I feel incredible, says pregnant man

[KazukiFerret]

I'm with Rilvor, this broke my fucking brain.

WHAT THE FUCK is this world coming to.

That woman-man creature is very indicisive tho'

 

[Fou-lu]

Creepy. But I see nothing wrong with this personally.
Besides, seems like he (she?) is in a steady relationship and the child will grow up with two loving parents. which is more than a lot of other kids with "normal" parents can say.

 

[Jelly]

He's still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

She, not "he"... no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true gender.

"Gender" is a social construct. You mean no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true sex.

Sex... gender... two words for the same thing, far as I'm concerned. Even though Webster's defines gender as: "The classification by which words are grouped as masculine, feminine, or neuter." And defines sex as: "1. Either of the two divisions of organisms distinguished as male and female... 2. The character of being male or female."

One: that definition of gender is one applied to grammar, not sociology and anthropology.
Two: look up Hijra.

 

[Roose Hurro]

He's still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

She, not "he"... no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true gender.

"Gender" is a social construct. You mean no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true sex.

Sex... gender... two words for the same thing, far as I'm concerned. Even though Webster's defines gender as: "The classification by which words are grouped as masculine, feminine, or neuter." And defines sex as: "1. Either of the two divisions of organisms distinguished as male and female... 2. The character of being male or female."

One: that definition of gender is one applied to grammar, not sociology and anthropology.
Two: look up Hijra.

I said the definition was according to Webster's. In my Edition, that was the only definition given. That doesn't change the fact I consider the two term interchangeable.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Fox Glove]

I kind of don't like the intolerance of transgenders going around here...

Furries: We can be as weird as we fucking want but you can't, because you aren't special like me.

That being said, I honestly see no problem with this, other than some mild criticism and perhaps hate, doesn't mean they shouldn't go through with it.

And I do enjoy what he said about a child being not a male or female desire, but simply a human desire.

 

[Adelio Altomar]

And I read some people's comments about the castrati, and they said they were strange...
...androgynous features, pasty pale, wide hips, voices like little boys, unusually tall, breasts, even.

Yet I have yet to see reactions about them like this...

...it's quite amusing, really.

 

[Jelly]

He's still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

She, not "he"... no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true gender.

"Gender" is a social construct. You mean no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true sex.

Sex... gender... two words for the same thing, far as I'm concerned. Even though Webster's defines gender as: "The classification by which words are grouped as masculine, feminine, or neuter." And defines sex as: "1. Either of the two divisions of organisms distinguished as male and female... 2. The character of being male or female."

One: that definition of gender is one applied to grammar, not sociology and anthropology.
Two: look up Hijra.

I said the definition was according to Webster's. In my Edition, that was the only definition given. That doesn't change the fact I consider the two term interchangeable.

Funny.

---

General comment (truncated to this post thanks to new forum features):
Wow. I didn't think I'd ever witness a thread that would severely piss me off.

...but here it is.

 

[Emil]

This child is going to be murdered when it gets to school.

 

[Surgat]

If your DNA ( I think thats the right thing...I never was much into this sort of thing) says you are female...then you are. No amount of outer conditioning will ever change that...you can do nothing more than fool yourself. Maybe not a bad thing, but in some strange way, it is literally living a lie?

"Male" and "female" are biological categories, not genders. Gender is a category used in anthropology and sociology. Genders, namely "man" and "woman," or "masculinity" and "femininity" are social constructs, and their content and number varies from culture to culture. Gender is simply the set of behaviors typically attributed to, and maybe thought appropriate for one sex in a culture.

Some cultures, like India of the Navajo before European influence, had three genders: male, female, and something inbetween like the Hirja, or a gender for the intrasexed. In some cultures, physical labor is considered "unmanly," in ours it's the opposite, different cultures have different jobs or tasks different genders are supposed to do, etc. None of this is necessary in virtue of people's sex alone. In some cultures, it was considered okay for a male to take on women's gender, and perform those tasks, just as long as their partner took on the male one.

Biology has three different categories of sex. There's chromosomal sex, which is determined by what set of chromosomes you have (XX, XY, XYY, XXY, XXYY, etc.), gonadal sex, which is determined by what set of gonads you have, and hormonal sex. These don't all have to match up; there are people who were born with female genitalia, produce female hormones, and have XY chromosomes, people with XX chromosomes and male genitalia and hormones, and other variations.

