So, the so-called "pregnant man" apparently gave birth to a baby girl. I don't know why this story pokes at my infertility like it does. I was particularly struck by the following paragraphs from an article in Slate Magazine
From Slate Magazine:
Beatie's transformation began a decade ago. "Sterilization is not a requirement for sex reassignment, so I decided to have chest reconstruction and testosterone therapy but kept my reproductive rights," he explained recently in the Advocate. "Reproductive rights" was a euphemism for his uterus and ovaries. "I actually opted not to do anything to my reproductive organs because I wanted to have a child one day," he told Oprah Winfrey in April.
For eight years, Beatie didn't menstruate. Then, two years ago, "I stopped taking my bimonthly testosterone injections," he recalls. "My body regulated itself after about four months, and I didn't have to take any exogenous estrogen, progesterone, or fertility drugs to aid my pregnancy." Meanwhile, his beard kept growing.
First of all, "he" had been taking testosterone for 8 years and it only took him 4 months for his cycles to return to normal after he stopped!!!! I'm working on 2 years off of bcp and I still don't feel like my cycles are back to "normal." And then he didn't even need any hormones or drugs to help him get pregnant or maintain his pregnancy? AND got pregnant with one try?
Secondly, what the hell are "reproductive rights." Do all women have the RIGHT to reproduce? What about those of us who can't? Does that mean nature or whatever, took our "rights" away for some reason?
I don't know, this story is obviously complicated, but I kinda think that if you don't want to be a woman any more and are trying to physically change your body so you have an enlarged clitoris that acts like a penis and your breasts are gone, that you have sort of decided to give up your "right" to have a child naturally. I mean, part of being a man means that you cannot bear children right?
What do you think? Does this bother anyone else?