Skip to content

How in buggery can this be true?

The High Court in England has ruled that Guardian journalist Freddy McConnell, a trans man, cannot be named as the father of his child on their birth certificate.

McConnell is his child’s dad, and as he has a gender recognition certificate he is legally a man.

Riiight. But then this:

And QCs for McConnell set out the implications: Previous legal protections for trans people, could be unpicked. Reforms to surrogacy laws will be halted. Same-sex parents would be blocked from birth certificates. Fertility clinics will not be able to offer treatment to trans ppl.

Xe got pregnant with the aid of fertility treatment…….

33 thoughts on “How in buggery can this be true?”

  1. If you start with one false axiom you can prove anything at all.
    This is being tested by starting from the axiom that genetalia do not matter.

  2. The judge’s reasoning is quite interesting actually and I can see the logic in it. Think this will be overturned on appeal though because the judge went out on a bit of a limb with this one, suspect some of you will be just as incredulous at it as at McConnell’s claims. The judge reasoned thusly…

    It’s actually a sexist stereotype to assume mothers are women.

    Most mothers in history were women. But increasingly mothers are men, too.

    Albeit in small numbers, yes. But people looking at the word “mother” and assuming it is feminine are basically being sexist.

    “Mother” is not a gender role. The word simply refers to any man or woman (or presumably non-binary or genderqueer or third spirit or whatever) person who carries and gives birth to a child. Hence McConnell is both a man and a mother as far as the birth certificate is concerned.

    Now this is consistent with how surrogacy is treated in birth certificates in English law- initially the surrogate who gave birth is put down as the mother. But those birth certificates can later be reissued to name the intended parents. In that case the “mother” need not be the person who be birth, and perhaps more importantly for this case, the person who gave birth need not be the “mother”. McConnell’s argument is that his child’s birth certificate will be an anomalous official document in that it reveals McConnell must have had a functioning womb at the time, with the strong implication to anyone who sees it that McConnell has changed gender from being initially assigned female. Law and policy have moved towards documentation that don’t “dead-gender” people by revealing their gender history. So it seems likely to me McConnell will either win on appeal or there will be a further change in the law to his benefit.

    Oddly I think the judge’s reasoning is perhaps better aligned with the more gender-fluid world that trans activists are trying to create – why should, in such a world, roles like “mother” or “father” still possess any gendered attributes? Why should knowing someone has a functioning womb make them any less of a man, when that’s purely biology and not psycho-socio-cultural gender? Why should anyone who saw the document draw the conclusion the mother had had a change of genders – for all they know it could be that McConnell has been non-binary or male-presenting since early childhood so had never “changed”.

    Anyone with more traditional views who sees the headline and thinks “wow, a victory for common sense and nice to see a judge who hasn’t gone all-in with this modern gender nonsense” might be rather surprised to read the actual reasoning…

  3. he could be named as father with the qualifier TRANS typed in big bold letters after his name, to indicate that biologically he was not and could never have been the father as the donor of the sperm that created the baby.

    The legal presumption that applies to declared fathers who are not the actual fathers eg due to infidelity or donor sperm could never apply to these persons.

  4. Nice for the child growing up to learn that his dad is a mother (if I’ve understood MBE correctly) and his other dad is a test tube.

  5. Old hat: believing we were made in the likeness and image of a heavenly father

    New hat: believing that squeezing a baby out of your fancy masculine mangina makes you a father


  6. MBE – Most mothers in history were women. But increasingly mothers are men, too.

    I’m pretty sure this is what drove The Joker to criminal insaneousness.

  7. A birth certificate is a statement of biology, not sociology. It requests the identity of who supplied the womb and/or eggs, and that person’s name goes in the box labelled ‘mother’. End of.

    I can see future issues when technology arises allowing extravivo incubation with donated gametes from both, err, donors, but that that’s not the issue here.

  8. @Steve, JG

    That’s the judge’s argument, not mine. I’m just paraphrasing.

