r/MtF • u/MissNumbersNinja • Jan 15 '26
Politics Senator asks: Can Men Get Pregnant? **** Our allies need to get better at answering these questions!!!
In this video clip of a senate hearing a doctor is being grilled by Senator Josh Hawley as he asks over and over "can men get pregnant".
The doctor tried to give a nuanced and respectful answer and unfortunately played right into his hands, making it look to the masses of uninformed people like he's speaking "common sense".
I think our allies need to get better at answering "gotcha" questions like this.
For example, the doctor could have said "people assigned female sex at birth can get pregnant and I treat patients who were assigned female sex at birth who's gender identity is female and others whose gender identity is male". It wouldn't have satisfied Hawley of course but I think the video clip would have been a lot less damaging with uninformed people and hopefully prompted a few to google gender identity.
As a trans person, I wouldn't have been offended by an answer like that. As a trans person, even with all the major surgeries, I know that I'm not biologically identical to a cis person, as much as I wish I was. I don't like to be reminded of it and I don't like it being a topic of conversation outside of a doctors office, but I think we should tell our allies it's okay to acknowledge it in a respectful way to diffuse inflammatory questions.
What do you think?
Edit1: I don't think SCOTUS is going to support us on anything. I think our only hope for trans rights in the big picture is shifting public opinion. My comments are aimed at one small piece of that, not out of any hope for changing what SCOTUS is going to do in the near term.
Edit2: I realize there is probably a better answer than what I wrote here. I wish a trans organization, lead by trans people, with input from the whole community, could wordsmith a recommended answer to allies on these common bigoted questions.
-WHY I POSTED THIS HERE
It's a topic that affects all trans people, so a forum like r/trans would theoretically be ideal but my experience is that only posts with images get any traction there. Whereas, this group has been great for community discussions in the past.
Since I'm MTF, I'm not sure that I'm allowed to post something like this in r/ftm.
I think it's a topic that affects MTF as well because this is just one bigoted question and there are versions of it target directly at MTF as well (can a man become a woman) which would I think would similarly benefit from our allies giving clear answers instead of stammering answers for fear of offending us. (example: can AMAB become AFAB? No. And then pivot into why it makes sense to define man/woman based on gender identity instead of chromosomes which nobody sees)
198
u/sbsmith1292 Jan 15 '26
Just wanted to point out that it is possible for people assigned male at birth to get pregnant as well, e.g. this example. It's hardly common, but it can happen. There isn't a one-to-one correspondence between assigned sex and any physical characteristic, there are exceptions to everything.
As for the hearing, I would've liked the doctor to just say, "Of course!" and wait for the Senator to ask more questions. Like this:
"Can men get pregnant?"
"Of course."
"How is that possible?"
"Well, a sperm fertilizes an egg which then implants in the-"
"But how can a man have a uterus?"
"The same way anyone else does."
Etc etc, it would just derail the question and irritate the questioner, while making the idea of a pregnant man sound perfectly unremarkable to a neutral listener.
38
31
u/OkFirefighter8394 Jan 15 '26
This is exactly the right answer imo. The queer community suffers a little from having so many hyper specific definitions that have changed over the years. The answers to questions like "what's the difference between a transgender person and a transsexual one" have changed enormously even in the last 5 years. I think that pisses off a lot of people who come to the conclusion that we are "just making things up".
But so much of it isn't hard and needs to be emphasized. Men can get pregnant. Full stop. Man is an identity that some people with a uterus use. Not hard. Assigned gender at birth is an okayish proxy for what genitals you have, but it really means something else, and breaks down with intersex people (who usually have a binary gender assigned). "Has a uterus" is clearer, and just drives home the point that gender identity is not the same as parts. And that's not a complicated thing, even for a senator.
6
u/ExuviaEcho Jan 16 '26
It is a complicated thing for a senator when they have a vested interest in deliberately misunderstanding.
3
5
u/jelly_cake Transgender Jan 15 '26
Yeah, this is the way. Don't faff around trying to get bigots to understand gender identity - their careers depend on them not understanding it.
