If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZ Family)   The world's first pregnant man is currently trying to convince the courts that he and his wife aren't the same sex so that he can legally divorce her   (azfamily.com) divider line 137
    More: Followup, Courts of Arizona, pregnant man, dictionary definitions, superior courts  
•       •       •

8602 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jan 2013 at 6:45 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-29 06:51:36 AM
Is it possible we could just shoot everyone involved in this into the sun?
 
2013-01-29 06:54:47 AM
Most men I know don't have a working uterus.
 
2013-01-29 06:57:11 AM
Thomas began testosterone treatment in the late 90s and by 2002, had a double mastectomy and chest reconstruction. He's been a man, legally, ever since.

They would have to define legally here because to me that means by law and if he is already lawfully considered a man then the same-sex issues shouldn't be relevant.
 
2013-01-29 06:57:19 AM
Just give them the divorce.

That said, the "pregnant man" thing was ridiculous/hilarious. It was treated like a medical miracle by some, which if course, it was not.
 
2013-01-29 06:57:33 AM
This is why I support marriage equality.
 
2013-01-29 07:02:07 AM

SpdrJay: Is it possible we could just shoot everyone involved in this into the sun?


I wouldn't go that far, but still...farking gross.
 
2013-01-29 07:02:46 AM
Wait, are the religious right pro- or anti-gay divorce?
 
2013-01-29 07:03:09 AM
For anyone that didn't read the article. He is "legally a man" now. But only legally. I don't know what that means in reality.
 
2013-01-29 07:06:34 AM

durbnpoisn: For anyone that didn't read the article. He is "legally a man" now. But only legally. I don't know what that means in reality.


It means that her delusions were acceptable to the state but not her uterus.
 
2013-01-29 07:09:29 AM

C18H27NO3: Thomas began testosterone treatment in the late 90s and by 2002, had a double mastectomy and chest reconstruction. He's been a man, legally, ever since.

They would have to define legally here because to me that means by law and if he is already lawfully considered a man then the same-sex issues shouldn't be relevant.


That's exactly what I thought. If he is  legally a man, then he is  not legally, a woman, poppin' out the crotch droppings or not, and he should  legally be able to get a divorce.

I swear the entire state of Arizona has its head up its ass,  legally.
 
2013-01-29 07:14:44 AM

Oysterman: Wait, are the religious right pro- or anti-gay divorce?


Technically the were never really married since they were same-sex.
 
2013-01-29 07:16:07 AM
His children will need lots of therapy.
 
2013-01-29 07:19:14 AM
Grant the divorce already and quit hashing over his sex. At least one state (Oregon) has already declared him a man. Why does Arizona have to throw a wrench into it?

That said, the man-giving-birth angle the media hyped up was not some sort of miracle. If a MTF actually is able to give birth, that would be the medical marvel.
 
2013-01-29 07:21:21 AM
Saying that this is a "pregnant man" is really ruining the specialness of the first *actual* pregnant man around 2065, with his omni-directional holo-womb implant.
 
2013-01-29 07:21:24 AM
i43.tower.com
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2013-01-29 07:21:40 AM
See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.
 
2013-01-29 07:21:52 AM
But "he" was declaired male legally by way of fraud.  As evidenced by the fact that he later gave birth and is the biological mother to three children.  So the state can claim that they cannot divorce two people who are not legally married.

The law should make sense as much as possible.  It does not make sense to call someone who is female a male and the reverse.  It also does not make sense to dissalow two females or two males to get married.

I know, I'm expecting the impossible.  Law will never make sense.  But it shouldn't be this screwed up.
 
2013-01-29 07:25:00 AM
Why would a lawyer say this "Only 21 percent of female-to-male transsexuals actually get a hysterectomy," Cantor said. "That means 80 percent keep their reproductive organs." - once you say 21% surely you should say 79%!?
 
2013-01-29 07:26:29 AM

taurusowner: See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.


But those who aren't XX or XY are not statistically insignificant (and... shock horror!... an even larger percentage of transgendered people are not).

