Can men get pregnant? Yes they can!!! Men can and do get pregnant.

originally posted by: Ohanka
How ridiculous.

I self Identify as the Emperor of Rome.

I demand all the powers afforded my position during the Dominate period, the full restoration of all my rightful lands & provinces as they stood at the time of Trajan, the restoration and reopening of the Flavian Amphitheatre and the transfer of all NATO forces to the refounded Legions & Auxilia.

My correct pronoun is "Augustus".

Togas optional.

Refusal is bigotry.

I suppose you are a republican voter. Like a wild guess... As you try to make fun of gender identity and men who can get pregnant.

originally posted by: Antimony
Men don't have uteruses.

But, you should respect their right to have a uterus, even though it's impossible.

(to misquote Monty Python)

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Of course not. Republicanism is for greedy patricians & scheming senators, like the ones who murdered my beloved Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Uncle Julius

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Antimony
Men don't have uteruses.

But, you should respect their right to have a uterus, even though it's impossible.

(to misquote Monty Python)

Perhaps you haven't understood well what a man is??

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Common sense...

I suppose there could be aberrant births out there, rare though they undoubtedly are, where chromosomes are mixed up.

However, men, generally speaking do not, can not, become pregnant, and no amount of impassioned rhetorical flourishes, and wishful thinking will make it so.

Now then... LInks?? If it's just so common, there must be some, right??

I gave you the link in the last page in case you haven't seen my post yet.

I never thought that in the 21st century and with the progress of science and medicine people will still hold 18th century views where men and women have specific roles in society and different physiologies where a men can get pregnant as they don't have a uterus.

originally posted by: Ohanka
How ridiculous.

I self Identify as the Emperor of Rome.

I demand all the powers afforded my position during the Dominate period, the full restoration of all my rightful lands & provinces as they stood at the time of Trajan, the restoration and reopening of the Flavian Amphitheatre and the transfer of all NATO forces to the refounded Legions & Auxilia.

My correct pronoun is "Augustus".

Togas optional.

Refusal is bigotry.

Refusing someone's identity is bigotry. Refusing to accept men can get pregnant shows misunderstanding or even denial of what a man is.

the problem with any of these debates is they tear society apart currently creating 2 camps and a future sectarian issue.

in the uk currently between 10 to 20% of children in the uk no longer attend school.. unlike the usa there is no real route to home schooling sio these kids simply vanish.

i see a lot of it comes back to teachers why should kids go to school as the world is always ending tomorrow (climate change) or to be preached that they should ignore their own eyes (gender wars)

a society that is so lost it loses touch with material reality is doomed to crash and burn..

a society that no longer has anything positive to offer future generations has already doomed itself to crash and burn.

what comes next is totally self inflicted..

a reply to: Asmodeus3

And posts like this remind me why I rarely make a comment. I identify as a 16# sledge hammer and I'd like to squish all this into a pile of "deny ignorance"......

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
I never thought that in the 21st century and with the progress of science and medicine people will still hold 18th century views where men and women have specific roles in society and different physiologies where a men can get pregnant as they don't have a uterus.

the thing is in terms of misogyny the victorian period is actually one of the very lowest in terms of women's rights in the anglosphere, we seem intent on beating that low.. adding in its own spin on racism and homophobia will place this period as one of the real lows.

look at the so called backwards periods of history even the dark ages were far more enlightened than now.. not just in understanding material reality but also in how they treated each other a fairness that doesn't exist in todays puritanical ideological mindset.

originally posted by: conspiracytheoristIAM

a reply to: Asmodeus3

And posts like this remind me why I rarely make a comment. I identify as a 16# sledge hammer and I'd like to squish all this into a pile of "deny ignorance"......

So you denying gender identity and you don't accept that men can get pregnant. Let me guess...Republican?

Y’all are just feeding the troll.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

What's wrong with the left?!

You might wanna bring a lunch, this is gonna take awhile.

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
Y’all are just feeding the troll.

You see there are 0 flags and 0 stars on the thread made, which means that people don't really agree with the view men can get pregnant.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: conspiracytheoristIAM

a reply to: Asmodeus3

And posts like this remind me why I rarely make a comment. I identify as a 16# sledge hammer and I'd like to squish all this into a pile of "deny ignorance"......

So you denying gender identity and you don't accept that men can get pregnant. Let me guess...Republican?

as this is a global issue is the other option monarchist

though to be fair the usa does feel like its coming full circle from its escape from a dementia laiden king to the embrace of another

a reply to: Middleoftheroad

You may have missed the post earlier but here is good evidence that men can and do get pregnant

www.healthline.com...

Is it possible?

Yes, it’s possible for men to become pregnant and give birth to children of their own. In fact, it’s probably a lot more common than you might think. In order to explain, we’ll need to break down some common misconceptions about how we understand the term “man.” Not all people who were assigned male at birth (AMAB) identify as men. Those who do are “cisgender” men. Conversely, some people who were assigned female at birth (AFAB) identify as men. These folks may be “transgender” men or transmasculine people

a reply to: Asmodeus3

What part of the above don't you not get?! It looks like there are several gaps in your understanding of human biology and genetics.

I think it be you who needs to fill in some gaps in understanding.

A man, as in a male human being, is a human who has male reproductive organs. That's the scientific definition. A woman, as in a female human being, is a human which has female reproductive organs. That's the scientific definition.

Period. One does not get to change those definitions because of political correctness.

A womb or uterus is one of the female reproductive organs and is required in order to attain pregnancy. Men, male humans, do not have functional female reproductive organs. A very rare birth defect exists where a child is born with some male and some female reproductive organs, but that is a birth defect which is unsustainable, requires surgery to correct, and almost always results in infertility (defined as the physical inability to reproduce, including the inability to become pregnant). Don't even go there.

We have the medical ability to change the tissue in a woman to appear similar to male tissue and vice versa. A trans-woman (aka a man surgically altered to appear to be a woman) does not have a functioning uterus even after such surgery; we do not have the medical ability to create a fully-functioning uterus. Therefore a trans-woman cannot become pregnant. A trans-man may indeed become pregnant, but that is not a man becoming pregnant. It is rather a woman with male appearance becoming pregnant. That said, I am confused how even that would be possible since pregnancy requires female hormones for the uterus to operate properly and trans-men undergo extensive hormonal therapy to change their hormonal balances to those of a make.

Not to mention (how do I say this delicately), the mechanics of creating a pregnancy would seem to be impossible. Pregnancy requires the introduction of male semen into the uterus, and any surgery would restrict such access.

Now, if you want to talk about the "trans-man" sans surgery, yes, it can become pregnant. But that is not a trans-man and certainly not a man. That is a woman pretending to be a man. It would have female reproductive organs. Outward dress and social interaction does not change what gender one is.

You need to catch up with the developments of modern science and medicine.

No sir. You need to discover what science actually says and what the limits of medical science are. You are not talking about science; you are talking about social traditions and politics.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
Y’all are just feeding the troll.

its the defining question of the timse though..

during the reformation it was are you eating flesh and drinking blood?
now its do women have willies and can men get pregnant)

a shock then to say that no its not flash or blood is as big as saying no women have willies.

shock recent headline read british pm says 100% of women don't have willies.

in the Aussie press they thought that a bold claim, its why this is either a new reformation or a continuation of the last one..

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Is it only those men who were assigned females at birth that can become pregnant?

Can cisgender men give birth?