Gay men and surrogacy - the new “be kind”?

[Tootingbec]

Just seen a LinkedIn post from a gay man who is writing a book about the surrogacy “journey” he and his husband went through. Cue gushing comments about how amazing this is…..

It has really upset me. The sheer fucking privilege of gay men to buy babies and then be lauded and praised for it like they were super heroes. And untouchable to criticism due to blinkered “be kind” beliefs about the poor gay men who just want a family like heterosexual men.

Where do people think these babies come from? Do you think people delude themselves that all these gay men just have kind, altruistic female friends who happily have a baby for them? As opposed to exploiting vulnerable and desperate women in India, Mexico and the like.

I feel so angry - women are just fucked over and abused time and time again by men and it is all dressed up as progressive when it is the exact opposite.

When I was a younger women I loved having gay men in my social circle. They seemed like “nicer” more lovely men than most straight men. Now I realise that underneath it all they just the same sexist, privileged tossers as many straight men are. They want a baby? No problem - buy one! They want to invade women’s spaces? No problem - just reinvent yourself as “the most vulnerable in society”!

It’s like the scales have fallen from my eyes.

Adoption is not a consolation prize for those who cannot have a child biologically

Neither is surrogacy.

Yes it actually is. You are very misinformed.

I'm basing it on many, many interactions on thousands-strong FB groups of adoptive parents and one to one interactions with personal friends who are, like us, adopters. Reports from friends' experience at training groups. Etc etc.
I have to say one thing: I'm more impressed with gay male couples' attitude to their children's mum (source, friends who are adopters) than gay male couples who've used surrogates (source: social media) but that's a low bar.
I have also seen adoptive parents being really relieved when birth parents with low literacy can't keep up with letterbox, instead of thinking of other ways (like, you know, PICKING UP THE PHONE) to keep in touch.

I can see what you mean, that does seem v worrying. Otoh, why do so many adoptees want it?

Plus a big argument against surrogacy is that it's more dangerous than carrying one's own egg.

Or coparenting, as AliasGrace47 said.

Sorry, picking up the phone? How many adopters do you know who have birth parents' phone number?

Are you in the UK? It is exceptionally rare for adoptive parents to have direct contact details for their children's birth parents.

This is something I've only recently learnt.

A fact that the industry has not been keen to publicise it seems.

What did he say about gay & lesbian sexuality? You mean he meant that they are actually the opposite of each other sexually?

It's true that lesbians have a lot less casual sex (though more than straight women) and aren't into the crazy sexual stuff too many gay men are (NAGMALT, ofc).

Otoh a lot of gay men sexistly seen to think lesbians are practically asexual, which is obvs ridiculous. Higher dead bedroom rate has been somewhat exaggerated, tho responsive desire means it is somewhat true. But that doesn't mean that lesbians don't enjoy sex

I would 't set too much store by a gay man's opinions of lesbians' sexuality..

I agree about lesbians and gay men often being quite separate. There can be nice friendships between though, I don't think we should discount that.

A gay man is the only man a lesbian can definitely rely on not to harass her as too many straight men do (ofc gay men can be sexist in other ways). Andrew Sullivan has done some good articles on the gay man-lesbian friendship bond (I've seen people on here say he has not much contact w women but not sure if that's true). There's sometimes been a connection between feminine lesbians in particular and gay men , (though I've mainly come across this in US writings) And ofc lesbians helped a lot in the AIDS crisis.

I follow someone on Substack, Unbowed Lesbian, who has talked about how gay men often protected lesbian bars in the past when they shared venues, and how gay men have helped her avoid the male sexual harassment which is sadly still permitted in a lot of US lesbians bars (they have no requirement to be single sex, so men don"/ even need to pretend to be trans)

On Reddit, the gay male forums have been supportive of lesbians' fight against the TRA rulers of the forums.

Obvs there are obstacles, but I think it's good if gay men try to befriend and ally with women, including lesbians, and stand up to this surrogacy etc misogyny.

