Re:The erasure of women from online pregnancy literature
by brigandish on Sunday November 20, 2022 @05:04PM
(#33685915)
I included legally so the whole bit about adoption is moot, and hence the rest of your argument based on it. That’s a child, that’s an adult male, he’s the legal guardian therefore he’s dad. There’s a pregnant adult female, she’s not dad. Why? Because men can’t get pregnant, for one.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The erasure of women from online pregnancy literature
by PoignardAzur on Sunday November 20, 2022 @06:46PM
(#33686827)
> I included legally so the whole bit about adoption is moot, and hence the rest of your argument based on it.
Oh, my mistake. I thought we were trying to exchange arguments in good faith to better understand other people's perspective, but we were actually playing the "my argument destroys yours with facts and logic" game.
Here, let me adjust.
> Because men can’t get pregnant, for one.
Except trans men can get pregnant, so your point is moot, and hence the rest of your argumentation based on it.
Re:The erasure of women from online pregnancy literature
by cluedos on Sunday November 20, 2022 @07:35PM
(#33687228)
Transmen are women who want to be men. The fact that some can and have become pregnant is because they are women.
Re:The erasure of women from online pregnancy literature
by brigandish on Monday November 21, 2022 @03:09AM
(#33690081)
If you were arguing in good faith then surely you’d use the argument I’d presented already, and not ignore it for your convenience.
Since we’re playing the logic game (and it would be strange if we were playing some game without logic - I fear that you may be), trans-men are a sub-category of women, not men, so you’ll need to expand on which part of my argument is moot.