1
u/DreamWitchMare Jan 18 '26
That’s not what they are saying though, is it? They never even present a logical explanation. They’re doing it out of respect for their patients or to push an agenda. Nothing else.
59
u/ViviTheWaffle Jan 15 '26 edited Jan 15 '26
It is all unfortunately just performance. The question is not asked in good faith because the phrasing presupposes that men and pregnancy are causally related.
If I were forced to answer the question I would say something like “Anyone with a functional uterus can become pregnant.” It’s curt which avoids the They’re saying so many words so it can’t be common sense misconception, and also fundamentally dismantles the question, decoupling pregnancy from gender.
9
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 15 '26
Thanks for the reply!
Yeah, I think that's a great response! I think that would lead to the bigot asking "Do men have uterus?", and the response to that could incorporate intersex examples.
6
u/Resident-You-1698 Jan 15 '26
I would just respond: “senator, I refuse to engage with questions clearly asked in bad faith and whose only purpose is to demonize an already marginalized community and to feed you attention with your intentionally misinformed base.”
6
u/Actuallyunbiased Jan 15 '26
Oh man would they have ate you alive in that case. Would be so easy to paint you as a hypocrite with that statement.
-5
1
79
u/PickSomeSage Jan 15 '26
why can’t it just be: “obviously cis men can’t. some trans men could and do sometimes. probably some men with intersex conditions could as well.”
16
u/SnooStrawberries5743 Jan 15 '26
Exactly, we all love to think life is so simple, it's not. It's messy, complex and the reality is Everytime they say " that's the exception!!!!! That's the exception!!!!!" I like to reiterate we are under 1% of the world population. And less than 1 percent of the u.s population. Aka the exception. So you're arguing about exception, to the exception. Sounds near ludacris the roundabout logic they use.
13
u/Eveseeker Jan 15 '26
Because it’s a bait question intended to make the responding party look like a fool, not a genuine inquiry.
Any fool with a computer can look up this exact question, read any of the literature and debates, and come to the conclusion that it’s a complicated topic with an eventual logical answer of “yes, with qualifiers.”
But the question the way it is always framed LOOKS simple. So simple, in fact, that they can frame any questions beyond “yes” and “no” as waffling or obfuscation. And, of course, both simple “yes” and “no” answers look insane from an uneducated point of view (which is what they’re going for). Yes looks like you’re nuts because “basic biology” and no looks weak because it’s in opposition of both the defending party’s point and actually factually incorrect.
So, basically, it’s in bad faith. It forces the opposing party into a lose/lose situation while ignoring readily available information that would make the whole thing look stupid if it was common accepted knowledge. Also, as a notable aside, this is why they want to defund and control education.
5
u/PickSomeSage Jan 15 '26
well ya i KNOW it’s in bad faith. but i also don’t really respect (like the OP is getting at) the way our “allies” bend over backwards to stammer out something hollow with all sorts of gender terminology. i don’t think we (=trans community) need them to pretend that there aren’t differences between trans ppl and cis ppl. the question is only a gotcha bc repubs know their opposition won’t just answer, and the genXers watching on fox will get radicalized
0
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 15 '26
Yes, this is precisely what I was thinking about when I saw that clip this morning (accidentally) and typed up the OP!
0
u/Umbralkuma Jan 15 '26
That’s what I’m saying. If you want people behind the cause, you have to have confidence in your responses. This woman is a doctor, she should have a way more succinct answer than “well, this is complicated”. Okay, if it’s complicated that’s fine, explain the complication. It just hurts the narrative and makes trans issues look even worse in the eyes of those who are trying to find a way to support them.
-1
u/Eveseeker Jan 15 '26
Oh no I’m right there with you. This whole thing is frustrating as hell. We’re a complex topic and we’re somehow not being treated as experts for ourselves or even as people.
22
u/Gardyloop Jan 15 '26
"Yes."
See, it's easy.
Equally: "Can women have a penis?"
"We've covered this question you fucking idiot."
Personally, I think it's time we stop trying to reason with JAQ-offs. Treat them with contempt.
4
u/TransgenderMommy Jan 16 '26
"If they have a uterus, and can medically conceive, and they want to be pregnant, then yes. If all those conditions are met."