You're saying "Let's ignore all this non-XY and non-XX nonsense, even though that's a large chuck of the issue!"
 
2013-01-29 07:28:26 AM

beautifulbob: But "he" was declaired male legally by way of fraud.  As evidenced by the fact that he later gave birth and is the biological mother to three children.  So the state can claim that they cannot divorce two people who are not legally married.

The law should make sense as much as possible.  It does not make sense to call someone who is female a male and the reverse.  It also does not make sense to dissalow two females or two males to get married.

I know, I'm expecting the impossible.  Law will never make sense.  But it shouldn't be this screwed up.


"'If the law supposes that,' said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, 'the law is a ass-a idiot."

/It's been true for a very long time.
 
2013-01-29 07:30:53 AM

Bungles: taurusowner: See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.

But those who aren't XX or XY are not statistically insignificant (and... shock horror!... an even larger percentage of transgendered people are not).

You're saying "Let's ignore all this non-XY and non-XX nonsense, even though that's a large chuck of the issue!"


Except...if neither of these particular people fit into those conditions then..gasp! that has nothing to do with this particular case. Do a blood test. If one of these two people have a non-XX/XY disorder, than go from there. But if they are both XX, than the fact that non XX/XY disorders exist has absolutely nothing to do with anything in this case. This case is about two human females. You can insert as much "identity" drama into this as you want, but the physical facts remain: they're both female. Approach this particular case with that fact (as would be proven by a gene test) as the starting point.
 
2013-01-29 07:31:46 AM
That is one confused individual.
 
2013-01-29 07:31:52 AM
And I guess I better clarify that I'm not agreeing with beautifulbob's opinion that the law should not recognize transgendered individuals as the gender they are, rather than the gender they were born as. Just pointing out that the law has always invented its own fictions as needed.
Of course, why the law needs to discriminate between genders at all is an interesting question too.
 
2013-01-29 07:34:39 AM
what's even more confusing, if this chick "became a man" and "married" her girlfriend, why wasn't the girlfriend the one who got pregnant? why did they choose to impregnate her (sorry, "him")?
 
2013-01-29 07:37:31 AM

SpdrJay: Is it possible we could just shoot everyone involved in this into the sun?


Insert scruffy the janitor meme here
 
2013-01-29 07:37:51 AM
Oh Jesus farking Christ, just give them a divorce already and let everyone involved be done with this.
 
2013-01-29 07:41:26 AM
Wow, I see a lot of "concern" here over some subject that has nothing to do with any of us, and is none of our business.

Some of you should be as diligent about your own life as you are about judging strangers.
 
2013-01-29 07:42:36 AM

proteus_b: what's even more confusing, if this chick "became a man" and "married" her girlfriend, why wasn't the girlfriend the one who got pregnant? why did they choose to impregnate her (sorry, "him")?


Because she (the wife) could not get pregnant.
 
2013-01-29 07:43:34 AM

taurusowner: Bungles: taurusowner: See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.

But those who aren't XX or XY are not statistically insignificant (and... shock horror!... an even larger percentage of transgendered people are not).

You're saying "Let's ignore all this non-XY and non-XX nonsense, even though that's a large chuck of the issue!"

Except...if neither of these particular people fit into those conditions then..gasp! that has nothing to do with this particular case. Do a blood test. If one of these two people have a non-XX/XY disorder, than go from there. But if they are both XX, than the fact that non XX/XY disorders exist has absolutely nothing to do with anything in this case. This case is about two human females. You can insert as much "identity" drama into this as you want, but the physical facts remain: they're both female. Approach this particular case with that fact (as would be proven by a gene test) as the starting point.


You're making an awful lot of presumptions here about a medical history you know nothing about.
 
2013-01-29 07:45:53 AM

durbnpoisn: For anyone that didn't read the article. He is "legally a man" now. But only legally. I don't know what that means in reality.


It means it's a woman who is surgically mutilated and chemically unbalanced.
 
2013-01-29 07:46:14 AM
I want to legally become an airplane.

/Don't you DARE judge me!
 
