I'm over heterosexuals thinking it's incumbent on gay men to adopt their neglected children.

Totally agree, OP.

huh?

Meh. I'm with them. What kind of narcissist insists on borrowing eggs and hiring an oven to cook a bun when there already perfectly fresh buns on the counter? This over production of buns is putting a strain on the household resources. I wish Bill Gates would hurry up with that vaccine thats rumored clip the over production of buns.

But in the meantime people should stop going out of their way to make new buns. Just grab one from the tray and keep it moving

I'm with you OP.

wait are you talking about buns?

[quote]Meh. I'm with them. What kind of narcissist insists on borrowing eggs and hiring an oven to cook a bun when there already perfectly fresh buns on the counter? This over production of buns is putting a strain on the household resources. I wish Bill Gates would hurry up with that vaccine thats rumored clip the over production of buns. But in the meantime people should stop going out of their way to make new buns. Just grab one from the tray and keep it moving

It is not gay men who have overpopulated the Earth, bigot.

R3, there's so much food waste in the world and around you. Please do us a favor. Stop buying food from grocery stores. Go to your nearest water processing plant and start eating from there.

You're fucked up, OP.

OP is definitely on her second box of wine.

Go on...

OP is definitely on her second box of wine.

Go on, OP...

R3 Breeders need to stop having children and dumping them. It's their issue, not ours.The vitriol directed at gay men from feminists doesn't even account for the fact that until recently it was impossible for us to adopt their brats to begin with. Now we're called selfish for entering into arrangements with surrogates/donors to make the fertilization process a little less gruesome for all parties involved. Lesbians and gay men have been having uncomfortable sex to make kids for thousands of years. Little known secret.

Again, it's heterosexuals that overwhelmingly and disproportionately use surrogates both domestically and internationally, so creating an image of a privileged gay man exploiting a woman as an 'incubator' can be nothing else but a homophobic rouse.

Sorry for the double post...

Pretty sure I made it clear this is narcissists issue, not just gays guys. Way too many people on this fucking planet for the narcissists to be going out of their way to make more. That includes the IVF crones. Take a bun from the tray and try not to fuck it up. The end.

Breeders since forever: Two men can't raise a baby together. It's unnatural. Adoption is out of the question for gay couples.

Breeders now: Wealthy gay men are using women as incubators. It's unnatural. Why don't you just adopt!?

[quote]Way too many people on this fucking planet for the narcissists to be going out of their way to make more.

Current earth population created by breeders: 7.6 billion

Current earth population created by gay men: 50k max?

I'm sure all those radical feminists are fighting to make adoption easier for gay couple in places where it's illegal.

Wait?! What?

They DON'T want gay men adopting either?

So, they're just homophobes.

R13 Again, gay people cannot be expected to be the cleanup crews for negligent straight parents. If your argument had any steam-- you would be focused on nipping the problem at its SOURCE, but you're not. Gay men and lesbians are in no way responsible for bearing the burden of the adoption system and millions of dollars and decades have gone into preventing gay adoption to begin with. For some it works-- but wanting your own biological offspring is an equally legitimate pursuit provided you're able to care for them.

I agree. Earth is overpopulated.

We need to put a limit on how many children straights have.

R15 You're not factoring in all the gay men/lesbians in unhappy closeted marriages for thousands of years. Or out lesbians and gay men that "do the deed" with friends-- I've known several of this variety. I'd like to think we've produced some of the best specimens of mankind quietly in the shadows. Now we're able to remove the coitus aspect of it and the straights are having a fit.

R17. I literally said I think we need to Trojan horse a solution that lowers global fertility. What did you think I meant when I mentioned Bill Gates' vaccine??? Lower hetero couples ability to reproduce and stop the extra surrogacy and IVF bullshit. In fact doing that stuff needs to become so taboo that only the true dregs would go that way rather than just adopt

R17 is a Nazi. He's advocating for forced sterilization.

R20, the number of children born to gay men through surrogates in a tiny, tiny, tiny proportion of the global population.

Banning it would have no measurable affect.

Sorry I meant R20 is a Nazi.

R16 Spot on. If there's not a womybn involved in the rearing of the child, it's not legitimate. The 'gender critical' offshoot of the radical feminist movement also have issues with lesbians and single mothers, so now there's a rift. The one thing they can agree about is that two faggots having a kid with the help of a donor is a nefarious scheme to turn women into incubators.

R20 I'm not interested in your eugenics spiel. This thread is about the homophobic double standards applied in the surrogacy conversation and the distortion of the facts by activists like Bindel-- the creating of a gay scapegoat to the distract from the broader issue of heterosexual negligence.

Breeders like carbon copies of themselves not prints from another machine.