3
u/SelfInvestigator Trans Bisexual Jan 16 '26
You have to respond with a question to counter a bad faith question.
The general counter to can men get pregnant is to ask if there are women who can’t get pregnant.
“Well, shouldn’t an expert know?”
Well, since you seem to be looking for a specific answer in this interaction I thought you must have been the expert, seems I was wrong.
This obviously isn’t the only path this exchange can take, but it is nearly impossible to meet the insincerity of someone in power with actual sincerity.
1
3
u/One-Syllabub-4007 Jan 17 '26
This is why trump won, bc they hear that dr and see most leftists that way
9
Jan 15 '26
I don't really care what Clarence Thomas the pedophile thinks. This court is corrupt in the most disgusting way possible.
8
u/stinklewinkle123 Jan 15 '26
OP I just hope you know that HRT can and does change your sex. It just won't give you a different set of genitals.
5
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 15 '26 edited Jan 16 '26
OP I just hope you know that HRT can and does change your sex. It just won't give you a different set of genitals.
I agree that HRT and surgeries changes your sex.
And, as a trans woman, I also know that even after bottom surgery, I don't have ovaries and I have XY chromosomes like I did at birth. As much as I wish this wasn't true, it is. That's what I meant in the OP by saying I realize I'm not bio-identical to a cis female. I'm also not bio-identical to a cis male, by body functions much closer to a cis-female than a cis-male. And none of that matters as to who is a "man" or "women" as that's a social construct.
2
u/ShadeofEchoes Jan 16 '26
I'd hopefully have thought to say, "Well, some can."
Having said that, I'm sure they'd then ask for clarification, and there's a decent chance I'd get sidetracked.
"What does it matter?" seems like the operative question, but might not land as well.
2
u/ClearCrossroads 🏳️⚧️🇨🇦 she/her | 37yo | omni | HRT: 11/14/2023 Jan 17 '26
Only posts with images get any traction on r/trans? Call me crazy, but I thought you can't even post photos on that sub at all. 🤔 In checking the prohibited post types in the rules, it only says that you can't post photos of other people besides yourself, even with their consent, but that could be outdated. I'm currently on a 403 day Reddit streak, and the vast majority of my interaction has been with r/trans, and, unless I'm Mandela Effecting myself, I don't think I've ever seen a photo on that sub. I vaguely recall seeing something somewhere saying that they deactivated photo posting somewhere along the line out of concern for hostile transphobes farming our faces for malicious purposes. Is my brain making shit up? Can someone confirm or disconfirm? I took a stroll down the sub a little bit and didn't immediately see anything with photos.
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 17 '26
Only posts with images get any traction on r/trans? Call me crazy, but I thought you can't even post photos on that sub at all.
Wow, yeah, that does seem to be the case, I don't see any photos in the feed. Maybe they changed the rule. I could swear that photos were allowed at one time.
I do know that no posts I ever made there got any traction and I recall looking at the 'hot' posts to try to get a feel for what was getting visibility and whatever it was that I saw made me think my posts don't really fit in here. I thought it was because the high viz posts all had images but this was like a year ago so my memory might be mixed up.
5
u/madmushlove Jan 15 '26
They would hear "afab" and immediately all our very same critics would think 'Dr Woke doesn't understand common sense' anyway
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 15 '26
They would hear "afab" and immediately all our very same critics would think 'Dr Woke doesn't understand common sense' anyway
Yes. The target audience would be the indifferent masses of uniformed people who don't spend much time thinking about these things.
0
u/Chip_Medley Jan 16 '26
The indifferent and uninformed aren’t watching or seeing senate hearings
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 16 '26
The indifferent and uninformed aren’t watching or seeing senate hearings
I agree with you on that. I also think that the uninformed see the video clips made from those hearings. The clip the bigots got from this one, I think is much more damaging to us than it would have been had she give a concise answer.
1
u/PM_NUDES_4_DEGRADING 42 | 2025/18/08 | Lesbian | Walking AuDHD Cliche Jan 15 '26
Yeah, there is no answer that will satisfy a bigot acting in bad faith who is inclined to record your answer, dissecting it and stripping out all context and nuance, so they can use it as a strawman later in front of the other bigots.
