....is what the headline should have read.
Watching ABC just now, and saw a story they were doing on a "pregnant man." Had to wait a few minutes to find out that the "man" --"Thomas" Beatie of Bend, Oregon, is actually a "transgendered" woman.
You can fool yourself--but reality is another matter. As Benjamin Radford on "Live Science" writes:
"The inescapable biological fact is that men cannot become pregnant . . if Beatie has retained his (her) babymaking equipment, then (s)he is in fact still biologically a woman, not a man. (Of course, "She's Having Their Baby” isn't quite such a startling news headline...)"
"her" and "(s)he" added in the interest of fidelity to truth....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This reminds me of how the SF Chronicle kept referring to Edward "Gwen" Araujo as "she". Araujo had not had a so-called sex-change operation, and had not had a legal change of sex, so there was not the slightest reason to call him by the feminine pronoun. Doing so the Chron was deliberately and repeatedly misstating fact.
Araujo was posthumously given a sex change by a judge, after which the Chron had at least some theoretical basis to refer to him as "her." But what human arrogance it is that doctors and judges think they can, with swipe of a pen or slice of a scalpel, change the sex that God gave a human being! A man with a piece of paper from a judge is still a man. A man with his genitals removed is a man with his genitals removed, not a woman.
What a sad thing that someone who is unable to accept himself as he is would be allowed by derelict doctors to undergo horrible bodily mutilation. We are a sick society indeed to allow such cruelty and call it "treatment." Forgive them Lord, they know not what they do!
Post a Comment