some years ago, i went to see a movie in nyc with some dear friends. it was called 'junior', and it starred the governator as a pregnant man. i did not enjoy the film. it so happened that at that time i was writing my senior sermon, and it was all about infertility. the movie made me cry. anyway ... some fancy newspapers have now picked up the story first broken in the advocate magazine (you may read it here) about thomas beatie and his wife nancy who live in bend, oregon. i read it today in the indy - 'we just want to be a family,' says oregon's pregnant man. Thomas is a ftm transexual who kept his reproductive organs. When his partner was unable to have children, having had a hysterectomy, thomas stopped taking his testosterone until he began to menstruate, and with fertility treatments became pregnant.
is there anything wrong with this? religious groups and so-called family values groups are going mental about it. the situation is certainly a mind-bender. it doesn't particularly bother me. the question that i have is, particularly since a previous attempt by thomas resulted in an ectopic pregnancy that nearly killed him, why go to such lengths to be a birth parent when there are so so many children in the world available for adoption? families are great. families need children. and children need families. it is a great story, guaranteed to make world-wide news and poke with a stick myriad pressure groups. meanwhile, myriad children sit and wait for someone to take them home and give them the family life for which they yearn. that is what upsets me about this story.