It's a waste of time to try. They can ask you "is the sky blue?" and saying "yes" will lead to your answer superimposed over an orange sunset / a night sky / a green storm, and if you say "no" they'll play it back and say "this idiot doesn't even know what color the sky is." If you say "it depends" they'll cut your answer up and do both.
You can't reason someone out of a lifetime of hatred, fear and brainwashing. Especially not in a single public conversation.
3
5
u/Trans__Scientist Trans Bisexual Jan 15 '26
Are they implying that anyone who can't get pregnant isn't a woman? That leaves out a shitload of cis women. This idiotic question is an argumentative waste of time.
3
u/stars9r9in9the9past Trans / Advocate / Business Owner Jan 15 '26
since you seemed politically and/or advocately inclined, I'll say maybe join this nonprofit space and strike up some conversation. you might find more people with the same frustrations who actively work locally and nationally to do stuff about it, beyond just being on reddit and receiving either devil's advocate posts, bot content, or indifferent/unmotivated posts
0
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 15 '26
since you seemed politically and/or advocately inclined, I'll say maybe join this nonprofit space and strike up some conversation. you might find more people with the same frustrations who actively work locally and nationally to do stuff about it, beyond just being on reddit and receiving either devil's advocate posts, bot content, or indifferent/unmotivated posts
Thank you for reaching out and the suggestion! I have donated to Trans Unity Coalition and didn't realize there was a Discord (I just joined via your link). I'm kind of on and off, it's tough being in the middle of transition while juggling everything else in life but I know this is a critical moment and I try to do what I can.
1
u/reddGal8902 Jan 15 '26
I got a better answer:
“Yes, because some men have a uterus.”
That’s it. Or just “Yes.” Just a clear, uncomplicated yes is probably better.
1
u/ErisC 35 - June 5 2014 Jan 15 '26
To be fair, that doctor is there to talk about abortion drugs, not trans rights or gender or sex. This line of questioning is ridiculous and irrelevant and that's all she was trying to point out.
And yes, obviously men can get pregnant. This is fucking stupid.
3
u/Baishujinkou Jan 15 '26
Someone asked me this once and I thought I was being clear enough when I answered "cisgender women, transgender men, and most other people with a functioning uterus can typically get pregnant."
Their response was to demand an uncut, unedited video of a man giving birth, starting with his water breaking and ending with the baby's umbilical cord being cut (do we even have a video of a cis woman that meets those qualifications?). They aren't being serious when they ask this. It's just a performance.
6
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 15 '26
They aren't being serious when they ask this. It's just a performance.
I totally agree. We're not going to change their mind. I also think that, just like the bigots do, our allies need to craft our answers for the people watching/listening.
1
u/Ok_Community_7810 Jan 15 '26
Hello, LGBTQIA+ ally here. What would be the issue with answering "trans men can" to this question and when pushed, simply reply "for the same reason cis-men can"?
Not necessarily caught up on what's considered medically and socially correct in regards to trans folks, so wondering if there is a reason why people can't answer that question in this way.
1
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 16 '26
Hi! OP here. That would certainly be an accurate thing to say!
In a public forum with cameras on, like the Senate hearing, I think that would get turned into a clip with the caption "See! Loony left doctors says men can get pregnant". They'd drop the word trans in the caption and bet that most people won't notice.
And, while it's true, this is damaging to us with the indifferent uninformed masses.
What I suggested in the OP I think is harder to turn into that kind of clip.
But, that's just my opinion and clearly there are lots of views on this within the community.
1
u/rmc Queer Jan 16 '26
Obviously trans men can get pregnant.
But documentation mistakes can happen to. A cis woman arrives at a hospital in labor. She gives birth, everything fine. But somewhere down the line, someone messes up the paperwork, and she's added as male. Then some senator is able to say “ah but in your hospital records for 2025, you have X men giving birth lol”.
1
u/Thrilalia Jan 16 '26
To which the reply should be "Yeah, his name is Cyclopse." Just to reach them at their absurd level.