A pre-op transgendered person on hormone replacement therapy would have a hormonal sex that doesn't match their gonadal or chromosomal, in addition to having begun behaving more in line with the gender more suitable to them. A post op transsexual would sort of have switched gonadal sex - you wouldn't say that someone who's had extensive reconstruction on their genitals as a result of an accident or disease, was no longer the sex they were born as.

And Roose Hurro wins the epic fail award of the year.

While the article doesn't really seem that bad at all, I'll have to agree with Rilvor that the image included is, well... mindscarring. D: Then again I've always hated MPreg in a fictional context, and I've always been the first one to get the torches and pitchforks at the sight of it without a proper explanation to satisfy the basic rules of biology.

Actually, no, I don't "epic fail"... as I said, no amount of surgery will change the fact a person is either male or female, a fact that is clearly set in chromosomal DNA. Two of those chromosomes determine a person's sex/gender... one X and one Y for a man, and two Xs for a woman. No amount of surgery changes that, it only turns the truth into a lie.

As for a proper explaination, that's easy... this is simply a woman who wears her hair short, takes hormones, and had her breasts hacked off. That satisfy the "basic rules of biology"...? SHE, not HE!

He's still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

She, not "he"... no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true gender.

"Gender" is a social construct. You mean no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true sex.

Sex... gender... two words for the same thing, far as I'm concerned. Even though Webster's defines gender as: "The classification by which words are grouped as masculine, feminine, or neuter." And defines sex as: "1. Either of the two divisions of organisms distinguished as male and female... 2. The character of being male or female."

Eh... the proper word would be "sex", by definition. But you already made the translation, so it makes no real difference. Socially speaking, sex and gender are interchangeable. Unless you want to poke at semantics. Besides, neither a person's true gender nor their sex can be changed by surgery, no matter how much you twist the words....

My reply to Rilvor deals with most of this.

Aside from that, you’re just arguing semantics. Call whatever anthropology and sociology call “gender” and whatever biology calls “sex” whatever you want, that doesn’t really matter since it’s just convention. However, it doesn’t make what they’re referring to go away or become the same thing, any more than calling both cats and dogs "cats" makes everything you call a "cat" sleep 14 hours a day.

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Conditions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swyer_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter%27s_Syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turner_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple-X_syndrome

And yes, you do "epic fail," about as much as it's possible to do so.

Yes, you are right... this is simply a mutilated woman who got pregnant, not a man. Unfortunately (at least from your viewpoint), your hope for a male born able to "get pregnant" is pure fantasy. Even human "hermaphrodites" aren't real herms, simply men or women suffering from a rare birth defect, in many (if not all) cases, correctable by surgery, if performed early enough (at least for the males... for the females, early correction is not as vital).

By your earlier definition, many hermaphrodites are true hermaphrodites. There’s more combinations of chromosomes than XX and XY.

Surgery on intrasexed infants can have devastating effects. Unless it’s necessary for some reason, like a urological reason or something, it’s best to wait to find out what they want to be, so that you don’t pick the wrong sex to reconstruct them as.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6994580/

And it isn’t “mutilation,” it’s recognized in psychology as the standard treatment for gender dysphoria.

 

[Roose Hurro]

I kind of don't like the intolerance of transgenders going around here...

Furries: We can be as weird as we fucking want but you can't, because you aren't special like me.

That being said, I honestly see no problem with this, other than some mild criticism and perhaps hate, doesn't mean they shouldn't go through with it.

And I do enjoy what he said about a child being not a male or female desire, but simply a human desire.

She, not he... I don't know how many times I have to repeat that. Having yourself surgically altered in defiance of your real sex is not what I would call normal behavior. Sure, you're free to do it, since there is not law against it, but... if I know you've done it... I'm certainly not going to be fooled into calling you "he" or "she" when I know you're not. This person is not a man... SHE is a woman who has decide she wants to look like a man, but retain her female ability to become pregnant. HER reproductive freedom. Fine by me, but she hasn't changed the fact she's female. Not in any way, shape or terminology is she now male, just because she's been mutilated to appear male.

If this makes me appear intolerant, so be it, at least I'm not playing along with The Lie. It's like homosexuality... I don't see the point, but if that's the choice you make, you're the one who has to live with it, not me. I don't care for it, any more than I care for Kabuki music, but I don't hate anyone for it, either. I just won't support a lie by calling a woman by a male pronoun, if I'm aware of the lie. That's all....

Oh, and by the way... yes, having children is a human desire, shared by both male and female. That I can agree on!

 

[Rilvor]

facepalm.jpg

I was agreeing with you until the homosexuality part. That really isn't a choice.

She is still a she.

