TW and IVF

[CatandSpoon]

I'm pondering...
Would this be a surefire test of how indoctrinated a person is.

Say for example my DH John has decided he is now a woman. As TWAW (or so they would have us believe) he has decided he wants to carry a baby. So he is going to contact the IVF clinics and undergo the hormones, the egg harvesting etc.

If, upon hearing this story a person replies "but no, John can't undergo IVF!"...

Can I then say "ah but that reply makes you a T*RF in the eyes of the TWAW movement"

Is this a potentially peaking example?

I'm trying to think of a way to .. not even challenge friends, but to highlight the ludicrous nature of the TWAW brigade.

@ZairWazAnOldLady
I am sorry. This was not my line of thinking. What I was thinking was IVF drugs can never work on men, they can only work for women.
I apologize for being insensitive

It’s obvious you hadn’t thought about how it might sit with the couples who need fertility treatment. I’m sure no harm was intended. As for the drugs not working on men, aren’t some them the same as puberty stoppers? I’m sure I remember reading that the drugs used to suppress your hormones were now being used on children to stop them developing.

FYI - I had fertility treatment and am not in the least bit offended so Zaire’s speaking for themselves, not all ‘sub-fertile women’.

I saw this recently on a plastic surgery reaction video and was quite shocked. Or was I? This is basically the nonsense we've come to expect. It doesn't help with your thought experiment, but I found it morbidly fascinating.

Skip to 4.44 to see Jessica Alves go to a fertility appointment.
5.22 to hear the Dr talk through the options.
6.17 for Jessica's confession that Jessica has wasted the Dr's time and made a right tit out of him.
6.30 for the Dr making himself into an even bigger tit by telling Jessica about womb transplants including how, one day, it might not just be "biological" women who can get them.
7.04 when he suggests Jessica rent a woman's womb.

I think the question of pregnant “transwomen” is covered quite well in this clip. :

@DifficultBloodyWoman I said “might sit” not did and wasn’t suggesting I spoke for all sub-fertile couples, any more than those women who “don’t mind sharing female spaces with men” talk for all women.

Women are not defined by their individual ability to have a baby. It's OF A CLASS capable of producing large gametes.
Whether John fits that CLASS or not is obvious to anyone with eyes. The IVF example is too easily refuted given that plenty of women have to have hysterectomies (and we all ultimately have a menopause) at which point IVF would be useless, and we don't stop being women. It would be great if this argument worked but it's flawed as much as the "girl mode/lady brain" argument is. Back to the drawing board.

Women are not defined by their individual ability to have a baby. I think there’s a further clarification that’s needed. Women are not closer to the male sex if they are less fertile, prepubescent or menopausal.

I would be fairly astounded if science developed to such a degree to enable IVF drugs to:
Stimulate men's nonexistent ovaries to produce oocytes which would then be fertilised and implanted in the man's non existent womb.
Then precisely manage the delicate balance of female hormones throughout the pregnancy that are not made by the male body, the blood flow etc

As a person undergoing/ who has undergone IVF yourself (I assume from your post) and who knows more than me about the process do you think this is a scientific possibility?

Not to mention an ABC journalist I previously credited with a modicum of intelligence stating that getting upset about a 'trans mum' breastfeeding is being mean because we're not focussing on actual child abuse.

Honestly they will say anything at this point. It's embarrassing.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-29/trans-mum-breastfeeding-anger/102659824

I can’t imagine it would EVER be better for an embryo to be transplanted into a male or a vat/tank than into a womb.

I don't know, OP. But I do know that pregnancy and birth is, by its very nature, trans exclusionary. Anyone who has ever been born is thus a complete transphobe.

Really, we should be choosing to be born of transwomen in order to be fully inclusive and affirmative.

I think that's an absolutely horrendous concept and still won't mean a man is a woman

My view is that IVF for men is such a ridiculous concept that it would surely show that TWAM!

But I didn't consider @YukoandHiro 's point that the rhetoric is not TW are biological women, rather it's stretching the definition of a woman to encompass biological women (or just "women" as I like to call them) and men who say they are women