I was recently asked by a Television reporter about my opinion on 'Pregnant Man' and I found myself stumbling to get my thoughts focused. Not because I was short of an opinion, but because it's such a hot button for Transgendered individuals, and people in general.The story originally ran November 2008 on ABC's 20/20 with Barbara Walter's interviewing Thomas Beattie, a Female to Male (F2M) Transsexual that became pregnant and birthed a child.
The problem: The story made international news headlines that a pregnant "Man" birthed the child.
Here's the rub: The argument is a difficult one for Trans People because TG people strive to educate others that gender is of the mind, not the sex organs we are assigned to at birth. This is were the argument gets difficult because there is no consensus or one size fits all box to place these issues in.
Can the general public be asked to accept a pregnant genetic female as a pregnant male? How will this affect public opinion and understanding of all Transgendered people? Is there a line to be drawn?
I myself (by all accounts) am a father of 2 children. My wife and I had these children before I decided to Transition. I will always be their biological father. No amount of political correctness or splashed on 'feel-good' catch phrases like "Authentic Living" or "Gender Variance" will change that fact. We are, what we are. I know and accept that fact, but that doesn't mean I can not present and fulfill the role of a second Mother - and to my children, I am. This doesn't erase the fact that they have a father either... because that IS what I did, I Fathered them into this world. Now I will raise them as a mother would with exception too the privileges and benefits mixed in of being their Father too.
Stay with me on this for a moment: Thomas Beattie's identity is Male, but his body is still genetically female - therefore, that makes him the 'biological mother' of his child. He is NOT a pregnant "Man", he's a genetic pregnant woman having a baby that identifies and lives as a male, fulfilling the role of husband and father.
Good for him!
But the problem is the that the news media spun this story inaccurately, leading people to believe possibly that a genetic "Man" was pregnant, instead of accurately saying a "Full Time, Female to Male, Transgendered person" in the commercial segments, was pregnant. So of course, people set their DVR's and Tivo to record the oddity of a possible genetic male having a baby. An example of this spin can be seen here on Discovery Health. Watch the video on this page as it portays Thomas as a Pregnant man and not mentioning AT ALL that he is a Transgendered person.
To be clear, society accepts certain facts - one of them is that "Genetic Males" currently can not birth babies. Genetic Females and Pre-op Female to Male Transgendered individuals can birth children because they have the birthing organs to do so.
When a story such as the pregnant man piece is brought to the court of public opinion, the way Thomas Beattie's story was, it becomes a spectacle. The Media knows this. They know that people will want to get to the bottom of how a "Man" can and did become pregnant... "How is this possible?" they'll ask.
When the veil was lifted that Thomas Beattie was not a Genetic Male, the platform of understanding "gender variant living" came crumbing down in a landslide of mud and confusion for many people already struggling to understand Transgenderisum.
An example of this was a friend of mine at work that came to me when this story aired and said:
"I seen the Pregnant Man story last night on TV. I thought you said when Transgendered people decide to transition, they do it to live the opposite gender role and the very idea of living as their former gender role is unthinkable? "
I explained that, Thomas Beattie is not held to the limitations of a genetic male - and as a transgendered or gender variant individual, has the liberty to have a child because he is a genetic female - he's just not living and presenting as a female anymore, because he 'identies' as a male. It should not matter what body Thomas was assigned to at birth that we address him by 'he or her', but by the fact that 'he' identifies as a male, not a female. 'Gender' is one's identity, and ones 'sex' is merely the assigned biological circumstance for which they must breed new life.
Can we have it both ways?
In my comments section, Alex wrote probably the most brilliant response... she accurately describes how the TG community suffered a black-eye from this story.
Alex writes:"OK I have an opinion on this issue that likely will not please some people, but it is what I believe so I will say it anyway.
I understand the couples need and wants to have the child, and it is indeed the right of any couple to have a child of their own.
However, I see this situation as being a case of having your cake and eating it too, or in other words wanting it all without sacrifices. My view is, if you need to change physical gender to feel at ease with the gender you believe yourself to be from birth, then you accept the new role to the full.
Until wonders of medicine allow all men to bear children (and it becomes accepted that men can do such a thing in society), all transmen should follow suit.
This story only fed the media to push the fact that he was not a real man, which fuels public perception that I'm also not a real woman. I do my best to be accepted by society as a fellow female, but very public stories such as the 'Pregnant Man' do me no favors, what so ever.
If he wants to be accepted as every other man is in present society, he really should not be allowing himself to be pregnant."