 

[Roose Hurro]

If your DNA ( I think thats the right thing...I never was much into this sort of thing) says you are female...then you are. No amount of outer conditioning will ever change that...you can do nothing more than fool yourself. Maybe not a bad thing, but in some strange way, it is literally living a lie?

"Male" and "female" are biological categories, not genders. Gender is a category used in anthropology and sociology. Genders are social constructs, and their content and number varies from culture to culture. Gender is simply the set of behaviors typically attributed to, and maybe thought appropriate for one sex in a culture.

Some cultures, like India of the Navajo before European influence, had three genders: male, female, and something inbetween like the Hirja, or a gender for the intrasexed. In some cultures, physical labor is considered "unmanly," in ours it's the opposite, different cultures have different jobs or tasks different genders are supposed to do, etc. None of this is necessary in virtue of people's sex alone. In some cultures, it was considered okay for a male to take on women's gender, and perform those tasks, just as long as their partner took on the male one.

Biology has three different categories of sex. There's chromosomal sex, which is determined by what set of chromosomes you have (XX, XY, XYY, XXY, XXYY, etc.), gonadal sex, which is determined by what set of gonads you have, and hormonal sex. These don't all have to match up; there are people who were born with female genitalia, produce female hormones, and have XY chromosomes, people with XX chromosomes and male genitalia and hormones, and other variations.

A pre-op transgendered person on hormone replacement therapy would have a hormonal sex that doesn't match their gonadal or chromosomal, in addition to having begun behaving more in line with the gender more suitable to them. A post op transsexual would sort of have switched gonadal sex - you wouldn't say that someone who's had extensive reconstruction on their genitals as a result of an accident or disease, was no longer the sex they were born as.

As you yourself have noted, anything other than XX or XY is a "syndrome"... a disease or condition, not the normal biological state of a human being. No, I would not say that someone who's had extensive reconstruction on their genitals as a result of an accident or disease was no longer the sex they were born as. That's exactly my point: Whether by accident, disease, or voluntary choice, it does not change the sex they were born as. However, I fully realize, with all the possible syndromes, it can be difficult to determine a person's gender. Also however, a person who is not born with any of these syndromes... someone who is born unmistakeably male or female... there is no confusion.

And Roose Hurro wins the epic fail award of the year.

While the article doesn't really seem that bad at all, I'll have to agree with Rilvor that the image included is, well... mindscarring. D: Then again I've always hated MPreg in a fictional context, and I've always been the first one to get the torches and pitchforks at the sight of it without a proper explanation to satisfy the basic rules of biology.

Actually, no, I don't "epic fail"... as I said, no amount of surgery will change the fact a person is either male or female, a fact that is clearly set in chromosomal DNA. Two of those chromosomes determine a person's sex/gender... one X and one Y for a man, and two Xs for a woman. No amount of surgery changes that, it only turns the truth into a lie.

As for a proper explaination, that's easy... this is simply a woman who wears her hair short, takes hormones, and had her breasts hacked off. That satisfy the "basic rules of biology"...? SHE, not HE!

He's still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

She, not "he"... no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true gender.

"Gender" is a social construct. You mean no amount of surgery will ever change a person's true sex.

Sex... gender... two words for the same thing, far as I'm concerned. Even though Webster's defines gender as: "The classification by which words are grouped as masculine, feminine, or neuter." And defines sex as: "1. Either of the two divisions of organisms distinguished as male and female... 2. The character of being male or female."

Eh... the proper word would be "sex", by definition. But you already made the translation, so it makes no real difference. Socially speaking, sex and gender are interchangeable. Unless you want to poke at semantics. Besides, neither a person's true gender nor their sex can be changed by surgery, no matter how much you twist the words....

My reply to Rilvor deals with most of this.

Aside from that, you’re just arguing semantics. Call whatever anthropology and sociology call “gender” and whatever biology calls “sex” whatever you want, that doesn’t really matter since it’s just convention. However, it doesn’t make what they’re referring to go away or become the same thing, any more than calling both cats and dogs "cats" makes everything you call a "cat" sleep 14 hours a day.

Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#Conditions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swyer_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter%27s_Syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turner_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple-X_syndrome

And yes, you do "epic fail," about as much as it's possible to do so.

I'm not arguing semantics so much as I am simply dismissing them... they're not important. Like you said, yourself, it's just convention. Oh, and thanks for all the links... I'll have to take a look later, when I have more time to go over them in detail. To bad I couldn't afford medical school, this stuff facinates me.

By the way, your comparison fails. I'm certainly not going to call a dog a cat, when I know it's a dog. Mayhaps you could clarify the sense in what you wrote?

