Should single men have right to exploit women's bodies?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Chess thinks that transwomen are not real women.

But... why?

Chess is a Radical Feminist.

[Zakuvia]

The odd thing is that CM had a perfectly good argument to make with her excerpt. The idea that men could call themselves legally 'infertile' could be abused to mislead women who would otherwise think that their romantic partner was 'safe', and allow men who simply stayed abstinent for a year and gamed the system to predatorily impregnate women.

Instead we get this outrageous strawmyn (tee hee) that goes full Orwellian about women being forced to bear unwanted children. Honestly, Poe's Law is in full effect.

What about the legal change of the 'infertility'? I do honestly find that bothersome, but for a much more practical reason.

[Ebliania]

Chess thinks that transwomen are not real women.

But... why? Just... why?

They're double agents working for the patriarchy.

[Lady Scylla]

There's no mention of this change in WHO's newsfeed either, instead, their latest development is new guidelines on how NOT to get an STD.

Really the rules changed on getting an STD? Why am I always the last to know??

On a more serious side. Then where are the Telegraph and independent getting their information from? They both put it as a future change.

For a sweater for the devil, what color should I get?

Not sure. The problem is, we're trusting the independent, which sources itself as a valid source by hyperlinking to other articles it's posted. If it is true, what the move is actually establishing is this:

Under the new terms, heterosexual single men and women, and gay men and women who want to have children would be given the same priority as couples seeking IVF because of medical fertility problems.

I.E. these groups will have an equal priority to straight couples of receiving a sperm donation, or surrogacy chance. Since this stuff runs off of a database and catalogue for matching, and obviously, there's only so much sperm stored, and a woman can only have so many children within a yearly period.

[Galloism]

Really the rules changed on getting an STD? Why am I always the last to know??

On a more serious side. Then where are the Telegraph and independent getting their information from? They both put it as a future change.

For a sweater for the devil, what color should I get?

Not sure. The problem is, we're trusting the independent, which sources itself as a valid source by hyperlinking to other articles it's posted. If it is true, what the move is actually establishing is this:

Under the new terms, heterosexual single men and women, and gay men and women who want to have children would be given the same priority as couples seeking IVF because of medical fertility problems.

I.E. these groups will have an equal priority to straight couples of receiving a sperm donation, or surrogacy chance. Since this stuff runs off of a database and catalogue for matching, and obviously, there's only so much sperm stored, and a woman can only have so many children within a yearly period.

Not to mention it does not abolish the right to self, so there's a limited pool of voluntary sperm donors/surrogates.

You can neither involuntarily collect sperm nor impregnate someone.

[Lady Scylla]

Not sure. The problem is, we're trusting the independent, which sources itself as a valid source by hyperlinking to other articles it's posted. If it is true, what the move is actually establishing is this:



I.E. these groups will have an equal priority to straight couples of receiving a sperm donation, or surrogacy chance. Since this stuff runs off of a database and catalogue for matching, and obviously, there's only so much sperm stored, and a woman can only have so many children within a yearly period.

Not to mention it does not abolish the right to self, so there's a limited pool of voluntary sperm donors/surrogates.

You can neither involuntarily collect sperm nor impregnate someone.

Yep. This is Chessmistress we're talking about people. She's always had a bad case of either citing biased, single studies, or relying on largely uncredible sources to back her claims. The independent being one.

[Vassenor]

Chess thinks that transwomen are not real women.

But... why? Just... why?

TERF logic. Usually involves the claim that we're just men pretending to be women so we can rape with impunity.

[Ethel mermania]

Really the rules changed on getting an STD? Why am I always the last to know??

On a more serious side. Then where are the Telegraph and independent getting their information from? They both put it as a future change.

For a sweater for the devil, what color should I get?

Navy blue looks fetching on you. If you're going to be demonized, at least do so looking bitchin'.

It does, even though it doesn't match my baby brown eyes..

Consider this post liked.

