How to respond to "what if human males have uteruses and can get pregnant, but because of social pressure they were never informed by the scientists and government"?

submitted by WhyAreYouSoDumb from self.GenderCriticalGuys

There was a certain line in a story that I think TRAs want to use, that's why they use it in their stories in the first place: https://imgur.com/KkFfOmC

"What is it?"

"That's Sir to you! Either find a fertile male or marry a woman", the elderly man said.

He frowned at the added comment, only recently had scientists released articles about the fact males had always been able to conceive. Because of societal pressures, and binary propaganda, no one really knew about it till recently. It wasn't even that rare.

If a TRA were to tell us this same thing, that "what if human males do have uteruses and can get pregnant, but because of social pressure and binary propaganda, scientists promised the government to keep this a secret and never inform men about it", how should we respond?

all 8 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]xandit 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Go to the zoo and look for pregnant male animals, I doubt the chimps governments are hiding that fact.

[–]grixit 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What if all humans can fly when they jump off cliffs, but no one tells us?

[–]IkeConn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You can paint an orange any color you want but it is still orange inside.

[–]JBJones 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Must have missed those ovaries in the 1000s of years of medical research.

[–]Michael_frf 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That's silly. Humans are so sexually creative that if there was one obscure technique that resulted in "M-preg", some guy would have been unpleasantly surprised by it by now.

Also, the reason our selfish genes are so unhelpful to MTFs is because born-male pregnancy is out of their reach. So many engineering shortcuts were taken by evolution in moving from the original spawning system (where both sexes ejaculate and they cross the streams to breed; some such fish can change sex) to the placental-mammal standard, that it is impossible without crossing a void of intermediate states with no selective advantage. And without the ability to use MTF to escape a lack of access to other humans' wombs, our genes simply have no interest.

But if born-male pregnancy was something that could be easily flipped on, our selfish genes would be using it to salvage their position when they find their male survival-machine out-competed. People would evolve to always be born "male", but spontaneously "transmaxx" themselves if celibate too long, even if the mind is revolted by the idea and the celibacy was a deliberate effort to avoid responsibility for kids.

[–]WhyAreYouSoDumb[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But if born-male pregnancy was something that could be easily flipped on, our selfish genes would be using it to salvage their position when they find their male survival-machine out-competed. People would evolve to always be born "male", but spontaneously "transmaxx" themselves if celibate too long, even if the mind is revolted by the idea and the celibacy was a deliberate effort to avoid responsibility for kids.

I don't understand the second half of the comment ... Could you dumb it down for me?

[–]Michael_frf 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Transmaxxing" is when incels decide to go MTF not out of direct dysphoria, but because they actually think they have a better chance finding love as a pseudo girl. The above would be an analog at the selfish gene level, and the main reason it didn't evolve long ago is that M-preg for a mammal is a puzzle evolution can't solve. Evolution could solve the problem of making such an MTF "sexy", but pseudo women who can pleasure men but not conceive are evolutionary dead ends, so it won't.

So, I meant that if our genes could accomplish this, we'd have a world where everyone is a functioning hermaphrodite by birth, whose bodies would enter puberty in a male pose, but feminize after a lack of success at the invest-little-in-many-girlfriends strategy. Even if the mind would prefer to remain in a male body as a childfree asexual.

I don't think that would be a remotely fun world to live in. There would no longer really be "men" and "women", but people who want to force others to incubate children would be empowered, and everyone, not just an unlucky 50%, would be at risk.

Note that if M-preg just appeared today, our society might actually manage to put the brakes to further evolution of that sort, since the benefit to the genes would be mostly eliminated by child support, birth control, and monogamy enforcement. But I'm imagining it happening in a parallel timeline that diverged long before apes got so smart.

[–]xandit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If a TRA were to tell us this same thing, that "what if human males do have uteruses and can get pregnant, but because of social pressure and binary propaganda, scientists promised the government to keep this a secret and never inform men about it", how should we respond?

With a mental health brochure.

This is a serious stretch of the imagination, if males had uteruses how would sperm get in there? Why arent there more pregnant male animals? Wouldn't there be more pregnant gay males?