Another outstanding perspective from Common Teri:"Well I’d like to be neutral on this, but I have to disagree with those who say he should never have gotten pregnant. I can understand the couple wanting to have a child together and the male partner choosing to carry the child that his partner couldn’t. If I could have done as a man before transitioning because my partner couldn’t I would have jumped at the chance. I see that as a very loving thing to do and applaud the courage it took to make the sacrifice of his masculinity.
He had to know he would take a lot of criticism for this.
The couple should have the right to do this yet I would have much preferred it stayed out of the limelight and not become such a media circus.
Trans people are going to have an understandable distaste for this because it highlights one of the things we try to hide and that is that our bodies will always betray us not matter how much surgery we can afford. We go to great lengths to make our bodies congruent with out minds yet there’s only so much science can do.
This event exposes us for who we really are, "transgender people". Is that bad?"
If I were 20/20, I would have advertised the segment as a Transgendered Female to Male is pregnant... but that doesn't sell air time the way 'Pregnant Man' does. Unfortunately, this and the Susan Stanton Story has left our community with some in depth explaining to do.
Well, Thomas is pregnant once more and is due in June of 2009 - can you just smell the book deals and the TV endorsements being cooked up?
What are your thoughts?
OK I have an opinion on this issue that likely will not please some people, but it is what I believe so will say it anyway.
ReplyDeleteI understand the couples need and wants to have the child, and it is indeed the right of any couple to have a child of their own.
However, I see this situation as being a case of having your cake and eating it, or in other words wanting it all without sacrifices. My view is if you need to change physical gender to feel at ease with the gender you believe yourself to be from birth, then you accept the new role to the full.
Until wonders of medicine allow all men to bear children and it becomes accepted that men can do such a thing in society, all transmen should follow suit.
This story only fed the media to push the fact that he was not a real man, which fuels public perception that I'm also not a real woman. I do my best to be accepted by society as a fellow female, but very public stories such as the 'Pregnant Man' do me no favors what so ever.
If he wants to be accepted as every other man is in present society, he really should not be allowing himself to be pregnant.
Alex. x
I totally agree with Alexandra. More than that, I simply cannot imagine how an FTM could even consider something as inherently female as pregnancy to be a viable option.
ReplyDeleteI feel it is nothing less than a 'freak show' that the news hungry media exploits. It does nothing positive for the transgender community and our rights to be equals amongst our non-traditional lifestyle peers. It is actually very harmful.
ReplyDeleteHummh, no wonder I don't watch ABC and esp. Barbah Wahwah (from the good-ol-days from Saturday Nite Live). I for one won't be watching despite even with Jenny Boylan being on the show (which also is not the right call - if Jenny really thinks it through).
We don't need this rubbish on our TV screens, and like Alex said, we're always questioned. I was too when people read about it in the tabloid paper that brought it to the UK.
ReplyDeleteThis person should have avoided the media. I feel that he mocks those of us who have transitioned and can not have a child.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much, if any, was premeditated for a book deal and the obligatory 15 minutes of notoriety we heap on people. With HIPA rules and such I wonder how the media found out? Someone had to spill the beans, and for what good? Not for the good of the baby! Just to sell air time.
ReplyDeleteI think it's kind of creepy and almost like someone wants to make a name for them self, not to mention some money.
ReplyDeleteImagine what kind of life the children are going to have to endure if people find out what their dad is famous for??!!
ReplyDeleteThe thing that I did not like was the fact the Television and or News Media made it sound as if a genetic male was pregnant and should have said "Transsexual" or a "Trans-Man" was pregnant. It gives people the wrong idea, and we need to correct this.
ReplyDeleteI agree with, Alenandera, leggtv, Nikki, Kat, Ally, Debby, Davin, and Leslie.
ReplyDeleteYou would not believe the conversations I have had to suffer from transgender haters at work because this went on national tv!
All it did was make us look like freaks. It is just more fuel for the haters. They should have kept it private in their family.
It is hard enough to assimilate into the gender role we really are inside, without this attention.
I believe they should have, and could have, kept it quite in their endevor to have a family. Have the child raise it like the rest of us do, not in front of the media. As for the world getting an unfavorable opinion of us, I beg to differ. I think most people see that this was just exploitation by all involved, that this was an extreme example, and that those of us who are out there working and living day-to-day are the ones that give them their knowledge and form their opinion about us. People who interact with me see there is nothing extreme about me, I'm just trying to get by in this world, like everyone else. At least, I hope this is their opinion they go away with!