[Sareva]

Oh, look, it's none other than

CONTROVERSY

In all honesty, I'd rather not read any more than the first few lines of the excerpts because I could already tell it was beginning to become more bullshit. I could not give less of a fuck anymore.

[Fartsniffage]

With surrogacy women become objects enlisted in auction catalogues of brokers, catalogues on which customers can choose according to the physical and mental features of the women (including the sexual tastes and even the level of education) then such customers can set contracts that should make everybody literally cringe for the absolute loss of dignity that such contracts underlies.

Funny part is this sounds exactly like the catalogs for women in sperm banks.

For women or of women? Because I think the 2 materials might be used a little differently....

[Galloism]

Funny part is this sounds exactly like the catalogs for women in sperm banks.

For women or of women? Because I think the 2 materials might be used a little differently....

Both.

[Pirelin]

But... why?

Chess is a Radical Feminist.

No, she's a misandrist.

[Galloism]

Chess is a Radical Feminist.

No, she's a misandrist.

Those two designations are not mutually exclusive in practice.

[Kazarogkai]

Should single women have the right to exploit men? A strong argument can be made that sperm banks are just as exploitive a surrogacy. If one can sell sperm should one not be allowed to in effect sell their eggs?

Personally I don't really care much for anything related towards modern fertility practices in general. And do not get me started on designer babies. Does it honestly really matter that the kid have your half your chromosomes? If you can't have a kid and still want one do the world a favor and adopt one. There is a lot of young children who are already here and need a loving home and would honestly appreciate it I can assure you. Plus it's better for the environment since you are not bringing more into the world and contributing to overpopulation. It appeals to my zero population growth inclinations as such it would in my case be my first choice. That's just me though. I understand some people are so self obsessed with themselves that they need to go through the trouble of such things as these but i'm on a tangent I'll get off now.

My opinions have been stated. I find it unsavory but am admittedly little ambivalent about it all mostly and don't really see the indignation of the whole thing. If you want to explain so be it, my ears are open and am willing to listen I guess.

[Crysuko]

No, she's a misandrist.

Those two designations are not mutually exclusive in practice.

Fun fact: man hating feminists will say that the moderate ones are no true scotsmen feminists

[Isetnonotekh]

Those two designations are not mutually exclusive in practice.

Fun fact: man hating feminists will say that the moderate ones are no true scotsmen feminists

And vice versa.

[Crysuko]

Fun fact: man hating feminists will say that the moderate ones are no true scotsmen feminists

And vice versa.

which is why the "But they're misandrists!" argument is a whopping No True Scotsman.

[The Emerald Legion]

Just build an artificial womb. We need test tube children.

[Dooom35796821595]

Just build an artificial womb. We need test tube children.

Vats! Vat should for all!

[Lady Scylla]

Just build an artificial womb. We need test tube children.

A synthetic womb you can buy off the shelf of walmart. Set it up on a table, insert samples, and watch your baby grow!

[Crysuko]

Just build an artificial womb. We need test tube children.

A synthetic womb you can buy off the shelf of walmart. Set it up on a table, insert samples, and watch your baby grow!

For only three easy instalments of 9.99

[Drayxaso]

Just build an artificial womb. We need test tube children.

Vats! Vat should for all!

And then we should nuke Brasilistan!

[Drayxaso]

But... why?

Chess is a Radical Feminist.

Clearly.
Isn't she supposed to be progressive or something?

[Wallenburg]

As long as the surrogate women consent, I see no problem here. "Right to reproduce" is a delicate phrase, but it doesn't seem like anyone means it in the sense that people can impregnate whomever they want regardless of consent.

[Crysuko]

As long as the surrogate women consent, I see no problem here. "Right to reproduce" is a delicate phrase, but it doesn't seem like anyone means it in the sense that people can impregnate whomever they want regardless of consent.

The radicals will absolutley blow it out of proportion if it suits their rhetoric.