News | Thomas Beatie | Transgender

BigGayDeal.com

Pregnant Trans Man Thomas Beatie to Give Birth Shortly

Beaite

Pregnant transgender man Thomas Beatie is less than a month away from giving birth and a slew of new images of Beatie at home and about have been published by the UK tabloid News of the World.

Beatie2Said Beatie: "I'm 36 weeks now and almost due but I feel fantastic. Every day Nancy and I think about how we just cannot wait to hold our daughter for the first time, to finally get to touch her and see her face. We have her nursery ready and her diapers are lined up in her bedroom. Everything is ready to go. We have even picked a name which we both love—although we're waiting until she is born before we tell anyone. All the people who really know us and love us, our friends and family, have been incredibly supportive. So much so we might even have more children. We will just see what the experience is like with our daughter's arrival first and then give it some thought."

Good Morning America did a segment on the photos of Beatie, but felt the above image of Beatie shaving was a bit much for their viewers.

Watch it, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Pekemo, thank you.

    Posted by: Alex | Jun 9, 2008 3:05:14 PM


  2. The right to self-determination and fluidity of gender is all well and good. However.

    We have NO IDEA what the mother's course of hormone treatments is doing to the child's fetal development. I'm amazed any doctor would cooperate in so reckless a procedure.

    Stopping the hormones when the pregnancy was discovered may or may not make a difference. We have no idea. It's an extraordinarily callous experiment with someone else's life.

    Posted by: thin mint | Jun 9, 2008 3:38:51 PM


  3. Alex: I think it was transvestites, aka "drag queens" that were involved in the Stonewall Riots, NOT transexuals. There is a big difference between the two I think. I don't think transvestites want to be transexuals. Although there might be some, but not because they feel psychologically trapped in the wrong body. I've known many drag queens, but none of them would want to be surgically altered to be real women. I can accept transexuals, but I do not identify with them. Nor do I think they are part of the struggle for gay rights, but have been included, why I don't fully understand. I am a gay man. I like men. I know lesbians who are lesbians because they like women. I'm a cocksucker and lesbians are muff divers. We love the genitalia of our same sex. As a gay man I find the vagina, well, disgusting. I don't want to have sex with one, nor do I want one for my own. Transexuals are supposedly folks "trapped" in the body of the wrong or opposite sex. Once their bodies are transformed surgically to correspond with their psychological sex perception, they are essentially "heterosexual" males or females surgically altered to reflect their perceived or proper gender. I am a man. I enjoy being a man. I have no desire to be a woman. I like other men, physically, sexually and emotionally. I would not be happy if a surgeon made me a women so I could be more compatible with men. Does any of this make sense? Because equating transgender with homosexual does not really make a lot of sense to me. Homosexuals are homosexuals and heterosexuals are heterosexuals and transgenders seem closer to heterosexuals in the "big picture" than they are to homosexuals. At least in my thinking. So now, let the flaming begin...

    Posted by: Bob R | Jun 9, 2008 4:02:41 PM


  4. Thanks, Bob R. For years I have been saying that other than oppression, I do not feel I have anything in common with trans people.

    This isn't "transphobia" at all. I have two good friends who are transgendered - but I don't think they are a part of the struggle for "Gay rights." I acknowledge they have the struggle for "trans rights," but I believe there to be a difference between the two - and also believe in equal rights for both.

    PEKEMO, this actually does nothing to depict the "diversities of the American family," Beatie and his/her wife are from the UK. I would hope that American doctors would conduct more thorough examinations and trials into how the extensive hormone treatments that Beatie has received for years would affect the growth and development of a fetus inside his/her womb. If this baby comes out with any abnormalities, the anti-gay communities will have a field day - and "evidence" to back up their claims. It is naive, I think, to say that this doesn't present a possible setback to our movement.

    Posted by: Dan B | Jun 9, 2008 4:21:17 PM


  5. I don't get it. This is one thing I cannot get my mind around. I try; I really do, but I just don't get it.

    Posted by: Al | Jun 9, 2008 4:55:53 PM


  6. Thomas Beatie is not from the UK. He lives in Oregon!

    Good gawd, get your facts right before commenting.

    Posted by: crispy | Jun 9, 2008 5:01:30 PM


  7. all i'm seeing with this whole thing is a WHOLE lotta media attention they seem to be encouraging and eating up. sorry, that is what it appears to be. i thought they said they just wanted to have a baby and be left in peace at the beginning? or am i wrong? it seems to have turned into a circus. they seem to exhibiting *really* poor judgment on a lot of things. why show the juxtaposition of shaving your face and pregnancy? what does that *really* prove? eh, just my two cents. they are the ones who have to live with all of this at the end of the day. if they can, live and let live.

    Posted by: chuck | Jun 9, 2008 5:20:20 PM


  8. For the 89-millionth fucking time is it too much to ask queens to actually read something once in a while rather than relying on word of mouth for their "facts" and "reality"? The claim that it was transgendered people OR transvestites that "started the Stonewall riots" is a MYTH! Apparently an invincible one, but a myth nonetheless.

