OK, when I first saw this picture while browsing some political news on the ABC News web site last week, it shocked the sweet bejesus outta me. I mean, “How the…? What the…? When the…? huh?” Was all I could manage to articulate. Of course, reading is fundamental, so when I took some time to actually read the story, I was a little bit clearer on the situation. Well, slightly, I mean, he’s not a biologically-born man but a transgendered man with female organs inside who happens to be a husband to a wife named Nancy and they live in Oregon. “Ohh okk…Now, it all makes sense…say what? Ok, let’s try this again…” I thought.
So, I used some common sense and figured I should just read his own first-person account on The Advocate, which was mentioned in the story. By now, I’m sure all of you have heard the story of even seen it Oprah earlier today.
Well, after skimming his story in The Advocate, I finally understood that this wasn’t about some crazy science experiment or something, but a couple trying to have a child… Granted, they’re doing it in a completely unconventional way that is extremely strange to me, particularly when it comes to the aesthetics of it all, but their desire to have one didn’t sound any different to me than any other couple … Right? ….Or wrong? I’m just not sure on this one, what do y’all think?
Is it a sign of the apocalypse? Or is it just another interesting example of the ever-changing American way?
5 comments:
Yes, initially the picture caught my interest when I saw it a couple of days ago but once I found out that he was a transgendered male, I realized that it is nothing more than a woman having a baby. Now, how that woman chooses to live her life is her business and if she wants to be a man well, then so be it.
But here's my question or thought. It was okay for them to be leagally married because she/he was transgendered. But now, he's slipped back over to the female side of life. It seems simplistic until you get into the leagalities of things. I mean now that he has stopped his shots and halted his transition to allow him to carry a baby, does this make thier marriage null and void?
Cases like this really show that our laws may be a little short sited. And that's perhaps because there shouldn't be a law regarding who can get married and who can't when everyone is of "legal" age.
You know, that's a good point anonymous - can they legally still be defined as married?
But I think it's unfair to say that "cases like this really show that our laws may be a little short-sighted" because this is a heck of scenario that I'm sure NONE of the forefathers, or heck, none of even the current legislators, were thinking of when these laws were formed.
Then again, maybe you're right - maybe there shouldn't even be a law in the first place on who can get married and who can't.
I mean, I especially don't get those kinds of laws, given the failure rate for marriages.
If the transgendered male went to all the emotional struggle to become a male and get married, then he should let his wife get artificially inseminated and have the baby. What is this all about?
If the 2nd anon commenter would have read the article, they would have learned that Nancy, the wife, had a hysterectomy due to a medical condition some time ago.
After I learned the specifics around the case, the mystique wore off for me. I read somewhere that they are having problems with Tom's insurance company wanting to pay for OB/GYN services because he's legally classified a man.
I hadn't yet considered the ramifications regarding the legality of their marriage. That will give me something to ponder. I'll probably be back to post another comment. -- Daphne
I, too, said, "no way" in disbelief when I heard a man was pregnant. But, like several have already said, once I found out he was formerly a woman, it's not that unbelievable. I have questions about all the anatomy of it as it is an extraordinary circumstance, but that just adds to the attention we give anything that is out of the ordinary.
I don't listen to Wendy Williams very often, but I heard her talking about this Friday. She said she thinks this couple did this for the money to sell their story. I don't know the couple personally, but I have the same suspicions.
I can understand the desire to want to have a child together, naturally, but I would tend to think that the fact that his wife is unable to have a child would limit that feasibility.
If he chose to have a child in a different way (such as this extremely rare way or through adoption), I would think they would want this to remain a private decision. This is why I wonder at this family's intentions for sensationalizing the story. Then again, once one media source spouted it as "a man is pregnant," then another grabbed for it, and so on. So I guess it's not necessarily one family's intent for making this story a big deal, it's kind of the media's fault.
My only worry is that people who are judgmental -- such as his brother, who (according to the story) told him that it's a good thing their first twins who were in his Fallopian tubes died so they wouldn't become a monster or see the monster who was having them -- are only going to have more ammunition in their hatred for anything that is not 'normal.'
Post a Comment