2013-01-29 07:46:33 AM

proteus_b: what's even more confusing, if this chick "became a man" and "married" her girlfriend, why wasn't the girlfriend the one who got pregnant? why did they choose to impregnate her (sorry, "him")?


Maybe she wanted to become a "attention man-whore."
 
2013-01-29 07:46:38 AM

taurusowner: Bungles: taurusowner: See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.

But those who aren't XX or XY are not statistically insignificant (and... shock horror!... an even larger percentage of transgendered people are not).

You're saying "Let's ignore all this non-XY and non-XX nonsense, even though that's a large chuck of the issue!"

Except...if neither of these particular people fit into those conditions then..gasp! that has nothing to do with this particular case. Do a blood test. If one of these two people have a non-XX/XY disorder, than go from there. But if they are both XX, than the fact that non XX/XY disorders exist has absolutely nothing to do with anything in this case. This case is about two human females. You can insert as much "identity" drama into this as you want, but the physical facts remain: they're both female. Approach this particular case with that fact (as would be proven by a gene test) as the starting point.


Regardless of science or common sense, there have already been cases where transgenderd people have changed their "legal" sex based on the situation they are in. That's not the case for all though.
 
2013-01-29 07:47:30 AM

taurusowner: Bungles: taurusowner: See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.

But those who aren't XX or XY are not statistically insignificant (and... shock horror!... an even larger percentage of transgendered people are not).

You're saying "Let's ignore all this non-XY and non-XX nonsense, even though that's a large chuck of the issue!"

Except...if neither of these particular people fit into those conditions then..gasp! that has nothing to do with this particular case. Do a blood test. If one of these two people have a non-XX/XY disorder, than go from there. But if they are both XX, than the fact that non XX/XY disorders exist has absolutely nothing to do with anything in this case. This case is about two human females. You can insert as much "identity" drama into this as you want, but the physical facts remain: they're both female. Approach this particular case with that fact (as would be proven by a gene test) as the starting point.


Except, while that may not be the situation in this case, it is a flaw in your argument that you want us to ignore. You can't claim a universal truth, and also claim exceptions.

If you say "Either this or that, but nothing else", you can't then respond "Well, that other situation is something else, but I don't want to factor that in because it blows holes in my worldview"
 
2013-01-29 07:47:41 AM
The gender on the state ID is the one that should be relevant.

/lots of bigots in this thread
//gender dysphoria is a real condition.
///gender reassignment is the only known effective therapy.
 
xcv
2013-01-29 07:47:53 AM

beautifulbob: But "he" was declaired male legally by way of fraud.  As evidenced by the fact that he later gave birth and is the biological mother to three children.  So the state can claim that they cannot divorce two people who are not legally married.

The law should make sense as much as possible.  It does not make sense to call someone who is female a male and the reverse.  It also does not make sense to dissalow two females or two males to get married.

I know, I'm expecting the impossible.  Law will never make sense.  But it shouldn't be this screwed up.


How about the first one to lose custody of the children and pay 18 years of child support and alimony gets to be declared male?
 
2013-01-29 07:55:50 AM

LesterB: And I guess I better clarify that I'm not agreeing with beautifulbob's opinion that the law should not recognize transgendered individuals as the gender they are, rather than the gender they were born as. Just pointing out that the law has always invented its own fictions as needed.
Of course, why the law needs to discriminate between genders at all is an interesting question too.


I think that law should have as few gender identifiers as possible.  We simply do not need to state male and female for almost anything, including marriage, divorce and the like.  However, if there are laws that do need identification, genetics is the easiest way to go.  And to answer the XXY statement above, you put in a definition.  I can't think right now of where we would need such a thing, but I'm sure someone else here will.

I can move to China and become a citizen.  I will be Chinese.  But I will never be asian.  Just can't be.  Live as a male, live as a female.  I don''t care and the law shouldn't either.  But when we need to identify the sex of a human being, it should be by what you are packing in your genes.  Not what you are packing in your jeans.
 
2013-01-29 07:56:01 AM

twat_waffle: The gender on the state ID is the one that should be relevant.