Most heteros who want kids do so out of narcissism not because they want to give a kid a better life. Oh sure, they will claim it's all about love from the top of the hill, but in reality they only love them self. Otherwise, they would be adopting any kid at any age with any disability available until there were no orphans in the world before they spit out their own crotch fruit.

R22 Again, this isn't just about gay guys. It's about all the fucking narcissists who can't value a child unless it carries your genetic material. That's probably the third time I'm having to say this. Just everyone regardless of gender, orientation, creed needs to just stop with the surrogacy.

And in the case of lowering fertility rates it will be pointless if IVF and surrogacy options are as ubiquitous as they are getting. Its a nauseating pattern and it needs to be openly associated with the narcissism that drives it so society can turn it into a taboo.

Ok, I'll bite OP, what set you off?

R26, you can start tackling the overpopulation problem by throwing yourself into a grease fire.

R2, exactly

I'm not, OP, R27.

But what sets me off is the invasion of this gay men's board by radical feminists who post flagrantly homophobic material constantly and are never blocked.

Seems like OP is coming from the same place.

R26 Humans are chemical, evolutionary beings. It is perfectly legitimate to want your own biological offspring and someone advocating for eugenics and forced sterilization should not be lecturing about narcissism. Adoption is fine-- but it's not for everyone. No one should be shamed for being able to produce a legacy provided they have the means for providing for the child.

When was the last time you saw a hetero celebrity SHAMED for getting pregnant and not adopting? Doesn't happen. It only applies to gay couples because certain people feel entitled to relegating us to being straight society's little helpers. We're only suitable in careers as hairdressers, stylists, designers, bitchy side companions-- all in service of straights--and now I guess they want us to be their wet nurses and nannies. Not happening.

R27 The reaction to Anderson Cooper's baby news here. Look for yourself.

Yes, R31.

Aging straight women getting IVF to have children is perfectly fine with rad fems.

But surrogacy -- which they incorrectly always make out to be only done by gay men -- is a huge deal.

[quote]Humans are chemical, evolutionary beings. It is perfectly legitimate to want your own biological offspring.

And it's perfect legitimate for the human species to shit in the woods, run around naked and for men to fuck every female he wants against her will. That is what the cave man did. See my point, we evolved ethics that override those beginnings, ergo, there is no excuse to claim wanting a biological offspring is any more legitimate.

Don't tell gay men then, R34. We didn't get Earth's population to this point. Tell straight women.

I would guess that most of you haven't looked deeply at the thousands and thousands of children who need parents in this country. Someone to love them and care for them. It doesn't matter who does it.

R33 Bindel still writes articles about gay men flying overseas to exploit impoverished women-- but it's always been disproportionately straight couples doing this. The statistics don't lie. A gay rights organization awhile ago held her to task for using a country that has had a decades long ban on gay surrogacy in one of her articles fingering us.

We're easy boogeymen for her to scare up support for her agenda-- which is a total ban on surrogacy period. Unfortunately her singling out of gay men isn't doing anything but giving permission for the main perpetrators of it to go unnoticed. Overseas surrogacy in developing countries is totally exploitative and mishandled, but that's not how western surrogacy works. There aren't any gay men coercing women off the streets, giving them a few shekels and ripping their newborn from their arms. These are overwhelmingly middle class women with careers who act as donors for gay men AND lesbians that also use surrogates. Gendercrits/Radfems think of them as gullible handmaids...

[quote]I would guess that most of you haven't looked deeply at the thousands and thousands of children who need parents in this country. Someone to love them and care for them. It doesn't matter who does it.

Of course, if a gay man tried to adopt any of those children Julie Bindel would probably just say they wanted them to sexually abuse.

R36 I would guess that you can't present an argument that justifies shifting the burden of the adoption issue onto gay men-- so you're just going to make an emotional appeal that anything offered in contrast to looks like cold-heartedness and self-indulgence.

Yes, the surplus of uncared for children in the world is sad. Tell me why it's my duty as a gay man to clean it up and why I deserve public shame for wanting biological offspring when every time a Kardashian multiplies it's an event?

It's OCD and tokophilia for people who are dying to have children incessantly. It's mental health issue, please seek psychiatric help ASAP. You're crazy.

R40 Everything about this post is bizarre. What exactly is anyone here dying of? Is this where the HIV/AIDS homophobia rears itself?

Do they really? How dare they!

[quote]The radical feminists that swarm these boards should go back to obsessing over trannies or at least know the facts and engage in good faith instead of relying on homophobic canards siphoned to them by Julie Bindel.

???

Wow, add convoluted to unhinged when describing this screed.

R43 They literally share the link to DL in their twitter circles when arguing with trans rights activists. The use of the term "handmaid" in the Anderson Cooper thread is a dead giveaway.