I am in the UK. It is completely possible for adoptive parents to contact birth parents by phone if they want to. For example, by asking social workers to pass on their phone no (or possibly a dedicated mobile) to birth parents. There is absolutely no reason why adoptive parents should not do this yet I know only a couple who have and many who do not consider the literacy issues birth parents may have.
Similarly adoptive parents generally meet birth families once "for closure" and yet it's perfectly possible to have regular visits.
These are fairly common (though again birth parents are demonised and made out to be "unsafe') in the US where many birth families have similar issues (neglect, drug use, chaotic lifestyle) to birth parents in the UK.

Here again you are assuming birth parents are engaged with social services to be contactable in order to provide a phone number. You are also assuming that adoptive parents have the knowledge and skills to know whether or not that is a good idea, which is a huge leap.

You're also ignoring that social workers will generally not pass on identifying information as part of post adoption contact.

Sorry, but the level of generalisations here is staggering.

Funny, you've not actually set out what you have done to facilitate this contact? You just popped your phone number in a letter to birth mother and hey presto your in phone contact?

No, we met her and gave her our phone number. We used a virtual number and made sure her parents had it too. She never got letters because she kept moving. She changed her phone no regularly. She always remembered our number and her parents number.

As we are 16 pages in and there are some wild takes on the original post I just want to reiterate a few things:

I am against surrogacy for heterosexual men and women, and homosexual men and women

My point/concern/view is that surrogacy is gaining legitimacy “out there” due to gay men using surrogates and it being seen as progressive and a good thing - not the exploitive awful thing I believe it is. And that fear of being called “homophobic” or a misguided sense of “be kind” is not calling this out for what it is.

When younger I made sweeping generalisations in my own mind that gay men were somehow “better” or “nicer” versions of men. But now I am older I realise they are just men at the end of the day. Some are fab, some are mediocre and some are shits. And some use their power and privilege to buy babies and for me, that is not ok.

No it is not "completely possible for adoptive parents to contact birth parents by phone if they want to". There is not a chance that I would ever give my phone number to my children's birth parents - one is an incredibly dangerous individual and the other doesn't have the intellect or social understand to use it appropriately if she had it. It's not about my wants.

I'm amazed your children's birth parents don't fall into one of those categories tbh, the number of birth parents in UK adoption who aren't either significantly impacted by learning needs, or by substance issues, or aren't dangerous offenders who present a genuine risk of harm to adopters and children, would be pretty small I think. Plus the contact we have is vetted by social care, they'd redact anything identifying I sent because my children were removed from these people for their own safety and that safety has to be preserved.

So far from being "absolutely no reason why adoptive parents should not do this", there are extremely good reasons why they should not do it. It's not about adopters not wanting to be in direct contact but about it not being safe to be in direct contact. Birth parents with low literacy can be helped by social workers to read and respond to letters, that's a far less extreme solution than handing out adopters phone numbers to people whose parenting ability has been proven so minimal that a court has decided they cannot safely parent their children. That's, rightly, a high bar.

But that's probably enough of the adoption derail.

I'm not going to give any more details of our family but suffice to say you have mentioned many things that apply and it's still possible to have phone and in person contact. In general birth parents with few resources who live at a distance are unable to find your home based just on a mobile number that's only used for them, anyway.

If you have a family member (your own biological family) who has substance abuse problems, generally you'd have occasional polite and mildly informative phone calls, and meet them with firm boundaries. At the time we adopted , one of my close family members was just recovered from mental health problems that meant we'd have been cautious about leaving children in their sole care. Their children are older than ours but if ours had been older by say 10 years it would have been a very similar set of risk assessments.

Many US adopters with very similar issues in their children's birth families have far more extensive contact than we do.

They behave completely differently sexually and you couldn't compare them as opposes, just different.

He wasn't remotely derogatory about lesbians sexual habits. Indeed it was quite the opposite.

Ah I see. He sounds sensible, thank you for clarifying. I agree it's not a direct opposition, they're 2 different things which should be judged on their own terms.

Bisexual groups shouldn't be grouped together either. Separate spaces for bi women and lesbians, for one, are important. But bi men & women have v different experiences & from what I've seen in bi forums (I'm bi) bi men often make sexist comments or talk like being DL is OK.

There has been a long problem of gay men dominating LGB groups. I think Julie Bindel has talked about that, among others. It's definitely important for feminists to be aware.