Anyway, thanks for the links....

Yes, you are right... this is simply a mutilated woman who got pregnant, not a man. Unfortunately (at least from your viewpoint), your hope for a male born able to "get pregnant" is pure fantasy. Even human "hermaphrodites" aren't real herms, simply men or women suffering from a rare birth defect, in many (if not all) cases, correctable by surgery, if performed early enough (at least for the males... for the females, early correction is not as vital).

By your earlier definition, many hermaphrodites are true hermaphrodites. There’s more combinations of chromosomes than XX and XY.

Surgery on intrasexed infants can have devastating effects. Unless it’s necessary for some reason, like a urological reason or something, it’s best to wait to find out what they want to be, so that you don’t pick the wrong sex to reconstruct them as.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6994580/

And it isn’t “mutilation,” it’s recognized in psychology as the standard treatment for gender dysphoria.

Afraid not... true hermaphrodites are both male and female, and are capable of procreation. Unless you can provide proof of a human born with both male and female organs, capable of self impregnation or the ability to be both a father and a mother, in the full sense of male and female... no, it doesn't jive. Most, if not all individuals with such chromosomal abnormalities, tend to be sterile. Also, it's not a matter of waiting long enough for an individual to grow to a level of choice, if... by doing so... it risks their future health. If you have a child born that looks female on the outside, but is both chromosomally and hormonally and in every other way male, failure to correct the defect quickly will result in atrophy of the testicles, due to heat exposure within the body cavity, and possible future cancer risks. I have heard of this scenario... it's been a while ago, but a baby boy was born (he's an adult, now), who had this condition. His parents, while he was still an infant, chose to have his defect corrected, not only so their SON could live a normal life, without ridicule or stigma, but so they could be grandparents. Wish I remembered where I read this story, so I could provide the link.

Anyway...

It would be rather difficult to make a mistake in reconstruction, so long as you have either a prostate and testicles, or a uterus and ovaries to work with, and all the other bits, wherever they happen to be. And, indeed, it is mutilation for a perfectly normal physical/biological/hormonal/chromosomal male to have his genitals hacked off, just so a surgeon can give him a fake vagina. That is mutilation, in my book. Reguardless of what psycology says. They should start looking for a new "standard" of treatment.

---

facepalm.jpg

I was agreeing with you until the homosexuality part. That really isn't a choice.

She is still a she.

Well, we can agree to disagree, on that one point of contention. Male is male, female is female, and anything else is a lie... a self-deception, if you will. You're perfectly free to disagree, and I'm perfectly free to not have any problem with your viewpoint, while still expressing my own views on any given matter. Oh, by the way, your facepalm.jpg didn't work....


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Kelsh]

It's probably a hoax.

Or an attempt of a pitiful conspiracy.

WHERE'S PAUL REVERE WHEN YOU NEED HIM?

 

[XeNoX]

damnit what did I say
do I have to go through all of this again
chromosomes do not determine sexes, the SRY region that is USUALLY on the Y chromosome USUALLY determines where the gonads develop further which USUALLY produces the hormones that USUALLY make an individual develop fully into one of both sexes (USUALLY)

also what Surgat says

also most sex chromosome anomalies are more or less asymptomatic
have you ever checked your karyotype ? I somehow doubt it ;B

WHERE'S PAUL REVERE WHEN YOU NEED HIM?

maybe roose and paul are the same person
DUN DUN DUN

 

[Magica]

He's still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

*blah blah blah bitch moan*

Okay.

[size=x-large]She's[/size] still biologically female so........ what the hell? o____O

Happy now?

 

[Roose Hurro]

damnit what did I say
do I have to go through all of this again
chromosomes do not determine sexes, the SRY region that is USUALLY on the Y chromosome USUALLY determines where the gonads develop further which USUALLY produces the hormones that USUALLY make an individual develop fully into one of both sexes (USUALLY)

also what Surgat says

also most sex chromosome anomalies are more or less asymptomatic
have you ever checked your karyotype ? I somehow doubt it ;B

WHERE'S PAUL REVERE WHEN YOU NEED HIM?

maybe roose and paul are the same person
DUN DUN DUN

Nope, I've never checked my karyotype, but I have frequently stripped naked, and looked... strange, isn't it, that all the equipment is there, and fully functional, along with the "feeling" (awareness) I'm entirely and completely male. Who'd a thunk it! :shock:

As for Paul Revere, all I have to say is: "One if by land, two if by sea." :roll: :lol:


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[XeNoX]