    My point, to anyone who takes the result of the case as some kind of “victory for common sense”, is that even the reasoning that McConnell is “mother” is a sign of how far down the rabbit-hole the whole system has gone. If the judge had turned round and said “well mother is a woman and father is a man, McConnell is a man, so yes he should indeed be put down as the father instead” then that might actually be closer to “common sense” than the actual judgment was.

  9. What are the odds that this thoroughly muxed ip individual would turn out to be a journalist for the ‘Ndraguia?

  10. He may be legally a bloke but biologically she is a woman as mammalian males do not give birth. What a weird world we are living in nowadays.

  11. Just who else will be described as “mother” on the Birth certificate? The sperm donor?
    McConnell wants to punish xer child by having a birth certificate that the child never dare show to anyone as the victim will be assumed to have forged it.

  12. A local judge ruled that a father not using trans child’s preferred pronouns amounted to an act of family violence under the family law act.
    This idiocy is not limited to the U.K.

  13. Just go back to the start for me. I can never remember whether ‘trans man’ means a man who wants to be a woman or a woman who wants to be a man.

    Actually, don’t bother; I don’t care.

  14. The father is whoever provided the y chromosome.

    The mother is whoever supplied the mitochondrial dna.

    The rest is just shyster word-juggling.

  15. The state, nor the rest of us have any business in knowing someone’s gender, it is an irrelevance. Someone biological sex is another and unrelated matter. The state and the rest of us may well have good reasons to want to know that. We need to stop conflating the too terms. Your gender preferences or identity is no more relevant than if you support the Spurs or like the Smiths.

  16. Yes, well said, samuelbuca.

    ‘McConnell is his child’s dad, and as he has a gender recognition certificate he is legally a man.’

    ‘If the law supposes that,’said Mr Bumble…’the law is a ass, a idiot.’

  17. I stopped at “a trans man” because I do not know or care whether it was a nutjob:
    -woman claiming to be a man
    -man claiming to be a woman

    Oh well, I’m glad we are so wealthy we can indulge our poor loonies in this way. Only incredibly wealthy societies can afford to say: “there, there, dear, of course you are.”

  18. People–forget the “weird” angle.

    In 1984 the Party tells you that 2+2=5.

    Now marxian scum tell you that men can become women and vice versa by declaring it is so.

    Same thing–to force you to declare that reality and objective fact is under the dominion of socialism.

    The shite of the left don’t give a flying fuck about trannies boo hoo-ing any more than they give a rat’s arse about wimmin and homo’s. They never did–they were always just canon fodder to stir up trouble and attack Western society/values–and the value now under attack is reality itself.

    All of this leftist shite needs to be brutally smashed–but we have an utterly corrupt middle class Marxist controlled system that is promoting it–esp to the kids.

    Brexit is only the beginning–or Steve’s bowl of cold insects will not only become reality but there will be a bowl of cold sick for dessert.

    PS–Tim–is there anyway to put Steve’s quote up on your Blog heading as permanent? It is worth 5 divisions in the battle of ideas.

    I repeat it below in case you have forgotten –IF WE LOSE THE “ELITE” AREN’T JUST GOING TO LEAVE US ALONE.

    “The establishment needs its collective nose rubbed in Brexit. The alternative is passively accepting the fate they have planned for us as a post-democratic post-nation: eating a cold bowl of insects in our freezing cold eco-yurts while the local mosque ululates the call to benefits and unaccountable nabobs zip by in their Zil lanes.”

    Thanks Tim.

  19. Yes, Fred Z. The West, in a word, is decadent.

    Yes, Mr Ecks. The Left doesn’t care about anyone. They are happy to exploit anyone. And anything. No tragedy is too severe not to exploit.
    They stand on warm bodies to tell you you must accept world socialism.

  20. These people need to be forcibly confined and treated for their mental illness. Anyone who has enabled them should lose their professional licences to practice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *