the person's sex) case panned out.

The thing is, courts aren't woke - they go by precedent. I think there's hope.

My only concern is that maybe this is only happening because this is in fact a female person, and that we could end up with a situation where transmen can't be their child's legal father but transwomen can be their child's legal mother, somehow.

I would think almost the opposite is more likely, actually.
This court case clarified that the person who gives birth to the child, is the mother.
Therefore, a transman who gave birth can't be the legal father, because they are legally the mother, and there must be a mother on the birth certificate.
A transwoman cannot give birth, so they cannot be listed as the mother (that slot would be reserved for the person who did), but they don't have to be listed as the father, because it is not mandatory to list the father - that space can be left blank, or there is a precedent from lesbian parents whereby they could potentially be listed as the "second parent" (I think that's the wording used, it's along those lines).

Hmm that doesn't sound very opposite, actually. Ignore the first sentence of my reply!

I don’t think it will ultimately matter what the courts say, he will still call himself the father.

Freddy can call Freddy's self whatever Freddy wants.

But for birth certificates, the mother gave birth to the baby.

interesting that the telegraph thinks the clinics are acting outside of their remit (they are licensed to assist women to conceive)
IMO it's the GRC given to this person that needs revision
they are not living in their acquired/intended gender