What's the problem with FiLiA?

[RhymesWithOrange]

On another thread a few posters referred to "the FiLiA debacle". Without wanting to poke at the wounds in the current feminist movement, can someone tell me what's gone on?

I don't think it is distracting from the reality, it is coming from a position of the soc fems (disagree with elitist) who are dismayed that some of the activism from grassroots GCs oppose the rights of lesbian women.

FiLia of all places should be a safe and supportive space for lesbians.

There is the other issue of aligning with the far right vs ideological purity (also summarised for brevity) which has been rumbling on.

I am now officially scared by what you mean by “rights” Sappho.

I wasn't aware that a right to have children for all, was a common soc fem position but I'm happy to see evidence to the contrary.

I mean this, and if lesbians receiving equal rights to heterosexual couples scares you I am not sorry www.hrw.org/news/2022/09/22/england-end-lbq-discrimination-access-fertility-services

And I haven't read the middle of the thread so apologies if this has already been mentioned , but the only FILIA related row I've seen concerning lesbians (other than the bouncer incident) is Belstaffie objecting to FILIA platforming Political Lesbians, which she sees as insulting to "real" lesbians

I wonder Sappho if you're trying to force team your new soc fems friends on this issue as much as you are us.

That's very flattering Tinsel, but I'm pretty sure my new soc fem friends are able to form their own opinions without any influence from me.

This link suggests that lesbians are get access to fertility treatment if they cannot naturally conceive.

You have been arguing for something different.

You have been arguing that lesbians should be able to use fertility services instead of making their own arrangements with a man.

*are equally able

I wish you'd pay us the same compliment then.

Quite

Lesbian equality with heterosexual couples viz a viz reproduction can't really be achieved, can it? 'Cos biology.

Issues about access to fertility services, when and under what conditions are just that - should access to service be based on equality between heterosexual and lesbian women?

I'm not sure that anyone is arguing that heterosexual women should have earlier/more access to fertility services (although I may have missed some posts about this).

I think posters are right when they say abstract principles of 'lesbian equality' around reproduction do inevitably lead to 'what about gay men equality?' and make it very difficult to draw a hard line between fertility intervention and surrogacy because it does get into 'right to a child' territory.

What about gay man equality?

Gay men should have equal rights to surrogacy as heterosexual men in a relationship have to surrogacy.

I don't care what anyone's sexuality is wrt to NHS Fertility Services. What I do care about is:

1. that the NHS is supposed to serve people with health problems, in this case "infertility", although it is also debatable whether the thwarted desire to give birth or pass on one's genes should be remedied by provision of NHS-funded fertility services. Arguments about the possible health risks to fertile adults of arrangements other than an NHS Fertility Service are spurious. There are plenty of providers outside the NHS supplying medical and technological solutions in accordance with current regulations and "alternative" arrangements are as old as the hills.

2. children. As a PP has mentioned, there is research indicating that "children raised by same-sex parents from birth perform better than children raised by different-sex parents in both primary and secondary education". and "we conclude that children raised by same-sex parents are likely to perform at least as well as (if not better than) children raised by different-sex parents in school.". The researchers note that "Our results mostly support the hypothesis that, given the time-consuming and costly procedures for same-sex couples to obtain children, same-sex parents typically have higher socioeconomic status resulting in better school outcomes. Nonetheless, when we control for a range of socioeconomic factors, the significantly positive association does not entirely disappear."

School Outcomes of Children Raised by Same-Sex Parents: Evidence from Administrative Panel Data, 2020
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0003122420957249

• School outcomes are not everything though.
• If same-sex parents "typically have higher socioeconomic status" then they should typically be in a better financial position to avail themselves of fertility services outside the NHS.
• the research included adopted children and where adoption was not at birth the effect was not as strong.

If raising children to be happy and reach their full potential was the aim, rather than the desire to give birth and/or pass on genetic material, then more people would opt to adopt and/or foster - whatever their sexuality.