    The gender-defying habitues of the Stonewall were primarily "scare queens" or "flame queens" who displayed "low drag," e.g., makeup, teased hair, but not full drag which was illegal in public and rare in the Stonwall per David Carter's "Stonewall: The Riots that Sparked the Gay Revolution."

    Even the legendary Ray "Sylvia" Rivera who pushed this envelope further and further and was there denies not only having started it herself but knowing how did or what their characteristics were. Some swear it was a butch lesbian who threw the first punch or resisted arrest but she's never been named nor come forward as several other individuals who were there have.

    Even IF the Stonewall riots HAD been ENTIRELY full-out transgendered people in total cross-dress it would not redeem the pathological attention circus that "We just want our privacy" Beattie is putting on.

    Posted by: Leland Frances | Jun 9, 2008 6:14:46 PM


  9. "And as far as transgenders setting back gay rights, remember it was the trannies that started the Stonewall Riots."

    That is such a fucking lie; consult Duberman's 'Stonewall'. Sylvia Rivera was still a man when she led the riot against the cops. It was in fact the Village Queens -- our fellow gay men, not trannies -- who did the deed alongside a few dykes and regular gay men. Trannies onlys started to pop up in our organization in the last 20 years for unknown reasons along with bisexuals, who also do not belong. Why don't they form their own organizations and stop glomming off of us?

    Posted by: Matt | Jun 9, 2008 7:20:13 PM


  10. Whether or not they qualified as "trannies" in 1969 is beside the point. People who fought back at Stonewall were definitely marginal. They were not buttoned-down, gender-conforming, clone-ish predecessors of gay republicans who considered themselves "just like everyone else" and wanted to get married and have a house in the suburbs. Those people had too much to lose to put themselves on the line or risk being in the media in 1969.

    The debate about who belongs in the movement and who doesn't goes back at least a century. (See Magnus Hirschfeld's "third sex" vs Adolf Brand's "manly" men).

    I still see throwing the transpeople out of our movement as closely akin to the policing that tells us not to accept flamers or leather queens or (fill in the blank, anyone not like me) at pride parades because it gives us a "bad name" or "reflects badly on us" in the media.

    It reeks of heteronormative hegemonic control by having us police ourselves, and it makes me sick to my stomach. I'd rather side with the marginals, thank you, even if as a WASP college professor I could easily rail against trans people and claim that power the hets will grant me any time I want.

    I agree with those who have said that people should be addressed with whatever pronoun they themselves prefer, regardless of body parts and chromosomes. He is pregnant. Get over it.

    I will also repeat my claim that what disturbs people about this (which gay men SHOULD get) is that male bodies are defined as integral: they are not penetrable by penis coming in or baby coming out. The same horror of penetration (which may sound familiar) is now recast as a horror of bearing a child.

    Posted by: Kevinvt | Jun 9, 2008 8:05:22 PM


  11. The great problem with the transgendered who want to change their sex is that they are essentially unhappy with the way they are. They are in many ways like the Ex-Gays trying to change their orientation. It can't be done, but if everyone pretends it can be done, then they MIGHT be happy. It's also very different from guys who are simply swishy or prefer women's clothes. The transgendered have attached themselves to the gay rights movement because they are few in number and need another trans-normative group to gain any political power. Unlike the Ex-Gays, as our allies they escape criticism for being unrealistic and self-hating. Now, their are those who's sexual re-assignment surgery was performed against their will (or without their informed consent at least) when they were infants, and who do deserve our sympathies, but while it's easy to see the milepost of gay rights leading to a finish line, the transgendered only have the vaguest notions of how to change things for their betterment and no true hope of any final resolution to their liking.

    Posted by: anon | Jun 9, 2008 8:26:20 PM


  12. The great problem with the transgendered who want to change their sex is that they are essentially unhappy with the way they are.

    Let me rephrase that the way most homophobes think: The great problem with the gays who want to change their object choice is that they are essentially unhappy with the way they are.

    Gay men are born with penises, therefore they should f**k women. Why do they insist on f**king men instead?

    Trans women are born with penises, therefore they should live like men. Why do they insist on living like women instead?

    What part of this is not comprehensible? Thankfully most of my students these days get it. Transphobia will eventually go the way of homophobia. Yes it will take longer, and yes they are a smaller minority than we are, but it will happen.

    Posted by: Kevinvt | Jun 9, 2008 9:33:50 PM


  13. If you were born with a va jay jay, you're not a man. You can be a very nice transgender person who is having a baby, but you are NOT a pregnant man!

    Posted by: Hickory | Jun 9, 2008 9:39:27 PM


  14. Very well stated, Bob R. I really don't feel any connection with transgendered people, except in a parallel way -- being part of a sexual minority that is discriminated against. I have understanding and compassion for anyone in this often difficult situation, but just can't identify. They basically want to change their gender, and that is totally fine. I, as a gay man, have no desire to change my gender.

    Posted by: k | Jun 10, 2008 12:47:38 AM


  15. Very well stated, Bob R. I really don't feel any connection with transgendered people, except in a parallel way -- being part of a sexual minority that is discriminated against. I have understanding and compassion for anyone in this often difficult situation, but just can't identify. They basically want to change their gender, and that is totally fine. I, as a gay man, have no desire to change my gender.

