I read this at Feministe yesterday and left this comment:

Sorry, no can like. A pregnant man? No, she’s not; a male id in a female body minus the chest alteration, pregnant, perhaps.
I feel for all confused human beings, and we all know how many severely conflicted people are out there, however, somewhere, lines have to be drawn.
If you choose to reassign your gender to be male, surgically remove your breasts, and take a female companion, why then decide to relinquish the drug therapy that assisted you to appear ‘male’ and go to numerous clinics to assist you to become pregnant? Why not adopt? The whole affair reeks of self-aggrandising neuroticism.
All sections of society, be they gay/lesbian/straight fall out of love and separate. Whatever legal problems ensue are a gold mine for lawyers and another problem for the community.
As for creating your own normality/reality, yeah, great. Look how it’s worked for the Bush administration.-end-

Guess who's popular today?

All sections of society, be they gay/lesbian/straight fall out of love and separate. Whatever legal problems ensue are a gold mine for lawyers and another problem for the community.

What in the world does this have to do with the issue of a pregnant FTM?

So nobody should ever have kids (gay/lesbian/straight) because they might get divorced/break up?

We've advanced to a scientific place and time that if a woman doesn't conceive and wishes to conceive, she doesn't have to wait around for adoptions, she can go through a series of treatments assuming she has the money or the insurance. That includes sperms donors and test tubes and uterine reconstructive surgeries ... there are women who haven't undergone surgery or hormones to change gender who go through as much treatment as described here.

Honestly, my concern is what happens to these offspring when they're born. Are they loved? Are they nurtured? How do their two parents deal with each other?

That can't be regulated and has nothing to do with conception.

If you choose to reassign your gender to be male, surgically remove your breasts, and take a female companion, why then decide to relinquish the drug therapy that assisted you to appear ‘male’ and go to numerous clinics to assist you to become pregnant?

The article mentions the reasons this couple decided to do that. But anyway, what business is it of yours?

I think it's sad that doctors refused, and they had to resort to the turkey baster routine. I bet it was cheaper, though. And potentially more fun.

I'm with owlmother... will they love the kid? Give it everything they can? That's what really matters.

Adoption would be awesome - but do you really think they would be able to adopt a kid? Hell, naw. Not in these great states, sorry to tell you.

"but do you really think they would be able to adopt a kid"

Exactly. Potential adoptive parents face such strict scrutiny that it would be unmitigatedly impossible for a "different couple" to become parents. I can't imagine what a difficult decision this was to make considering how sympathetic most of America is toward transgendered couples.

Though I do think it's a little self-serving to put it in the paper and talk about it. In the interest of the teenage daughter they will have- and we all know how kind 14 year olds can be to anyone who is a little different. I hope the world is a more tolerant place for her. I have my doubts, but I do still have my hope.

waldo: shit stirrer extraordinaire!

The gaijin - always ready with the false trail

More power to 'em.

My only concern is that this will somehow become an issue in the presidential election. "If you vote for a liberul, the country will be overrun with pregnant shemales! Oh, the humanity!"

Folks who haven't clicked on GB's link will be interested at the damning, absolutely definitive evidence that this story is a fraud:

A story about a pregnant American man - who was able to conceive because he was born a woman - has been dismissed as a hoax by a neighbour.
The new allegations come only days after Thomas Beatie, formerly a woman named Tracy Langondino who underwent a partial sex change, said he was five months pregnant.
"Quite frankly, I think it's a hoax," neighbor Ron Schlieper told a local television station.
"I saw him a few days ago, he didn't look [pregnant].

Plus, um ... well, actually that's all of it.

GB, please stop being so evil! I`m afraid unless you make a full confession and clean break, pleople will have a hard time noticing how your views are changing.

But I do appreciate your digging and other interesting links. I liked the "Diebold leaks results of 2008 early" clip at Onion, too.

#13: It is possible to appreciate good comedy, as comedy, regardless of the views it promotes or disparages. Similarly, it's possible to find bad comedy utterly lame, even if it's advancing a point of view you support. The Onion's recent video work has been quite well done indeed.

M/tch M/lls “…what business is it of yours?” - Yeah right, nothing on the web should ever be commented on.

If all you're doing is stating an aesthetic preference, then fine, the web is the perfect place to do that. Of course, if I told you your shoes were ugly, or that you painted your house the wrong colo(u)r, I think you would be perfectly within our rights to respond "What business is it of yours, M/tch?" I believe you have the right to wear those ugly shoes and paint your house that hideous color, waldo, even if I don't approve of your deplorable choices.