R44 Wow. Back to gender critical reddit with you. Make a substantive argument or get lost.

This thread is mostly one lunatic talking to himself.

R46 = Anti-gay agitator feminist with the typical "everyone is autistic and a troll talking to themselves" line of dismissal. You girls are so unfunnily transparent.

R37 Not only that, they go overseas as "sex tourists" and makes kids. I literally just read an article about one town in the Philippines where an entire generation are the children of sex tourists!

I don’t know about superior genes.... but agreed. If straight breeders are using surrogates there is no reason the gays shouldn’t either.

Pay all the women you want to have your children. I really don’t care.

Rad fems: what have you done to make it easier for gay men to adopt?

[quote][R44] Wow. Back to gender critical reddit with you. Make a substantive argument or get lost.

You first.

What do you suppose my criticism of you and your convoluted logic was?

Sadly gay men are now a minority of this board, which is why all these homophobic posts are still up.

Gay men have an innate right to surrogates.

What on earth is up with all this crazy blather about "radical feminists"? Have a glass of wine or something.

It's about how we (gay men on a gay board) have to keep putting up with homophobia from all the radical feminists who have decided to start posting here.

Some of the responses to Anderson Cooper’s announcement were just vile. Sheesh. This is a touchy subject for a lot of people.

I did have a frau colleague who became increasing crazy when her first son turned out to be autistic. She became a wacko antivaccer.

When she found out gays were having kids, she would go on these rants about how unnatural it was.

Before I cut any connection to her, I rebuked her by pointing out that she and her friends had all injected tons of hormones into their systems to try to have babies at an older age (and this was after years of birth control pills and, likely, abortions)--none of which seemed natural to me.

I'm against all breeding. Equal opportunity and all that. Selling and buying human beings is fucked up, regardless of who is doing what.

R56 A female friend of mine went through fertility treatments, and some frau she knew would troll her by passive-aggressively saying stuff like "people should only have the kids that they're given by nature" and shit like that. Turns out the frau had an abortion.

It's no more natural to have an abortion than it is to give birth through a surrogate.

All of the rad fems criticizing Anderson will cheer when Ellen puts someone's sperm in Portia.

They do have a double standard when it comes to lesbians having a child unnaturally and gay men doing the same.

Lesbians usually hate gay men.

Lesbians hate men in general so gay men not a surprise. Maybe a little less but not by much. I know some straight people that used to thing all gay men and lesbians hang out together. They were surprised it's not very common.

[quote] They do have a double standard when it comes to lesbians having a child unnaturally and gay men doing the same.

It's not a double standard because lesbians actually have the equipment. Gay men have to rent it. It's not the same thing. Will Anderson be breastfeeding his child?

[quote]It's not a double standard because lesbians actually have the equipment.

Really? Lesbians have sperm?

Sperm is supply, not equipment. And it's very cheap supply. A lesbian obtaining sperm and using her own body to nurture the child is far more natural than what Anderson Cooper did.

[quote]A lesbian obtaining sperm and using her own body to nurture the child is far more natural than what Anderson Cooper did.

No, it isn't.

You are just a radical feminist proving the point at R60.

How is a lesbian buying sperm somehow natural, but surrogacy isn’t?

YOU'RE ALL UNNATURAL! LESBIANS TURKEY BASTING! QUEERS GROWING EGGS IN TANKS LIKE SEA MONKEYS! REPENT UNGODLY SINNERS!

Most Xtians are totally fine with IVF and surrogacy.

Except when done by gay men.

Just like they hate when gay men adopt.

Or when gay men do anything.

Or when gay men exist.

Don't blame the children. They did no one wrong

This is why I stopped bothering with radfems and 'gender critics'. Their arguments went from; we're just trying to protect women's rights from erosion, trans have an unfair advantage in sports to "evil drag queens and gay baby makers". They really showed themselves up to be homophobic assholes, but they'd be the first to bemoan how gay men won't support them. Gee, you wonder why? Lol

R72 Yeah the obsession with drag queens reading to kids did it for me also.

They’ve turned a JK thread — one of the countless they start — into a thread saying gay men have no right to have children.

I’m wondering how effective penis gifs are in removing them?

R74 Fucking homophobic feminist assholes. RBG just died they have more important things to worry about than gay men's children

My boyfriend and I got a Handmaid. She's a bit neurotic but a good breeder. Except we can't decide which of our names to give her Ofmichael or Ofkevin.

OfNan after yourself, R77.

r52 How much of a minority?We still seem like a majority to me.

On threads like at R74 there wild things like fifty WWs for stuff that would’ve been mocked years ago.

Then there’s a lot of homophobia that never gets greyed-out.

I guess the point is gay men shouldn’t have to debate their right to children on a gay board. I don’t believe it’s other gay men we’re arguing with.

