Genderqueer couples, pregnant transgender male and love and happiness, who says you can't be transgender and have it all?
Recently, it was suggested that some up and comers purport to be part of the first generation to “transcend gender” that is, to de-emphasize gender and gender divisions in romantic relationships, in this nytimes.com article, (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16students-t.html?ex=13634064...).
Is that who we are? Is that possible? I have thought a lot about this progressive attitude since reading the article and overall believe it to be a beautiful goal. Can men and women transcend the gender roles assigned by society to a degree that the roles disintegrate? Can those who favor make-up, manicures and malls maintain their culture no matter their gender?
And then yesterday, the Advocate reports this, http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid52947.asp, a pregnant transgender male carrying a child. Thomas Beattie reports on his experiences while pregnant in his small community. I found this article to be quite happy and wish the couple well. The forward-thinking and openness exhibited by Thomas and his wife, Nancy, will rule the life of this child. The couple has been criticized, like many lesbian and gay parents, of “not thinking of their child” when becoming pregnant or adopting. What does that even mean? Many parents are certain they will bring love and joy to their child’s life. Some parents don’t even think about having a child. How is this a valid criticism of parents? And why should these parents have to prove that they will provide the “perfect” life for their child. We all suffer, that is part of the human condition. Why is it presumed that a child with parents who fit a particular societal designation as “normal” are better suited to raise a child?
Anyway, I thought that these two articles together provide some hope for the future of our nation and our world. Finding love and happiness while pursuing your heart’s desires does not always fit society’s expectations, and that’s the way it should be!
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Two words: that's incredible!
"Put it before them briefly so they will read it, clearly so they will appreciate it, picturesquely so they will remember it, and, above all, accurately so they will be guided by its light." ~ Joseph Pulitzer
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/k-mal
how will he deliver the baby? where is the baby? in his stomach?
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
I read the article and I think he used to be a she -- they talked about how he hadn't had his menstrual cycle in months and wasn't able to get pregnant until he stopped taking testosterone shots. They got the sperm from the sperm bank; his wife can't have kids because she had a historectomy.
It's amazing what science can do these days! :]
"Put it before them briefly so they will read it, clearly so they will appreciate it, picturesquely so they will remember it, and, above all, accurately so they will be guided by its light." ~ Joseph Pulitzer
http://www.progessiveu.org/blog/k-mal
the article explains that while he is a transgender male he retained his female organs and after health complications prevented his wife from conceiving, they took into consideration and ultimately pursued using his female reproductive organs to conceive. the details are in the article.
Assuming he does not have a vagina anymore, I would assume he'd deliver via C-section. He still has his uterus, so his baby is in there.
I assume that since he is legally male, his genitals are male? It's not QUITE as cool if he still has a vagina. If he has a penis though AND he's pregnant.... yeah. Wow.
I'm all for transcending gender. Labels like "masculine" "feminine" etc are simply ridiculous. imo "male" means having male reproductive organs/genitalia, "female" means having female reproductive organs/genitalia. Though there are exceptions to those labels, too.