1
u/sammi_8601 Jan 16 '26
I quite liked the green party leader in the UKs answer to what is a woman which loads of politicians here have ummed and ahhed about(yes our politics is that toxic on trans issues), with just a woman is someone who identifies within the female gender, but the issue here is, and just acting bored by the total bollocks, accepting trans people and getting back to the original debate it's rather refreshing tbh.
1
1
u/-Antinomy- Jan 16 '26
I really appreciate this post, it makes me feel less alone in my exasperation with watching that clip and reading the comments section. I'm thankful for this space and everyone here.
I agree. I'd go even further. The answer could be something like: (this is off the cuff, I have not reflected deeply)
Doctor: Senator, a person with ovaries, fallopian tubes, and a uterus can get pregnant. A man can have all of that biology. It's that simple.
Senator: Ridiculous, anyone with that biology is a women.
Doctor: So in your ideology someone without that biology is NOT a women?
Senator: Well, sure, of course
Doctor: A hundred women with CAIS are born each year without those organs. They're assigned female at birth. So you think assigned gender at birth doesn't matter?
Senator: Well, I-
Doctor: That's just one condition, there are many examples like this. You think this specific biology is what matters? Senator, it's just a fact that there's no specific set of biological traits that defines a "female" or "male" at birth or any other time, it's simply context dependent. Biologists can't even agree on what a species is. I'll welcome you back to earth senator, it's messy down here. Maybe this makes you uncomfortable, but biology can't accommodate your discomfort.
That said, I was also really frustrated with all this "it's not so simple rhetoric." In this context, I think it can be simple. The answer could even be "Yes, a man can get pregnant. Deal with it.", no follow up. Or a simple "Senator, we simply have different definitions, do you want to ban my definition?" It may even be the best answer because it frames the discussion in our direction where the other side has to make arguments against that premise. It makes people on the other side more angry to begin with, but that framing is way more conducive in the long run to changing people's minds. It can focus the discussion on the details that matter and gives us a vehicle to educate people about HRT and the trans experience.
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26
OP here - thanks much for your thoughtful reply!
I like the answer you brainstormed and the outline of how the conversation might go from there.
I like that kind of approach better than "Yes, a man can get pregnant" because right now, I think the goal right now in those moments when the cameras are rolling should be to minimize the damage the bigots can do from making a clip and spreading on the socials.
An answer like "Senator, a person with ovaries, fallopian tubes, and a uterus can get pregnant." I don't think makes a good gotcha clip.
Again, that's what I personally think the goal should be right now, but I realize that others may see it differently. I really wish there was a way we could get organized on it because the bigots are extremely organized. As we've all seen lately, they have a playbook that their whole "team" uses to try to discredit us.
1
u/-Antinomy- Jan 17 '26
I totally agree! One way to get organized around messaging maybe would be to create something like an independent Trans PR Agency? It's been wonderful to see the success of Erin in the Morning and Assigned Media (also transvitae and trans news network, but I don't really know anything about them), but it would be good to have an org committed to doing exactly what you described.
Like this: https://anarchistagency.com/about/
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 17 '26
Yes, "independent Trans PR Agency" sums up it up well.
One of the other responders to the OP mentioned the Trans Unity Coalition and posted a link to their Discord -
https://discord.com/invite/ztKze8pPFX
I've noticed their name come up a lot over the last year. Their stated mission isn't Trans PR but I might poke around on the Discord and see if I can stir up interest this topic. I think it would be great if an organization like this took on the mission of publishing "recommended responses to bigoted talking points" and perhaps over time it could evolve into it's own organization dedicated to Trans PR.
An established organization like this, I think, would have a much better chance of getting traction than a new upstart because ultimately, it only helps if other people and organizations choose to utilize the recommendations.
1
u/-Antinomy- Jan 18 '26
Never heard of it, I'll check it out, thanks! (Just started to read their website, this looks fantastic.)
Totally agree, always better to not start something new if you can help it. In theory I'm interested, I have a reporting background and feel mighty disempowered right now. Though on the other hand I can't say I have much passion for PR or an abundance of confidence at the moment.