    Posted by: k | Jun 10, 2008 12:48:24 AM


  16. I found it disturbing to read all the hateful and ignorant comments on Oprah's website, but expected not to see the vitriol or misconceptions in comments on Towleroad.
    I'm a gay man, and like many others I consider Thomas' struggle to be very much different from those I face. Just because I do not understand or experience what he does does not mean that I cannot accept him and others like him as fellow human beings without making assumptions that their motivations for having children or living as they do are based on something sinister.
    There are so many misconceptions on here that I'm not sure where I would even start to correct them. But the doctor who is treating Thomas says that the fetus seems to be very healthy and the pregnancy is a normal one, regardless of how unique the parents are.
    Thomas and his wife came across as an articulate and loving couple who just want to raise a family.
    So what if they are taking advantage of the opportunity to make money from the photographs. They are likley top face extra financial struggles, not because of anything inherent to their situation but because of the ignorance of others which could mean changing homes or jobs.
    How many of you, if you were getting ready to raise a child, would turn down a newspaper that wanted to pay money for a picture of the new parents, if you knew that money could help pay for a better future for your child?
    I'm happy that Thomas and his wife will have the family they have always wanted, and for those (far too many) who would snicker at them or their child, I would far rather have Thomas and his family as my neighbor than someone who is so negative toward fellow human beings over something as irrelevant as what you imagine their genitalia looks like.

    Posted by: GregV | Jun 10, 2008 12:55:03 AM


  17. Thank you Gregv, my thoughts exactly! And thank you Alex for the lovely comment

    Posted by: Pekemo | Jun 10, 2008 2:38:55 AM


  18. I agree with Thomas Beatie... love is love no matter how you have a child. If you can do it and want to, then you should! Who are we to say no?

    Posted by: Melissa | Jun 10, 2008 3:42:15 AM


  19. The kid is going to have a long hard road, selfish is the word.

    Posted by: patrick nyc | Jun 10, 2008 7:01:50 AM


  20. Enough with this sideshow hustler! She (yes She not He, for people who identify as male don't choose to be pregnant) wants your attention and then she wants your money come book release! Just say no to this insincere tale of transgenderedness. Rent a documentary on The Bearded Lady for a more honest and compelling biography.

    Posted by: rege | Jun 10, 2008 8:20:46 AM


  21. KevinVT, you stated everything I believe about this issue so eloquently. Thank you.

    The push for "we're just like straights . . . with a TWIST" that's been part of contemporary gay politics unnerves me. I've always felt the contribution the gay movement makes to the larger culture is the expansion of definitions of gender and sexual behavior . . . and sexual autonomy. While I can understand there are suburban gays who go to WalMart "just like everyone else," it doesn't mean that suddenly we have to hide the drag queens/transgender, the leather daddies, the hairdressers and the like because "it gives us a bad name!"

    And for the record, there are many transgendered people who transition and live as gay people. So it's not like they all suddenly become hetero. As a short, bookish, sissyish kid growing up in a machista Latino culture, I have fought to regain a sense of my masculinity. When I see a FTM who doesn't even have male genitals claim they are a man, I identify greatly with their struggle.

    Posted by: Alex | Jun 10, 2008 9:43:22 AM


  22. Guys,

    or whatever you are, this is an abomination in God's eyes. I suggest this fellow find the Lord Jesus Christ, and repent his ways. I know you guys are going to rag me no end, but look to nature for your facts if you must. And please dont quote the sea-horse, he only looks after the brood!
    What kind of child is going to look forward to going to school and saying her father gav birth to her!

    Posted by: New Faith | Jun 10, 2008 9:59:40 AM


  23. "The kid is going to have a long hard road, selfish is the word."

    Now where have I heard that before? Hmmmm.....

    Posted by: Kevinvt | Jun 10, 2008 10:40:01 AM


  24. ALEX, KEVINVT, GREGV & PEKEMO:

    Thanks for speaking up. It's exahausting to find such bigotry within the gay world. But what do you expect: gay guys aint saints, and they aint special...no, suh.

    Look, what's the difference between a gueen in full drag and one in just a little make-up and tight jeans. Do straight folks see a difference? Did the cops raiding The Stonewall in 1969 (and every gay bar in America) see a difference? And if they are really homophobic straight folks--hell, they don't see a difference between T.R. Knight and RuPaul. We're all faggots to them.

    No, gay men aint special at all, but it can't be penis envy...maybe it's all that effort put in to trying to get rid of the syballant "s". Just accept it the way Carol Channing taught us to, brothershs & shisters.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jun 10, 2008 11:09:32 AM


  25. Thanks, KevinVT, for the false conflation, but bigots regard gay acts as unnatural, not impossible. I can't complain if a guy wants to live as a women (or vice versa), but it's currently impossible to actually become a women (or vice versa). Sadly, there is too much myopia on this topic to have a rational discussion. Derrick, you're going to be carrying water to the ends of the earth for people who will never be happy.

    Posted by: anon | Jun 10, 2008 12:05:23 PM


  26. « | 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Ugandan Gay Activists Charged with Criminal Trespass« «