/lots of bigots in this thread
//gender dysphoria is a real condition.
///gender reassignment is the only known effective therapy.


Sounds like someone's speaking from experience?
 
2013-01-29 07:58:07 AM
In for the custody battle
 
2013-01-29 07:59:13 AM

twat_waffle: //gender dysphoria is a real condition.
///gender reassignment is the only known effective therapy.


It is a real medical condition, and a good friend of mine has it. You shouldn't discriminate against someone that has it, nor should you give them a hard time about it. When they came out of the closet and wanted to go to a gay bar and what it was about I was the person they asked to go with them to make sure they were safe. My friend knows that he is safe in my house, can walk around in skirts all he wants and talks to me about the surgeries he wants to get. I truly understand that they /actually/ really do feel like a woman / man trapped in the wrong body.

However that doesn't mean that having surgery /really/ makes you a man or women any more than dying your skin makes you a black guy. The surgery is about trying to give the person a peace of mind about their identity, it doesn't actually change their sex. Your chromosomes don't change, your plumbing remains the same and your internal health problems remain the same.

/Flame away as I'm sure I've now offended people on both sides of this one....
 
2013-01-29 08:00:12 AM
Sex and gender are two completely different things.

Where's the Father in all of this?

WHAR SPERM? WHAR!!
 
2013-01-29 08:00:21 AM

Bungles: You're making an awful lot of presumptions here about a medical history you know nothing about.


Pretty sure pregnant means that's a chick.
 
2013-01-29 08:04:49 AM

twat_waffle: The gender on the state ID is the one that should be relevant.


....because the declaration of a DMV clerk unmakes reality.

/lots of bigots in this thread
//gender dysphoria is a real condition.
///gender reassignment is the only known effective therapy.


How's that been working out for this couple?
 
2013-01-29 08:05:33 AM
It's legally as simple as checking the sex on his birth certificate. If it says male, case closed. Grant the divorce. The Arizona judge is just grandstanding at that point.

/Yes, you can change the sex on your birth certificate.
//Gay marriage has nothing to do with this.
 
2013-01-29 08:09:35 AM

taurusowner: See which one has XX chromosomes and which one (if any) has XY chromosomes. Make the decision from there. No need to involve any social perception or "gender identity" nonsense. Use some high school level physiology. Human females have XX, and human males have XY. Yes, there are disorders, such as Klinefelter syndrome, where there can be mutated combinations. But that is a disorder, not a new species or a normal combination of chromosomes. The fact still remains: the correct human female has XX chromosomes and the correct human male has XY. Do a simple test of these two people and see what their chromosomes are. If they both have XX, they're both female.


Wow. Way to belittle every transgender person's experience and struggle.

And I just fed the troll but this subject always pisses me off.
 
2013-01-29 08:10:23 AM

Molavian: Bungles: You're making an awful lot of presumptions here about a medical history you know nothing about.

Pretty sure pregnant means that's a chick.



Only a few of the non-XX and non-XY conditions make you infertile. Is someone who is XXXXY and pregnant a "chick"?

If that's the case, it suggests that we're not talking sex chromozomes here, but physical genital manifestation.

But then what's the relatively common condition of being a hermaphrodite?

People like to pretend this is some sort of black and white thing, when only a little though shows it really isn't.
 
2013-01-29 08:11:17 AM
content8.flixster.com

I want to have babies.
 
2013-01-29 08:16:40 AM

cryinoutloud: Wow, I see a lot of "concern" here over some subject that has nothing to do with any of us, and is none of our business.

Some of you should be as diligent about your own life as you are about judging strangers.


You're an idiot.
 
2013-01-29 08:16:44 AM
Well. If he is undergoing hormone therapy he should have his children taken away anyway for abuse. Subjecting an unborn child to a level 2 controlled substance while pregnant.
 
2013-01-29 08:17:55 AM
not enough sighing or eye rolling can be conveyed to everyone involved and everyone posting. head_assplode.jpg
 
Displayed 50 of 137 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report