Nope, I've never checked my karyotype, but I have frequently stripped naked, and looked... strange, isn't it, that all the equipment is there, and fully functional, along with the "feeling" (awareness) I'm entirely and completely male. Who'd a thunk it! :shock:

that means nothing
and I quote

[size=small]a fact that is clearly set in chromosomal DNA. Two of those chromosomes determine a person's sex/gender... one X and one Y for a man, and two Xs for a woman.[/size]

ergo, by you own (as me and others have pointed out, wrong) standards you are not a guy

 

[Shà nwà ng]

He forfeited the "male" term when he got pregnant, which is one thing I as a card carrying member of both the male gender and sex cannot do (nor really want to do).

 

[Rilvor]

facepalm.jpg

I was agreeing with you until the homosexuality part. That really isn't a choice.

She is still a she.

Well, we can agree to disagree, on that one point of contention. Male is male, female is female, and anything else is a lie... a self-deception, if you will. You're perfectly free to disagree, and I'm perfectly free to not have any problem with your viewpoint, while still expressing my own views on any given matter. Oh, by the way, your facepalm.jpg didn't work....


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Double Fail.

I said homosexuality is not a choice, nothing else was included in that line of text.

facepalm.jpg <--- this is intentionally typed out in text, since image macros are LOLBANNED.
It is generally assumed when someone says "facepalm.jpg" that there is facepalming being had.

But, since you asked.....
http://img245.imageshack.us/my.php?image=facepalmuberlf3.jpg


Summary of this thread: IT HAS FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS, IT IS FEMALE.

Males CANNOT get pregnant, they lack OVARIES, a trait only found in FEMALES.

 

[Roose Hurro]

facepalm.jpg

I was agreeing with you until the homosexuality part. That really isn't a choice.

She is still a she.

Well, we can agree to disagree, on that one point of contention. Male is male, female is female, and anything else is a lie... a self-deception, if you will. You're perfectly free to disagree, and I'm perfectly free to not have any problem with your viewpoint, while still expressing my own views on any given matter. Oh, by the way, your facepalm.jpg didn't work....


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Double Fail.

I said homosexuality is not a choice, nothing else was included in that line of text.

facepalm.jpg <--- this is intentionally typed out in text, since image macros are LOLBANNED.
It is generally assumed when someone says "facepalm.jpg" that there is facepalming being had.

But, since you asked.....
http://img245.imageshack.us/my.php?image=facepalmuberlf3.jpg


Summary of this thread: IT HAS FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS, IT IS FEMALE.

Males CANNOT get pregnant, they lack OVARIES, a trait only found in FEMALES.

And I said we can agree to disagree, on that one point of contention... sorry if I left it up to you to figure out which point we disagreed on. I'll try to be more clear in the future.

As for your Summary? Spot on! My summarical view, exactly....

Oh, and thanks for the facepalm link... it's now on my Favorites list.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[IceDragonVisy]

I knew it! Cuntboys do exist!

 

[Rilvor]

And I said we can agree to disagree, on that one point of contention

.....*snrk*....

 

[Seratuhl]

XD EPIC WTF
The only male pregnancy stories I knew came from the Alien films.

 

[phoxxz]

The fuck??!?
THE FUCK?!?!
[size=x-large] THE FUCK!?!??[/size]
..th...that picture...
why god why...

Wow it is a rarity to see Rilvor's mind break like that XD


And I dont think this is entirely true. I mean if this dude(I use this term ambiguously) has been taking hormones like most transexuals do, then theres no way his uterus (god that sounds weird. His Uterus....) could have held onto and continue to nurture a child. He'd have to resume regular female hormones, wouldn't he? And then his MALE appearance would fade to female. I mean I'm no OB/GYN but I do have lady parts. And I've had issues with mine. To my knowledge if you don't have normal levels of estrogen/progesterone then NO BABIEZ.

+10 internet points for BIOLOGY.

 

[Ceceil Felias]

I love how Roose Hurro is saying he doesn't mind people making the choice to consider themselves transgender (actually, was it even him who said that? I can't remember), but doesn't waste a second in demanding that everyone call the person in the article by a feminine pronoun in an almost crazed manner. That's going far beyond opinion and putting yourself in denying people basic courtesy as well as their own opinion.

Epic fail indeed. Viewpoints aren't going to change if you make your side of the argument look utterly intolerant and insulting.

In short, Roose Hurro, we don't give a shit what you think. In the real world, sex and gender are two different things, and trying to hammer your own definition into place will not work, so stop trying to force it onto others.