JK Rowling article

[DrDreReturns]

Interesting read. I know it's from a Conservative site but it seems only the right are gender critical at the moment.

www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2022/03/profile-j-k-rowling-striving-to-stop-starmer-nailing-his-colours-to-the-fence-on-trans.html

After trans masculine hormone therapy they may have several male sex characteristics.

What would they be? A low voice and extra body hair don't change your sex.

Let's look also at the ethical side of 'developing' this technology to allow a male to carry a foetus.

The current status at the moment for experimenting on embryos is that some labs may start petitioning to increase the legal limit of 14 days to five weeks, but there is a great deal of debate as to the ethics.

By contrast, no human embryos have been grown outside the womb beyond 14 days (the legal limit in the UK, Israel, China and many other countries), which is of course still at a very early stage of the journey towards becoming a baby. But Jacob Hanna, who led the Israeli project at the Weizmann Institute of Science, told Technology Review that it “sets the stage for other species… I hope that it will allow scientists to grow human embryos until week five.”

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/replotting-the-human-the-thorny-ethics-of-growing-babies-outside-the-womb

The ethics of ‘ectogenesis’ which this then forms part of has been debated since the term ectogenesis came into being around 1924. I doubt that we will get to the point of creating a human life to be part of an experiment in this kind of pregnancy.

Just think. With all the drugs cocktails (considering that we are told when we are pregnant that we cannot even take certain pain relief and a whole list of drugs and even food!!! But if you had been pregnant Fuchs you would have known all this) who has the responsibility of any surviving foetus for the effects of those drugs?

In addition, if the pregnancy, one that has been created just for that male who does not have any natural ability to carry that foetus to term or past a time when that child has a chance of surviving, that is purely experimentation on a human.

The ethics of which are not even grey. The experiments needed to produce the processes and technology to do this makes it unethical. Not just borderline. But unethical.

Trans women can't get pregnant yet, but I hope it happens in our lifetime.

yep. This statement is indeed enlightening.

@ElaineFuchs

If you actually believe that trans women are doing this or even want to do this then I don't know what to say... You're so blinded by bigotry and hatred that you swallow an obviously made up conspiricy theory

You are obviously so blinded by a warped version of reality that you believe men are women.

Birthing children is an important part of being a woman to many.

Birthing children is NO ONE's 'right'.

what sex characteristics other people have is none of your business, and you should stop caring so much

Elaine, this is all brilliant. I really think you should start posting on AIBU. We're a hopeless bunch of wee sock puppets in here, you could educate so many more on the busier boards.

I mean, keep posting here, too, please! But do share the joy.

It's bobbins grin

Which sums up the whole trans argument nicely.

[quote ScrollingLeaves]@ElaineFuchs
There are also papers by actual doctors saying it's daunting but not impossible. I trust them over you I'm afraid

Links to peer reviewed scientific papers please.[/quote]
There are quite a few!

First one I found " Based upon our clinical consideration, UTx in transgender women, and uterine donation from transgender men, are feasible." www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26895269.2021.1915635?src=recsys

I didn't claim you hate trans people.

I believe you hold discriminatory attitudes towards trans people.

When you said: You're so blinded by bigotry and hatred

You cannot twist your words to mean anything but that you are saying I 'hate' trans people. Are you so used to people just agreeing with you to be nice, that you think you can get away with the words you have used on this thread?

Are you so devoid of logic, that you cannot draw adequate conclusions to the words you use?

I don't believe you are pro life in general, but it's clear that your pro choice attitude doesn't extend to those you don't consider real women.

after you have already declared with glee 'Gonna pin this straight in the middle of the GC, pro-life venn diagram.'

Also leads exactly to the conclusion that you called my 'pro-life' earlier in the thread.

And if by 'real women' I mean female humans and not male humans being re-engineered to be able to artificially develop a foetus, then YES MY PRO-CHOICE DOES NOT COVER UNETHICAL EXPERIMENTS ON HUMAN FOETUSES.

By the way, neither does the international law if you bother reading what I posted earlier. So, I think I am really comfortable with my decision.

The fact is that you seem to have some really warped ethical boundaries, and it seems to be something you are happy to deny. You think it is 'progress'.

I suggest that I can work out why that is. It is a sentiment that we see expressed by a particular group on this board regularly.

'The ability to bear children may help TGW fulfill both physical and psychological goals.'

Aw, how heartwarming. And a great reason to have children, I'm sure everyone will agree.

@Helleofabore

Let's look also at the ethical side of 'developing' this technology to allow a male to carry a foetus.

The current status at the moment for experimenting on embryos is that some labs may start petitioning to increase the legal limit of 14 days to five weeks, but there is a great deal of debate as to the ethics.

By contrast, no human embryos have been grown outside the womb beyond 14 days (the legal limit in the UK, Israel, China and many other countries), which is of course still at a very early stage of the journey towards becoming a baby. But Jacob Hanna, who led the Israeli project at the Weizmann Institute of Science, told Technology Review that it “sets the stage for other species… I hope that it will allow scientists to grow human embryos until week five.”

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/replotting-the-human-the-thorny-ethics-of-growing-babies-outside-the-womb

The ethics of ‘ectogenesis’ which this then forms part of has been debated since the term ectogenesis came into being around 1924. I doubt that we will get to the point of creating a human life to be part of an experiment in this kind of pregnancy.