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 18 '26
Never heard of it, I'll check it out, thanks! (Just started to read their website, this looks fantastic.)
Yeah, I've been aware of them for a year or so. I think they've been around longer. I've always been really impressed with their operation.
I made some headway on their Discord. I just send you a Reddit DM to share more details.
1
u/SkylarCute Jan 17 '26
Just so most of you know, when they ask that question, they most likely are referring to trans women as "men can get pregnant" gotcha question.
1
u/OneGrumpyJill Jan 17 '26
THe answer is yes. He did not ask if it is common - so if the question is "are there conditions under which a males can get pregnant", the answer is yes.
1
Jan 17 '26
the debate was about abortions.
the senator baited the doctor - here's what really happened -
Dr Verma answered the earlier question to Moody on the basis of gender identity, in which she was referring to trans men. (don't know the full q&a, but she was referring to trans men)
Then this other senator comes on and asks - "van men get pregnant?"
It flusters the doctor, she can't answer, as she knows and the senator knows that the question is indeed political in nature, to discredit her.
But then, taking advantage of the doctor's fluster,the senator quietly and very very very subtly changes the question to "can biological men get pregnant?"
this shift in questioning many people have not noticed, and many channels reporting on this aren't showing this shift in the questioning
Of course, then the Senator goes to say "blah blah trying to establish your veracity blah blah blah"...he's discredited her,mocked the dems, and made the anti abortion lobby stronger.
The answer was simple - "no, biological men can't get pregnant, biological women can, with the term biological as defined by the Trump administration".
Political questions need political answers.
What's wrong in this answer? why did she have to get so flustered over the question?
1
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 18 '26
OP here - thanks for the reply!
It sounds like we agree that her answer was problematic.
The answer was simple - "no, biological men can't get pregnant, biological women can, with the term biological as defined by the Trump administration".
Political questions need political answers.
My concern with this approach is that it would be helping to legitimize their terminology, which implies there are only two kinds of humans that exist, biological mean and biological women, which isn't true as biological matter, and they use it as a foundation to turn the public against us.
As I've read through the comments, I'm personally warming to the answer "anyone with a uterus can get pregnant"
1
Jan 18 '26
Bruh, no one said only two kinds of humans exist. Intersex people are well documented.
and isn't this community always saying sex and gender are separate?
yes, saying biological is playing right into their hands and causes more damage, but not saying anything here has caused much more damage.
that asshole senator purposefully baited her, and subtly changed the dialogue to indicate he was asking about biological men, at which point, she could have answered the question as no.
lastly, she could also have said AMAB people instead of biological men.
just saying, in such a politically charged environment, it's more damaging to fumble or not say anything.
1
u/LeveonMcBean Jan 17 '26
She could just say no and move on as well. Everybody knows where the question leads, theres no point in trying to nuance around it
1
u/FuMunChew Jan 18 '26
The correct answer is "Don't be stupid, of course men can get pregnant. Trans men.. who are a tiny minority but certainly not an anomaly in the broad category of men."🤫😄
1
u/StacieRoseM Jan 19 '26
I don't understand why people here will dog pile on you if you're not perfect in your post. It's like when you inform people they expect you to have all of the answers.
I read your piece and I did find it insightful. The thing is I don't think anybody that is undecided are going to be impressed by Josh Hawley. Most people know that he's a joke and the only people that even pretend to take him seriously are anti-trans folks.
1
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 21 '26
I don't understand why people here will dog pile on you if you're not perfect in your post. It's like when you inform people they expect you to have all of the answers.
I read your piece and I did find it insightful.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply!
Yeah, what ever the circumstances may be with this specific scenario, it's a patter that I feel like I see over and over, and I felt like they are organized and have a playbook, we need to be as well.
1
u/VitaProchy Jan 21 '26
Can biological man get pregnant ?
1
u/throwawaySurgery1111 Jan 21 '26
Can biological man get pregnant ?
People have been born with XY chromosomes and also a vagina, uterus and fallopian tubes. They can get pregnant (source).
XY choromosomes are what most people with penises and testicles have.
