KJK's film out at 8pm tonight

[lochmaree]

I never said they could.

Of course no one is going to argue with “equal rights to straight people”.

But you are going to seriously explain what the fuck you mean by “fertility equality“, before we can go any further.

And nothing circular please.

Reproduction is heterosexual. So please explain the exact machinations of what you believe homosexuals (non-reproducing couples) are entitled to, in order for them to be ‘equal’ with heterosexual ones.

Apologies @UtopiaPlanitia

Start another thread if you want to discuss it @EndlessTea

If straight couples with male factor infertility get state funded donor insemination / fertility treatment then lesbians couples should be offered the same.

You say fucking entitled, I say gay equality.

Are you aware that these demands are not what most people think of when the think ‘gay rights’? That this is a pretty radical new direction?

It's not a radical new direction, a law was passed last year to secure equality for lesbian couples.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/lesbian-couples-gain-equal-access-to-nhs-ivfukk_62d7b431e4b0aad58d146a96/

The ‘same terms’ would be if they are infertile.

'Until now, female same-sex couples have had to pay for up to six rounds of private artificial insemination before being eligible for NHS treatment, costing couples tens of thousands of pounds and pricing some out of starting a family. The restrictions are even more complex for male same-sex couples where a surrogate is needed. In comparison, straight couples just have to say they’ve been trying to conceive for two years.'

From the article Sappho posted.

That seems to be conflating very different situations. Artificial insemination is very far removed from surrogacy. These are not the same things. Is this law paving the way to men claiming some kind of 'right' to surrogate children?

I think it is Arabella. I think “equal fertility” is a reasonable-sounding name for dystopian horror.

have had to pay for up to six rounds of private artificial insemination

And this is a lie. In the past, women would come to an agreement with a man and use a syringe. Cheap and cheerful. The idea that women need to over-engineer it and use IVF is lies.

Women who came to a private arrangement often ended up in a nightmare. Men who said they would only donate sperm, once the baby was born sued and won 50% custody, Men who only wanted to be sperm donors ended up having to pay CSA. Women caught STDs.

It is clearly trying to imply that lesbians getting pregnant is the same as gay men renting a surrogate mother who doesn’t want to sell her own biological child. It is very expensive. Loads of rounds of IVF cos she won’t do the syringe.

De-sexing and fudging the matter to bring about approval for our brave new world.

I do not consider these rights.

Sounds like equal rights with heterosexuals to me.

Equality not good enough.

You demand ‘Rights+’… just like other human rights, but only for extra special people.

Anyway, thanks both for replying.

Anyone who believes a birth certificate shouldn't record biological reality, has most likely never been in the situation of having a child require genetic testing for an inherited disability, only apparent after birth.

As someone who has been in that situation, this biological reality was hugely important for my child. Much much more important than any of my own desires or feelings.

So you support DNA testing before a birth certificate is completed so we know who the biological parents are?

'Until now, female same-sex couples have had to pay for up to six rounds of private artificial insemination

Doesn't this include private arrangements with a male donor too? The requirement is to diagnose infertility, that's the reason there is a qualifying period.

Women who came to a private arrangement often ended up in a nightmare. Men who said they would only donate sperm, once the baby was born sued and won 50% custody, Men who only wanted to be sperm donors ended up having to pay CSA. Women caught STDs.

Exactly the same applies to single women of any sexual orientation using a private donor.

Like many women who aren't lesbians then?

Most single women do not come to private arrangements.
Most single women and lesbian couples go to clinics.

It does seem like ‘special privileges’ to expect the state to provide you with a risk free father.

There are risks of STDs, lies, let downs, custody battles, etc, when people want to make babies (or for heterosexuals, when they make babies by accident too).

Why should lesbians not have any of those things? Why should the state provide this guaranteed hassle free man to father their children?

It’s ‘enhanced rights+’ they feel entitled to. They don’t want ‘equal rights’.

Check out the relationships section of MN if you think that the demand for the state to provide a risk free father for lesbians, in any way resembles the ‘guarantees’ heterosexual women have.

By the way, by ‘they’ I refer to the two posters arguing for enhanced rights+ not lesbians as a group.

FYI using the word 'father' instead of 'donor' for the anonymous men who help lesbian couples conceive is pretty offensive. Not sure if that is deliberate.

It would be like telling adoptive parents that the people who created their child are the 'real' mum and dad.

I don’t care if you find the truth offensive.

Children are concieved from a mans sperm and a woman's egg. The owner's of the egg and the sperm are biologically the child's mother and father. This is what they have been known as for as long as we've had language and understanding of reproduction.

It's no one's fault but their own if some people choose to be perpetually offended by the world.