I couldn’t guess the exact numbers... but there is a certain type of woman who posts mostly on rad fem threads on DL and doesn’t accept that this site is for gay men when called out.

So what kind of legal and financial arrangement is acceptable to a uterus haver to be inseminated and grow a baby in his/her/their womb, and then give it to the biological parents.

Should there be a minimum wage structure for the uterus haver's labour (lol) on a step by step basis, e.g. $500 per insemination attempt?

Should there be a maximum set fee that a uterus haver should be paid to protect low income families?

What kind of financial penalty should be imposed if the uterus haver withdraws his/her/their services at some point. e.g. refuses to chest feed the baby they have given birth to? Should there be a set percentage fee, e.g. 25%

Should the child born of surrogacy ever have the right to know who the identity of the uterus haver who gestated them?

Homophobic rad fem at R83.

F&F.

....

There are feminists who are anti gay, like the person above, who think no same sex attracted people should ever raise a child. They can burn in hell.

There are also feminists who question the ethics of hiring someone's womb, be it Beyoncé & Jay Z, Sarah Jessica Parker and Matthew Broderick, Elton John and his partner David Furnish, Tom Daley and that man who wrote that film about Harvey Milk or Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen.

I wonder how many of the men here demanding their right to surrogacy services also care about other aspects of female reproductive health - access to contraception, sexual health checks, terminations, maternity pay etc.

And coming along to prove the point it's R83 again...

[quote] There are feminists who are anti gay, like the person above, who think no same sex attracted people should ever raise a child. They can burn in hell. There are also feminists who question the ethics of hiring someone's womb, be it Beyoncé & Jay Z, Sarah Jessica Parker and Matthew Broderick, Elton John and his partner David Furnish, Tom Daley and that man who wrote that film about Harvey Milk or Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen.

Nope. They're one and the same. That's why we never hear them talk about Beyonce and SJP.

[quote]I wonder how many of the men here demanding their right to surrogacy services also care about other aspects of female reproductive health - access to contraception, sexual health checks, terminations, maternity pay etc.

I don't, R83/R86.

I have my own oppression to deal with.

[quote]our superior biological genes

This is all trollbait of course but the idea that any Datalounger at all has "superior biological genes" never fails to amuse.

R85 clueless cluster b radfem dyke is wearing a Keith Haring shirt in her profile picture, adding to the stupidity

[quote] I couldn’t guess the exact numbers... but there is a certain type of woman who posts mostly on rad fem threads on DL and doesn’t accept that this site is for gay men when called out.

R83 R86

Except I'm not a rad fem or a woman, I'm a cocksucking Kylie, Madonna and Matt Bomer loving gay man.

If gay men can't challenge misogyny, why should we expect straight people to challenge homophobia?

[quote] If gay men can't challenge misogyny, why should we expect straight people to challenge homophobia?

Gay men are not responsible for misogyny.

Co-parenting with lesbian couples would be easier if primary parental rights were eased up a bit, but I absolutely understand why bio mothers are given primacy. The whole round about way of finding a donor and a separate surrogate seems like a huge medical burden just to take advantage of a legal loophole. This applies to both straight and gay couples. There's a huge grey area.

I'm not adopting some ghetto kid whose mother was a crackhead and whose father was a violent criminal, nor am I adopting some white trash kid whose parents are trailer park meth head pieces of shit. Fuck that. I'm having a kid with my own genetic material and the mother will be an educated, intelligent woman.

[quote]I'm not adopting some ghetto kid whose mother was a crackhead and whose father was a violent criminal, nor am I adopting some white trash kid whose parents are trailer park meth head pieces of shit. Fuck that. I'm having a kid with my own genetic material and the mother will be an educated, intelligent woman.

And how much would you expect to pay this educated intelligent woman for the hiring of her reproductive organs?

Why don’t go back to Mumsnet and your JK threads, R95.

We’re not debating this.

Surrogacy is gay rights.

More money than you probably make in a year r95.

"Gay men are not responsible for misogyny."

Well, this board sure participates in it.

[quote]More money than you probably make in a year [R95].

Well I earn £28k a year. Which looks like its about $38k in the US.

Does that sound like a reasonable fee?

r98 some women are just cunts and that's all there is to it.

[quote] Well, this board sure participates in it.

This board does not rape, beat, or kill women.

If you think calling Madonna fat is worse than that, then you’re just a homophobe and can get out of here.

The self flagellating homo in this thread joining in with the other misogynist radfem pigs don't realize the women are equal partners in the transaction and it's highly patronizing to the women who choose to become surrogates to pretend they're being treated unfairly or duped by villainous wealthy gay men. The cherrypicking is clearly a homophobic pretense