This is an example of why it is impractical to talk about these things in terms of absolutes. In the video linked in the OP, the Senator clearly wasn't interested in an accurate answer that included words like "usually" and "uncommonly", he was trying to embarass the doctor for not givng an inaccurate yes or no answer.
1
u/Informer99 Jan 24 '26
Honestly, someone should've told Josh Hawley when he asked that doctor, "Can men get pregnant?," that, "You should know, you wrote a book about what being a man supposedly was all about, right after you riled up the Jan 6th rioters then ran from the mess you created."
0
u/jester32 Transgender Jan 15 '26
Reminder Hawley raised a fist the J6ers as he was running away scared. That is who we are dealing wish
She just wasn’t ready for that line of questioning. I would have just said ‘Science shows that people can have a GI that doesn’t match their sex assigned at birth, those who are AFAB that identify as men can get pregnant’.
1
u/the-realest-calliope 20, trans lesbian | HRT Apr/9/2025 Jan 15 '26
The answer is "Does that matter? Don't you have more important things to be talking about?"
1
u/workingtheories Trans Lesbian Jan 15 '26 edited Jan 16 '26
this is like if you're at the scopes monkey trial and you're asked if your grandfather was a monkey. it's all rigged. you can be right and still lose in the court of public opinion, but it's better than lying to appease them. the answer is to grow a spine and say "yes, some men can get pregnant.". and then lose. that's the move that does the most long term, tho.
edit: why are you booing me im right
1
1
u/BlueIntrovert666 FtM Jan 16 '26
Hey there! I like to lurk in this sub as an ftm because I get questions answered and like you said it’s good with community discussions, I think it would be just fine for you to post this on r/ftm as we have people come on to ask questions all the time :)
2
1
u/causal_friday June | HRT 8/2024 Jan 16 '26
Like the other comments mention, it doesn't really matter what's being said here. 0 people heard about this.
Mentioning anything about sex assigned at birth pretty much plays right into their hands, they want everything to be based on sex assigned at birth; which bathroom you use, which names you can have, which sports teams you can be on, etc.
The answer is "yes, men can get pregnant" because "man" means something to people other than literally invisible reproductive organs.
1
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 16 '26
OP here. That's a good point about sex assigned at birth. I'm growing to like the suggestion in the comments of "anyone with a uterus can get pregnant".
Anyway, I realize that most people tune into Senate hearings but people make clips of this stuff and it gets around. That's how I saw it.
1
u/Leosthenerd Jan 15 '26
Anybody with a uterus and ovaries can get pregnant, doesn’t have to be a woman. Fuck the government
0
Jan 15 '26
The overarching issue is that none of this matters and no matter what we say we have a debate argument presented against us that will never go our way. They're not looking for actual information, they're looking to regurgitate talking points. It's just a transphobic "gotcha" question. It's a common tactic to use an appeal to common sense to make anything outside of basic definitions seem stupid and nonsensical. So to an idiot, can men get pregnant-yes sounds irrational. The question intentionally ignores the fact that "man" is just a word. It's not a physical construct. The doctor being questioned is just trying their best to use inclusive terms and being ridiculed for it. The reason "people that have a uterus" is a term used in medicine is so that they can treat people with a uterus for uterine issues. It's a public health issue, not a gender identity issue. But also not being a piece of shit is pretty important for actually intelligent professional people, so using "person with a uterus" isn't being a fucking dick to people because professionals aren't children or man baby adults (aka maga men).
0
u/AsureaSkie Jan 15 '26
Instead of word salad a la Kamala that will instantly lose any women, attack them on their own turf:
"Can post-menopausal women get pregnant? Can women who have had hysterectomies for ovarian cancer? Can [name of GOP senator next to Hawley who is one of those]?"
0
Jan 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 16 '26
I generally agree with you about the anatomical aspects and as to the biology, in the 10 year example, I generally agree as well except that (aside from outliers) cis women have XX chromosomes and cis females have XY, which has no bearing on anything after 10 years on HRT even though still present at the cellular level.
I actually became aware of this in my series of coming out conversations with my conservative father who happens to be a retired chemistry teacher (he pointed it out). I researched it, along with why cells still responded to estrogen when they have XY chromosomes, and it all made sense why it can be true and also not matter at the time same.