He's very sensible.

And surprised me with how measured he is about a few things.

I would like the following steps to be taken:

(1) Criminalising all use of overseas surrogates.

(2) In any situation where a birth mother is giving up her parental rights voluntarily, the new parents should go through exactly the same process of assessment as adoptive parents, EVEN IF one of the intended parents is the biological father of the child.
Women and men are not interchangeable. Gay couples or single men choosing to raise babies without the presence of a of a mother should expect intense scrutiny. (I also don't think gay men should be allowed to adopt babies or young children.)

(3) In any situation where a woman is carrying a baby with the intention for someone else to raise the child, it should be a criminal offence for the intended parents to give her any money, EVEN EXPENSES, or substantial non-pecuniary gifts.
If a woman wants to risk her own life to create a child for a beloved, infertile sister or friend, she can bear any financial costs of pregnancy herself, which for most people are trivial.

“Where do people think these babies come from? Do you think people delude themselves that all these gay men just have kind, altruistic female friends who happily have a baby for them? As opposed to exploiting vulnerable and desperate women in India, Mexico and the like.”

I had a vague memory that commercial surrogacy was no longer possible in India so did some checking. Commercial is legal in:
Russia
Ukraine
Some US states. Of these, some have state level surrogacy regulation, some don’t. Of those that do, none require background checks on the commissioning parents.

Basically, if you have enough money, you can commission a baby in the US. More checks are run on people trying to adopt a pet from a shelter. As long as they pay up, as soon as the baby is born they have full legal parentage, a birth certificate (baby is US citizen) and can get a US passport and leave the country. If they go to their home country, other laws about parental orders kick in, varying by country. If they don’t go home, nothing would trigger any scrutiny, because they have a birth certificate and a passport for the child.

Even in the most heavily regulated state, NY, long term health consequences for the surrogate are not covered. So depending on the State, the commissioning parent’s obligations to the surrogate are what’s in the contract. No legal requirement for healthcare, life insurance, coverage of expenses, different lawyer for the surrogate, nothing.

Yep that is all right. I 100% guarantee that if we asked our post adoption team to pass on a number to our sons BM they would 100% refuse. As much because of her wellbeing as ours.

If we wanted to arrange a face to face meeting they may be willing to discuss putting it forward but it would entirely depend on what we had in mind and what happens next.

I think the poster is either not being entirely honest or had very unique circumstances that made this possible. It is 100% not possible for most adopters.

I read it. I disagreed with it. Why are you now repeatedly trying to derail with spurious accusations of ‘homophobia’ while berating us for not engaging with your other point?

You appear to dismiss the damage done to babies separated permanently from their mother at birth. What about the accounts from adoptees who spend their lives looking for their mother and wanting to find the lost connection? Does their harm not count?

Even if it doesn’t happen to every baby, why are we risking it happening to some? The risk of a baby being bought for purposes of sexual abuse is also there. Why are we risking that happening to some? How many babies bought for sexual abuse purposes is too many?

I never got this idea of gay men being ‘nicer’ than other men, I knew plenty of gay men growing up and they seemed to dislike and disrespect women more than the average man in my opinion, women have nothing that they want so why would they be nicer to them?

I am being honest but not revealing the extent of her difficulties.
This type of contact is as I say extremely common (and I've never said it's universal) in US adopters who have adopted from foster care. There is no reason why this model couldn't be followed in the UK, except that social workers don't think it's possible and adoptive parents tell each other it's dangerous.

I'm not sure that lots of adoptees want it. Some want it and they have been vociferous in saying so. And the situation is so very different from say 25 years ago when I adopted - social media means that contact is often happening unsupported on line and causing lots of issues. So managing a relationship with birth family from the beginning makes sense in many ways; however it remains to be seen how this works in practice. There is no funding to support any of the parties involved and this is a potentially fraught area.

For example, my girls' birth mother scapegoated one of the two girls. This was detailed in the reports and she kept it up in the few letters we received (she then stopped communication completely). Imagine if we had been ordered by the courts to have face to face contact with her!!

Some adoptees do yearn for contact but many do not. But the latter don't campaign and their wishes are ignored.