Just think. With all the drugs cocktails (considering that we are told when we are pregnant that we cannot even take certain pain relief and a whole list of drugs and even food!!! But if you had been pregnant Fuchs you would have known all this) who has the responsibility of any surviving foetus for the effects of those drugs?

In addition, if the pregnancy, one that has been created just for that male who does not have any natural ability to carry that foetus to term or past a time when that child has a chance of surviving, that is purely experimentation on a human.

The ethics of which are not even grey. The experiments needed to produce the processes and technology to do this makes it unethical. Not just borderline. But unethical.

There are published papers discussing the ethics of this.

Prohibiting this would violate trans women's right to gestate www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26895269.2021.1915635 and
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15532739.2019.1599764

They don't have a "right to gestate" because they are male. It's really quite simple.

'TGM as living uterine donors'

An ingenious plan!

'Prohibiting this would violate trans women's right to gestate'

Would it, aye?

Transwomen could also reproduce the old fashioned way by impregnating a female human. That would be lot safer for everyone and would also be a lot more ethical. Implanting a foreign organ into a body quite capable of reproducing naturally is not moral.

Prohibiting this would violate trans women's right to gestate

What?! 🤣

Also, remember that there will be an actual human produced at the end of all this, who will need nurturing and looking after until at least the age of 18. How does that fit in with the 'physical and psychological goals'?

@Helleofabore

I didn't claim you hate trans people.

I believe you hold discriminatory attitudes towards trans people.

When you said: You're so blinded by bigotry and hatred

You cannot twist your words to mean anything but that you are saying I 'hate' trans people. Are you so used to people just agreeing with you to be nice, that you think you can get away with the words you have used on this thread?

Are you so devoid of logic, that you cannot draw adequate conclusions to the words you use?

I don't believe you are pro life in general, but it's clear that your pro choice attitude doesn't extend to those you don't consider real women.

after you have already declared with glee 'Gonna pin this straight in the middle of the GC, pro-life venn diagram.'

Also leads exactly to the conclusion that you called my 'pro-life' earlier in the thread.

And if by 'real women' I mean female humans and not male humans being re-engineered to be able to artificially develop a foetus, then YES MY PRO-CHOICE DOES NOT COVER UNETHICAL EXPERIMENTS ON HUMAN FOETUSES.

By the way, neither does the international law if you bother reading what I posted earlier. So, I think I am really comfortable with my decision.

The fact is that you seem to have some really warped ethical boundaries, and it seems to be something you are happy to deny. You think it is 'progress'.

I suggest that I can work out why that is. It is a sentiment that we see expressed by a particular group on this board regularly.

I was talking about the pro life attitude. Not you as a whole.

And blinded by hatred towards the idea of being transgender, which I suppose on reflection is tantamount to hating trans people.

Prohibiting this would violate trans women's right to gestate

Umm .... and this is again a very clear indication of your motivations in this regard.

what about the rights of the child?

Do you actually understand that a child is not an accessory for life but that a child has rights too?

Do you actually understand that doctors can discuss this dilemma all they want about implanting uteruses.... but an embryo also has rights under international law?

Do you honestly believe that the rights of a transitioned male comes before that of a child?

@Helleofabore

Prohibiting this would violate trans women's right to gestate

Umm .... and this is again a very clear indication of your motivations in this regard.

what about the rights of the child?

Do you actually understand that a child is not an accessory for life but that a child has rights too?

Do you actually understand that doctors can discuss this dilemma all they want about implanting uteruses.... but an embryo also has rights under international law?

Do you honestly believe that the rights of a transitioned male comes before that of a child?

Please read the articles. I support any woman who is unable to have children to have medical intervention to help with that.

I've had enough for today, so I won't respond further for now

And blinded by hatred towards the idea of being transgender, which I suppose on reflection is tantamount to hating trans people.

You are plucking shit out of the air and trying to make it stick.

Disagreeing with you about the categories of sex, the conflicts that females have with transitioned males for access to single sex spaces and other female protective rights and pointing out the complete lack of ethics for a human embryo does not amount to 'hating trans people'.

I also figure that many trans people would actually agree with much of what I write here.

Or are you a self-identified spokes person for all trans people? And if you are, who elected you?

I support any woman who is unable to have children to have medical intervention to help with that.

Your support of 'any woman' seems to be self-motivated perhaps?

Whereas I support any female who is unable to have children to have medical intervention to help with that.

Brilliant. Thanks, Elaine! Look forward to hearing lots more from you!

Being pro-experimentation on animals whatever the experiment is, including human animals, is "less bigoted"?

No. It. Isn't.

I wonder if you have even considered that early experiments are being conducted on mice, and will then be performed on our closest relations amongst the apes.

Yeah, it's really so kind to cheer on as scientists remove the uterus from a female chimpanzee and put it in a male chimpanzee. Do you have posters of smoking beagles on your walls, too?

So, what does 'assigned at birth' mean?

If a transman was incorrectly assigned female at birth, what does that involve, medical intervention?

Or does it mean the doctor/midwife incorrectly said 'it's a girl'? If it's this one why didn't the baby develop male bits 'n' bobs as they grew up?

Or is there another answer, I would love to know?