And it seems to me that you're doing more than just saying what you don't like. You seem to be advocating somehow putting the force of law behind your particular preferences, and appealing to "the community" to back you up.

It's not clear what you're advocating, though. Shunning and scowling at the transgendered and their children? (That'll solve the problem!) Sending in the police and forcing an abortion? Seriously, are you just saying "I don't like it", or are you saying "It shouldn't be allowed."?

So far your comments remind me of nothing so much as arguments once frequently made against interracial marriage (and still sometimes heard today): "But people will be mean to your children!" The cure is to get people to stop being assholes, not to prevent loving couples from raising children.

As for what your encounter in a public toilet at a young age has to do with this issue, I have no idea. There's plenty of sexual exposure and abuse perpetrated on children by straight perverts too, but I don't think that should have any bearing on whether a traditional couple can have a child or not, or how I should treat that couple and their children.

And this sentence:

Yeah, well, maybe so you don’t frighten/confuse the fuck out of the 16 year-old-trainee nurse’s assistant when you go for your pre natal, eh? And I’m sure she’ll enjoy the chest scars.

Your concern for the trainee is touching. However, there are plenty of "normal" people with all kinds of scars in all kinds of places, including ones from breast reduction or removal, and with hair in places you might not find suit your personal aesthetic (or that of many a 16 year old trainee), who still need medical treatment. Those intending to go into the profession of medicine need to be able to deal with this fact (and whether they "enjoy" this or not is not the issue).

You'd probably be a better person if you learned to deal with it too, as at some point in your life you might just have a friend or lover or family member who ends up having unsightly scars or unusual hair somewhere, or some other "unbeautiful" condition. In fact you yourself might be so afflicted and need understanding and acceptance from your friends and family, not to mention healthcare professionals. I doubt you believe that having them tell you "sorry, I can't treat you, you're grossing me out" would not be an optimal outcome.

Finally, your equating this couple's decisions with the Bush administration's lunatic ravings is almost certainly the dumbest analogy I've ever seen. Anywhere.

So far your comments remind me of nothing so much as arguments once frequently made against interracial marriage

Dare I say, the crux of the biscuit.

"...your equating this couple's decisions with the Bush administration's lunatic ravings..."

These are the quotes: "to define for themselves what is normal".
"when we act, we create our own reality".

See the similarity? We say what goes and you concur or you're anti-whatever.

As for the rest, I'm not calling for the law to do anything. What I would like is for people to make rational decisions. A person who is broadcasting their private life which consists of one radical decision after another invites comment, as illustrated by this page.

And let's not forget, “In total, nine different doctors have been involved.” I ask again, does anyone here think that all of these professional people were merely being mean and obstructive in order discriminate against this person? Or did they also judge this person's behaviour as unstable, narcissitic and innapropriate?

When I said "The whole affair reeks of self-aggrandising neuroticism” I said it for a reason. This person presents like a martyr. "A pregnant trans man (a what?) tells his story of discrimination, mockery..."

This woman could have had a family with no fuss and no headlines but chose the most theatrical manner and venues to do so. Her decisions are indicative of a bizarre, public self-gratification not dissimilar to the body modification poseurs this site features so regularly.
Like them, she can do what she likes; that doesn't mean her behaviour is rational and that people can't comment negatively.

Now I'm tempted to do a little rewrite of 'Bobby Brown" but, enough for tonight.

Cruxier 17: "It was bad enough when the Negroes started getting all uppity, but now the homos are doing it too!"

...or name calling

Describing the actions of someone you don't know personally as "reeking of self-aggrandising neuroticism” is a total asshole move. Period.

Sometimes, name-calling is what's called for.

(Hypocrisy disclaimer: I'm not attributing your jerky comments to any psychological dysfunction on your part. I'm just noting that they're jerky.)

When I said "The whole affair reeks of self-aggrandising neuroticism” I said it for a reason. This person presents like a martyr. "A pregnant trans man (a what?) tells his story of discrimination, mockery..."

So are you asserting that discrimination and mockery haven't occurred, or are you just stating your wish that those who are unfairly discriminated against and mocked should keep quiet about it, keep sitting in the back of the bus, and not create any fuss?

I blame nonsense like this on America's overcomsumption of processed soy products.

This kids today, with all their tofu and tempeh and transsexuality...