ReplyDeleteWell I’d like to be neutral on this, but I have to disagree with those who say he should never have gotten pregnant. I can understand the couple wanting to have a child together and the male partner choosing to carry the child that his partner couldn’t. If I could have done as a man before transitioning because my partner couldn’t I would have jumped at the chance. I see that as a very loving thing to do and applaud the courage it took to make the sacrifice of his masculinity.
ReplyDeleteHe had to know he would take a lot of criticism for this.
The couple should have the right to do this yet I would have much preferred it stayed out of the limelight and not become such a media circus.
Trans people are going to have an understandable distaste for this because it highlights one of the things we try to hide and that is that our bodies will always betray us not matter how much surgery we can afford. We go to great lengths to make our bodies congruent with out minds yet there’s only so much science can do.
This event exposes us for who we really are, "transgender people". Is that bad?
I'm a transman, but biologically still female. Unfortunately. The idea of being pregnant repulses me, always has always will. Just as much as my female parts repulse me.
ReplyDeleteI have to beautiful adopted girls. :)
Sorry that should be two adopted girls!!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alex.
ReplyDeleteI can see a couple who have a child wish and in this case use the 'technical' option they have available. However, I think this should have been in total privacy.
The thing in this is indeed that it is turned into a 'freak show'by the media and especially that it underlines the common idea with the big public in that it is about 'freaks'.
So, I think that the whole media hype in this can only strenghten the negative attitude that excists with a large group in our society.
This person is simply looking for publicity, to make money. The media is cooperating because it works for them, because the subject is sensational, which is the only way they think the public can deal with issues like transgenderism.
ReplyDeleteThis is the Jerry Springer Show brought to Good Morning America and 20/20. It is at best a "circus" act, and this person should be ashamed of themself for adding confusion in the public's mind to an issue that doesn't need anymore.
The entire story has been misrepresented from the beginning by calling her a "pregnant man." That isn't any more accurate than if I got my girlfriend pregnant and announced I was the first woman to impregnate another woman.
That misrepresentation was intentional, and is a good example of why you shouldn't believe everything you read, and certainly not much of what you see on TV.
This no different than the "unicorn" that Barnum & Bailey presented to the media (who sucked it up) a few years ago. The "unicorn," was of course, just a surgically altered goat.
I've said this a couple of times. At least 5 years ago, maybe more, there was an LA Times article about a couple of transmen who decided to have a baby. They went to birthing classes... the who schmear. Fact is, Thomas Beattie is not the first.
ReplyDeleteAnd I wonder that he spends as much time as he does in this questionable limelight. Misrepresented or not, he certainly does not seem to be shying away from public attention.
I wish him and his famliy well, but I don't think he's done anybody in the trans community any favors.
Consider adding your blog to mine. A blog designed to improve search engine listings for bloggers such as yourself. Also there will be blog tips for managing your Google Blog.
ReplyDeleteBLOG FOLLOW ME
http://blogsfollowme.blogspot.com/
This is a Bloggers Blog. You may find others who share your own interest.
I seriously believe that we have to accept Everyone, his pregnancy is not hurting anyone at all, if anything I believe it will help us in the long run.
ReplyDeleteThe world is grey, not black and white as you know, I seriously believe we have to accept
everyone from man to woman and everyone in between, as long as someone does not involve
minors. Man, MtoF, FtoM, Genderqueer, TG, TS, TV, Gay, Lesbian, fetishists, DQ, transgenderist, to
woman and everyone in between!
There are no absolutes in life, I have to believe that, if everyone would open their eyes, minds
and hearts, you will see there are variants and differing degrees of every category, whereas the
categories just blend together.
Where do you draw the line? Think about it, we want equality and acceptance, but this group
over here does not deserve the same? We absolutely can not draw lines in what we might
consider a "freak" or not!
True acceptance is accepting anyone and everyone. As long as no one is hurt, or an unwilling
participant.
So basically we want others to accept us for wanting to transition, why can't we accept a "man" giving birth.
Love everyone for who they are, not for what you want them to be.
Tammie Huber
I feel that anyone should be able to be and do anything they want. It's unfortunate that, in this society, we Have to label ourselves, and more unfortunate that some people want to hold us to all the "rules" associated with that label.
ReplyDeleteOf course, I don't agree with the way the media handled it, but I can't say that I disagree with the decision of the couple to "go public". In my opinion, the only way to get people to be comfortable with "others" is to make them "normal" via exposure. The more people hide, the less the world will understand. Also, I don't think it's wise for others people who label themselves similarly to criticize this couple for their decision -- that only confuses society, and makes him more of a freak.