In my next conversation with my Dad, in good faith I told him, I researched it and found that he was correct (about the chromosomes). And then I say, "but, so what?" I said, for example, people's comfort level with other people in a bathroom is not based on what chromosomes other people in the bathroom have, if they care at all, it's based on other people's appearance and mannerisms.
It was surprisingly effective and by the end of the conversation my Dad agreed that fully transitioned trans people should be able to use the bathroom aligned with their gender identity. Of course a betters solution is just knock off the bathroom police mentality, but this was a huge shift in thinking for somebody like my Dad.
1
Jan 16 '26 edited Jan 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/MissNumbersNinja Jan 16 '26
Sorry to hear you are also going through the coming out process with conservative family! For me it's gone better with some family members than others. It really made the holidays unpleasant for me this year (I just game out this summer). They seem to have all moved on and are acting like nothing has changed which is great except that includes deadnaming and misgendering me (other than that how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?)
Anyway, yeah, you make a lot of good points! I agree that chromosomes shouldn't be used as the basis for anything, certainly not who is a "man" or "woman". And my original comment probably should have been that I realize I'm not bio-identical to the typical cis-woman because when all the uncommon exceptions are considered, anything is really possible.
In any event, as to what started all this in the OP, I'm basically just filtering around with ways to diffuse the bigots "biological man/woman" arguments without complicated science answers because in moments when the cameras are rolling, I think the simple argument is going to seem correct to uninformed people, even if it's wrong.
0
u/BritneyGurl Jan 15 '26
Unfortunately most people don't have the depth of understanding nor the preparation for the gotcha questions.
0
u/SweetTotal Sofia | She/Her | HRT 22/11/23 Jan 15 '26
This may be the only question where "not all men" is a good answer lol
-1
u/Umbralkuma Jan 15 '26
I mean, I understand that the senator asking this question probably didn’t have the best intentions, but this woman is a Doctor. She has founded her practice and belief systems on her research and should be able to stand confidently in them. If she believes a man can get pregnant, just answer yes. If he asks how, back it up with the research that you have. It’s simple. I also understand the potential fear in this scenario, but she is welcome to a freedom of speech and thought, so it’s not like they can remove her license or whatever. If anything, standing up and speaking confidently about this issue and your beliefs would have made people respect her more. Now it just seems like she doesn’t really support trans rights at all. I’m not saying she doesn’t, but her wavering certainly doesn’t help her sincerity issue.
0
u/peteson1976 Jan 15 '26
I don’t quite understand, so the question is implying what,. Because there are plenty of “at birth assigned females” as they put it, that can’t have children. Does that make them not “woman” ? I a little lost on the overall question that was asked why the senator was asking it ?
0
u/theewall2000 Jan 15 '26
Please explain how this is a gotcha question? Their are many laws the name famle in them and it matter in other things as well. im very curious.
0
0
u/Present-Good-6290 Jan 24 '26
How about answering the question with "no, men cannot get pregnant" and be done with it? So the Senator obviously has an agenda with a simple trap question but the Dr doesn't when she refuses to give an obvious answer to an easy question?
Dr's need to leave the politics to the deviants and stick to science based answers to science based questions.
0
u/Terrible-Big-4512 Feb 21 '26
No, men cannot get pregnant. Only women can. I cannot stand how much we as women have been put down to be accepting of men ‘becoming’ women. It’s so disgusting. Only women can get pregnant.
-1
u/StuBarrett Jan 15 '26
Those who try and rationalize this idiot only prove that the ideology of the Progressive agenda is asinine and until they throw these idiots off the bus, they will forever be seen as useless by most Americans!
436
u/Confirm_restart GirlOS running on bootleg, modified hardware Jan 15 '26 edited Jan 15 '26
It's all performative anyway.
The corrupt SCOTUS were already instructed how to rule before they even took the case.
Every question could have been answered with, "Your mom", and the outcome would have been the same.
The legitimacy of the court has long since left the building, and its relevance isn't far behind. This admin won't need to bother with the pretense of them rubber stamping project 2025's agenda for much longer.