![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In response to a post elsewhere about the proposed Swedish law to make sterilisation mandatory for trans people undergoing surgical transition, this was posted:
Fortunately laws are not made on the basis of what sickens you. Or they should not be. Whose threshold would we use, after all? If laws were made on the basis of what sickened others, trans people might not be allowed to have surgery at all, or perhaps HRT. Or maybe same-gender romantic / sexual relations would be forbidden. So might eating seafood - my sister finds that pretty sickening.
The way you go about disrespecting Thomas Beattie's identity just because he did something you do not approve of with his body is pretty disgusting. It sickens me, a little, to see you saying such things while talking about how 'liberal' you are.
What in the world would be natural - and here I mean something like 'occurring without human technological interference' about a trans woman becoming pregnant? It is far more natural for a trans man to give birth, as that requires less interference in biology.
I hope you are never in a position to enforce on others your prejudices about what people should and should not be allowed to do with their bodies.
Addendum: Oh, and I see you have decided they - Thomas Beattie and his wife - "obviously" made a new person for the attention and not for, oh, any of the reasons they actually gave. I have some important information to impart to you: people are not necessarily different for your entertainment or to secure your attention. Indeed, it often has nothing whatsoever to do with you. Reminds me of seeing last night on the 'news' talk about The Veronicas caught on film kissing and people speculating they were doing it for publicity.
Really, deviance from the norm does not exist in order to be a spectacle for public entertainment.
Apparently I'm alone in thinking this is a good idea. At least, in one regard.
The whole "pregnant man" scenario just sickens me, and I'm almost as liberal as they come regarding transpeople.
If she wanted to be a man, then she should take whatever comes with being a man, and that includes the inability to become pregnant. This entire thing was so bleeding obviously done just for the 15 minutes of fame it's disgusting.
Conversely, however, if there were a way for a transgirl to get pregnant, I would be all for it. Women can get pregnant, it's only natural.
So this has nothing to do with my opinions on transpeople having children. What it does have to do with is someone wanting to become a man and refusing to take everything that comes with it.
Sex isn't a buffet, people. You don't pick and freaking choose what tidbits you'd like to partake in. Ugh.
Fortunately laws are not made on the basis of what sickens you. Or they should not be. Whose threshold would we use, after all? If laws were made on the basis of what sickened others, trans people might not be allowed to have surgery at all, or perhaps HRT. Or maybe same-gender romantic / sexual relations would be forbidden. So might eating seafood - my sister finds that pretty sickening.
The way you go about disrespecting Thomas Beattie's identity just because he did something you do not approve of with his body is pretty disgusting. It sickens me, a little, to see you saying such things while talking about how 'liberal' you are.
What in the world would be natural - and here I mean something like 'occurring without human technological interference' about a trans woman becoming pregnant? It is far more natural for a trans man to give birth, as that requires less interference in biology.
I hope you are never in a position to enforce on others your prejudices about what people should and should not be allowed to do with their bodies.
Addendum: Oh, and I see you have decided they - Thomas Beattie and his wife - "obviously" made a new person for the attention and not for, oh, any of the reasons they actually gave. I have some important information to impart to you: people are not necessarily different for your entertainment or to secure your attention. Indeed, it often has nothing whatsoever to do with you. Reminds me of seeing last night on the 'news' talk about The Veronicas caught on film kissing and people speculating they were doing it for publicity.
Really, deviance from the norm does not exist in order to be a spectacle for public entertainment.
