Dearsugar, this has already been covered On Lilsugar,Buzzsugar, heck Citizen sugar.

Enough already we get it.

Will EVERYONE PLEASE stop calling her a MAN if you have the ability to carry a child in your uterus you are a WOMEN!!!!

Seriously, he's not a man....he's a friggin woman!

Yes. He is a woman. Men do not, and never will have a uterus. She wanted to be a man so badly she decided to retain the one organ that would give her the biggest benefit of being a woman.

The rest of what I have to say, I'm saving for an 'unhappy' place cause I'm going to need a hall pass.

she's a woman! she has a vagina and not a penis. I don't see what's so exciting about this person being pregnant, women get pregnant everyday.

Try explaining to a 7 year old that recently saw this story on the news that men can have babies. I think a certain tv station is looking for ratings.

I agree with everyone else. I thoroughly respect Thomas and the fact that he felt that he was always male. However, BIOLOGICALLY SPEAKING, if Thomas has the "tools" that females need/require to carry babies, Thomas is female. Ugh. And no, this isn't "breaking stereotypes". Men can't carry babies.

I clicked this article, expecting to read about some crazy scientific breakthrough about men having babies only to find that, biologically, it's just another woman having a baby.

Hype, much?

wow people need to read up on their transgender studies.

I agree quietriott.

Thomas Beatie, the law, and the rest of us who chose not to foist our narrow-minded views on other people recognize that he is in fact a man. Biology is not the only characteristic that determines how we identify ourselves.

It amuses me greatly (read: saddens) how many of you are passionate about change when it comes to the recent election and Prop8, but get quite nasty about transgender issues.

I should also ad that I do not define myself as a woman simply because I can carry a child inside me. I do not define myself by my chromosomes. I also do not define myself based on the fact that i have breasts and a vagina. I think these are narrow minded views that belong in previous centuries.

For those of you who state that he is a woman because of this fact, how do you characterize women who cannot conceive? Are they less of a woman for that fact?

well - i think that it was truly amazing the first time and to see that it's happened again - well i guess they are really able to make their dream come true that they can actually have a baby. i think that people are starting to be more accepting of things like this now.

I agree lildorothyparker, if Thomas wishes to identify as a man, then he should be known as a man. However, I also agree that he is biologically a woman. But this is a matter of ethics and personal choice, not biology.

anybody can identify their womanhood however they would like, but anatomically, if you have a vagina, you are a woman. just because some of us realize this, that does not make us anti-transgered people or narrow-minded.

He is a man, love it or leave. If you don't like this topic, stop reading it. I'm with you, Dorothy.

i really love how people try to tell others what they should be reading... i'll read and post on whatever topic i want, whenever i want.

Congratulations, Thomas. Although I find it awesome that he has the guts to not let other people's views bother him and his family, I would love it if he'd kind of step out of the media. You no longer seem like a human being just trying to be who they are and live their life if you constantly thrust yourself into the spotlight.

She is a WOMAN and that will NEVER change so she can go ahead and have all the surgery she want to. And further more you go through all that trouble to be back right where you started. What will our answer to God be?

If 'he' wants to be a man and wants people to view 'him' that way stop getting pregnant. Men can't get pregnant. This isn't a miracle.

hmmm... very interesting

Oh for f*ck sakes...why is this story so f*cking controversial? It frustrates me to no end.

He is a man, he sees himself as a man trapped in a woman's body and chooses to live his life as a man. He retained his reproductive organs...thus he can have a baby...big whoop? I don't see why people are so upset about this..and going all God on sutff.

As long as the child is born into a loving family does it really matter?

Pinky - I'm not trying to tell others what they should be reading, I'm merely suggesting that they take their negativity elsewhere.

"anybody can identify their womanhood however they would like, but anatomically, if you have a vagina, you are a woman. just because some of us realize this, that does not make us anti-transgered people or narrow-minded."

You're right... anyone can identify himself or herself in the manner in which he or she would like. I'm suggesting that narrow mindedness applies to those people who absolutely refuse consider that biology isn't the only defining characteristic of gender.

