Is it okay to be a pregnant 'man' and transgender father?

[silverfox]

Fair point. My conspiracy position does imply they are being duped with words like victim and doesn't give them credit for making their own choices. Of course they haven't been forced into this position. Further my question whether this is a mixed-up couple playing a dangerous game of mommies and daddies implies possible lack of intelligence and suitability.

Such issues will have been raised by social workers when they applied for adoption and I've no reason to suspect there was anything wrong with the vetting process.

However you'll need to reword your question wannaV because if they wish to be male the question of a biological family wouldn't arise. The position with Scott and Thomas is that the desire to be male isn't irreversible by virtue of the fact that Scott was still a capable of hhaving children.

[V511]

On the general issue of your question about ideology, i don't think that there is a covert agenda - it looks quite clear to me. Current western societies i think, are products of the Enlightenment/Liberal/inherent human rights socio-political movement. The development of the possibility for this type of situation to be, feels like a natural extension of that.

I think that those who don't fit into the heterosexual category feel there is still a long way to go though (which i agree with).

So this couple may arguably feel more that they are fighting the system and society rather than the system being biased toward them as one of your points suggests.

On your point of biological family- yep, you're correct that its not true in this case. Yes, a 'pregnant man' is semantic word play but does it matter to us? It does to them, but all i can say is that it doesn't confuse me or worry me and (this isn't meant as any critique) but I don't understand why it would matter to anyone else. I recognise you seem troubled by it, but I can't identify with that. It just feels instinctively a non-issue to me. Whereas to you it instinctively feels something. All i can suggest is to maybe step back and consider why that is for you?

V.

[silverfox]

Okay, thanks for all your contributions. As wannaV politely advised, I'll step back and have another think about what is it that's bugging me about this.

There's nothing ground breaking happening here in the field of medicine or science that's straining ethical boundaries. It's not as if they're implanting clones of themselves so they can have a biological family. No doubt that will be one for the future. It's simply a woman who would prefer to be a man deciding she/he wants a child and will bring up that child in an unconventional set up.

Also, unless information comes to light that particular groups or parties are financing this arrangement I can't prove any ideological motives behind it.

I find myself in a minority of, err, one, with my concern.