Adoptions fall by 62% as IVF success rises
2018
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46081726

Don't even get me started on "surrogacy" - whatever the sexuality of those who should properly be referred to as the "surrogate parents", ie. the baby-buyers:

web.archive.org/web/20210404131650/threadreaderapp.com/thread/1378661064339042306.html

It is manipulative and disgusting to suggest that "homophobia" and/or"lesbophobia" and/or "transphobia" and/or "religion" is the "real" motivation for reasoned objections to:

• fertility services per se or
• fertility services using donor gametes or
• fertility services on the NHS or
• fertility services on the NHS for fertile individuals/couples

It is also bizarre to be surprised that some women on Mumsnet, including feminists, might prioritise: the rights of children over the desires of adults; the restricting of NHS funding to medically necessary procedures. And NO, that does not equate to being anti-abortion, homophobic or far-fucking-right.

However, if that is the conclusion of some Filia organisers and attendees and it naturally put them at odds with other attendees then maybe it would be better for Filia to encourage focus on points of agreement in the greater cause rather than divisive issues?

Nobody should have a right to surrogacy.

Surrogacy is exploiting a woman's body. All pregnancies are risky and unpredictable. The baby will be separated from his/her mother. The emotional impact of this separation is negative for mother and baby.

It's surprising that anyone on a feminist board would view surrogacy as comparable to sperm donation which does not have any of the same risks for men or the potential to exploit men and does not mean the child is separated from its mother.

Surrogacy and sperm donation are as far apart as prostitution and consensual sex IMO.

All sperm donors (in the UK) must be traceable and the child will always have the option to contact their donor once they are 18. Children conceived from heterosexual one night stands or times when the parents lose contact do not have this option.

Bearing all of the above in mind, I believe that as the NHS offer's heterosexual couples with male factor infertility IUI and IVF using donor sperm then lesbians should be offered this too.

The NHS does not offer surrogacy to anyone and there is no plan for this to change.

Sappho you are the one using “equal fertility rights” as a catch-all to include a whole lot of dubious stuff. This catch-all term also includes surrogacy for gay men.

The arguments are identical.

Gay men equally have the same “right” to a family/to become parents as “straight” men.

And just like women not producing sperm in same-sex female couples is framed as a “fertility issue” in this catch-all, so is men not producing eggs, or not having wombs, is a “fertility issue” for male same-sex couples.

No I'm not.

As a PP posted out, if surrogacy was offered to heterosexual couples on the NHS there would be an argument for gay couples to be offered this too. But it isn't and never will be.

There is a valid argument for lesbians to receive donor insemination and therefore receive equality with straight couples with male factor infertility.

Sappho have you not noticed that many gay men are now purchasing babies through surrogacy, and although it’s not provided by the NHS, they do feel entitled to rent women and buy babies as part of their ‘equal fertility rights’? And believe that only homophobes could object?

Commercial surrogacy isn’t even legal in this country, yet it is being done brazenly.

Here is the way it will go, if we don’t do something about it.

First commercial surrogacy is being normalised.

Then it will be legalised.

Then it will be considered essential “equal fertility rights” for homosexuals.

The it will be demanded on the NHS.

Yes I have noticed gay men are renting wombs and it is appalling and a feminist issue but this is not the fault of lesbians who use donor sperm.

That would be like saying 'have you seen all these people having consensual sex? It's not surprising that men are now using prostitutes'

EndlessTea it could be argued that sex outside marriage paves the way for prostitution so should we ban sex outside marriage?

this is not the fault of lesbians who use donor sperm.

Anyone who uses obfuscating language like “equal fertility rights” is partially culpable for normalising and setting the stage for surrogacy for gay men in the UK.

Not all lesbians who use donor sperm call it their “equal fertility rights”, so no, it is not the fault of those women.

Nobody is saying surrogacy is lesbians fault obviously, we are warning against using the language of "rights" with regards to having children because surrogacy is where that argument will take us.

All the "but it's different!" floundering is not tackling this point.

Nobody has a right to a child.

I’ve never heard this. I always saw it framed the other way around, that when the majority of women didn’t have sex outside marriage, the prostituted underclass of women was created for men who couldn’t get all the sex they want.

That's a false comparison.

The correct comparison is "everybody has a right to sex", which we do see being used for eg disabled men having a right to the services of prostituted women.

As a thought experiment. If certain couples (including lesbians) are seen to have a "right" to fertility treatment including the use of donor sperm, what would happen if there was no donor sperm available because all men had decided they didn't want to donate any more? Let's say there was some proof that it was somehow a health risk to men to donate.

How would their right be fulfilled?