I'd also like to echo CYL - if the child is well loved and all needs are met, who are you to judge? Unless of course you'd like absolutely everyone with an opinion to enter your home and criticize you and your lifestyle.

I appreciate people's right to live how they chose, and if he/she "feels" like a man and wants to live like one, fine, but let's face it...he/she is NOT a man. Men cannot give birth, period.

This is no miracle of nature... the right plumbing, sperm and voila a baby.

Sometimes I think we are so busy trying to be politically correct, we cannot see the forest through the trees of bullsh*te.

This story is an emperor's new clothes if I have ever seen one, and I am glad some posters here are calling them on this PR stunt. This has nothing to do with people's right to live how they choose...it has to do with what is physically and not physically possible... you have a woman's anatomy and can give birth.

OWN IT.

JazzTummy - Well said if you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything. We're so busy trying to be right that we are SO WRONG.

It's not a matter of being politically correct. It's a matter of recognizing differences in all people and respecting that fact. I get that transgender issues are still uncomfortable for people, but I think (and hope) that eventually this won't be an issue.

And yes, what he's doing is a PR stunt. Angelina Jolie covering a magazine is also a PR stunt as is every other celebrity who chooses to talk about his or her personal life. Why not leave this man alone and attack them?

He is a man because that is how he recognizes himself. You don't have to like it, but you sure as hell aren't going to change that fact for him or his loved ones.

He is a man because he identifies himself as such.

Sex is biological ... gender can be complicated and uterus/ vagina does not necessarily equal female if the person identifies himself as sees himself as a male.

Like Lildorthy said, yes, it's a PR stunt, but it is no different than Jamie Lynn Spears selling her baby pictures to US Weekly or Angelina Jolie and her kids in W.

We have two people that love each other and want children. Who are we to tell them that's wrong?

dorothy- my last post wasn't directed towards you, I'm sorry if you thought it was.

I'm not judging thomas. and I personally have no problems with transgendered people. I feel for them for not feeling at home in their own bodies. and you're right, there are so many children without loving homes so I'm glad these will have them.

my only issue with this whole thing is the fact that the media keep calling her a man, when in fact she is not. its great and gravy that she feels like a man and went through lots of steps to physically be a man. but since she decided to keep her vagina, she is still a woman.

CYL, lildorothyparker, runningesq and quietriott - i COMPLETELY AGREE.

nothing more to be said that you wonderful people haven't said already.

btw, I am not inviting cameras into my home or sitting down and getting paid for interviews so that "anybody with an opinion" can judge me. thomas is. this is the comment section after the story and its purpose is for people to give their opinion. I gave mine and you gave yours.

I have a question out of general curiosity more than anything... for those of you who believe that sex organs are the defining characteristic of being a man/woman, how do you characterize people who are born with both?

Pinky, as for your issue with the way in which the media describe Thomas... as a general rule the media refers to people in the manner in which they prefer. This has been an issue for Aboriginal groups for years (Native, Indian, Aboriginal, First Nations, etc) as well as many other minority groups - to avoid conflict the media (at least the credible media) will respect the wishes of the person.

I also don't understand the "I'm not judging him" comments. I don't mean you specifically Pinky, but those comments in general. They're always offered as a precursor to judgment. It's the same thing as saying "No offense, but" and saying something insulting.

i dont understand the big argument here. yes he can cut his hair and chop off his boobs,but whether you like it or not, biologically hes a woman and mentally he is a man.I'll consider him a man, but its just a pile of BS to call this controversial. He has a vagina he has a baby. thats all anyones saying here, and i truly do not understand why i am disrespecting trans gender people by saying that.

if someone is born with both, then i give them the right to choose what theyd like to be and i would refer to them accordingly. whats the big deal?

They just want attention.

I said too much already on LILSUGAR...he's basically a hypocrite for calling himself a man yet getting pregnant twice..attention wh*re.

sarahab145's 2 posts say it better than I can.

I gave my piece.

The big deal with my question is that I was pointing out that biology cannot be the only determiner of sex/gender. There are genetic screw ups that result in people being with both male and female sex organs. If you chose to extend people the right to determine their sex/gender based on the presence of multiple sex organs, why not afford people the same right who do not identify with their biological sex.

