Can men give birth? These days it depends on who you ask, unfortunately. But the answer is no, not biologically in any form or fashion. The growing transgender movement means that giving birth, a purely female domain, is now being coopted by people who want to ignore biological realities in pursuit of a transgender ideology. Case-in-point, a recent story from the U.K. about a transgender man, a biological woman who believes she is a man, who gave birth to a child.
As the Mirror U.K. puts it, “Proud dad Reuben Sharpe today tells how HE gave birth to a miracle baby in Britain’s most modern family.” According to the article, Sharpe “still had maternal instincts and six years ago stopped taking testosterone in the hope of one day having a child.”
In order to conceive a child, Sharpe and Sharpe’s partner, a biological woman who identifies as nonbinary, used a sperm donation from a transgender woman, a man who believes he is a woman, for the sperm donation. Needless to say, the situation is complex.
Throughout the article, Sharpe talks about how she wanted desperately to have a child. Sharpe’s doctor, who is also transgender, told her that it was possible since “he still had his womb and ovaries.” (Only biological women can have wombs and ovaries.)
“Like many things, people have got it into their heads that ‘this is a female thing, this is a male thing,” Sharpe said. “Having a child is male, female, everyone. Even when people go through that pregnancy experience with their partner, it’s a joint thing. Wanting to have a baby doesn’t feel like a female thing for me. I don’t think pregnancy is the ultimate female experience, therefore it didn’t challenge me as a man. It doesn’t make a woman less of a woman if she’s not keen on pregnancy, infertile, doesn’t want a baby. This isn’t a trans issue – it affects everyone.”
As one Twitter user, who appears to support the transgender movement, rather ironically said, “(The headline:) ‘Trans man gives birth to non-binary person’s baby with female sperm donor,’ while accurate, is clearly being phrased in a way which is violent to our community by making us sound freakish and illogical.”
To a certain extent, this individual is correct. While the violent intent definitely isn’t there at all, the situation could be considered both “freakish” but, more specifically, entirely “illogical.”
What Sharpe fails to take into account is that only a biological woman can birth to a child. Not a man and not “everyone.” The only reason that Sharpe was able to have a child at all is that regardless of taking the chemical testosterone to adopt the appearance of a man, Sharpe’s underlying DNA and biology remains female. That cannot be changed.
Of course, agreeing with the biological reality of pregnancy and childbirth is no longer an option for some. Candace Owens, the outspoken conservative activist, was recently disinvited from a podcast with radical progressive activist Jameela Jamil for simply supporting simple biology. Owens tweeted, “SAD TO ANNOUNCE that @jameelajamil has revoked my invitation to her podcast because I tweeted “only women can give birth.” Apparently, the statement made her trans co-workers feel “unsafe.” My refusal to untether myself from biological realities has cost me, yet again. SAD!”
The growing availability of “gender affirming” surgery and puberty blockers cannot change the biological reality of men and women. Sex distinctions are written into the very essence of our DNA. Even the conception of Sharpe’s child, notwithstanding all of its complexities, still required a woman’s egg and womb and a man’s sperm. The Mirror’s article title may be eye-catching, but it’s still #fakenews.