My overall goal was to point out that sex organs do not determine who a person is, much like skin colour, height, eye colour, etc. do not determine who we are.

I wish I could claim to be a MAN and then my period and future menopause would just 'miraculously' stop.

One way to get on Oprah.

She believes she is mentally a man so she did everything surgically and with drugs EXCEPT make sure she could get around the law to 'acquire' a baby. If she acquired a penis I'd believe her.

Even her supporters can't deny that it wasn't her girlfriend that got her pregnant. With two outlets- electricity can not be conducted. That child will not be happy or content knowing it was a science experiment, however, I pray to God that I am proven wrong.
And now another one. No concern for the children whatsoever.
A media wh*re of the worst kind.

A science experiment, Mesayme?

Is that what you call teh children of all parents who undergo in vitro to get pregnant?

Methinks no.

And again, I don't agree with the media wh*oring of it, but they are not the first - and will not be the last - people who seek it.

And again, how is this different then Jamie Lynn selling her baby pictures to U.S. Weekly?

Thomas is a man because he IDENTIFIES himself as one. Gender can be complicated and penis does not automatically equal man/ vagina does not automatically equal woman. Male does not always go with man, and female does not always go with women.

This is the way most people used to view two people of different races having a child together ... and now, none of you (at least publically) would say that it's wrong for a white woman and black man, asain man and white woman, etc. etc. to have a child together.

"He is a man because he identifies himself as such".

Really? If he identifies himself as a man, why did he get pregnant? I would think that that would be the LAST thing this "man" would want to do to live and be accepted as male.

My point is that it is so hypocritical that this person claims to want to be a biological man so badly because that is her "inner gender", yet she went out of her way to get pregnant and have a child, in my humble opinion, the major event that truly defines us as biological women, NOT men.

I don't want to get into a metaphysical argument about what a woman truly "is". Your sex organs may not define WHO you are, but they do define WHAT you are, in this case, a woman looking for publicity.

Total poser.

By the way, if I identify myself as hummingbird, does it make it so?

Didn't think so.

I don't like this story. I get everyone's point of view, but I feel the headline is seriously misleading, and they are using it to get attention. It's a normal baby being conceived a normal way. Not anything interesting to me.

I do believe that Thomas chose to go through in-vitro fertilization treatments only after his partner discovered that she could not.

In the end, this is two people who love each other having another baby. Sure, it's a little different because Thomas was born biologically a woman, but has gone through what I am sure is a lot of emotional and psychological turmoil surrounding his gender issues (and a lot of psychological evaluations and surgical as well) and overcome them in order to be happy with himself.

Thomas having a child has done nothing to any of you. He has not taken away your right to have children or not to have children. He has not hurt you, or any one you loved. He has not stopped you from loving the people you love. He has not taken away any opportunities from you or the ones you love. Instead, he has made a commitment to a woman he loves and to bringing children into this world to love.

And he did this on his own terms - rather than allowing the media to "out" him and exploit him through tabloid photos or staying hidden and sequestered during his entire pregnancy, he went to the press himself. And you know what? He has shown the world that there are alternatives out there, and not to be closed-minded about love or families. For that I commend him.

quietriott -- amen, sista! seriously, I don't see why there's even controversy over this.

only women can have babies, so thomas is a woman. it is impossible for a man to have a baby, so therefore there is no way this person can be viewed as a man having a baby

I would like to echo Runningesq's response to Mesayme... just to enforce how absolutely absurd the "science experiment" comment is.

Runningesq and lildorothyparker:

It's easy to take a sound byte and apply it to something general.

Your translation is incorrect.

I was referring to all the drugs the woman took to become a man and then IVF on top of that. All those drugs can't be healthy FOR THE CHILDREN. But I'm sure you'd have a great argument for that. It's only important that this selfish woman has what she wants...screw the health or well being of the babies right.

"This is the way most people used to view two people of different races having a child together ... and now, none of you (at least publically) would say that it's wrong for a white woman and black man, asain man and white woman, etc. etc. to have a child together."

...what a comparison does this justify? A demonstration of prejudice and ignorance. That is crystal clear. As ethnic backgrounds has nothing at all to do with same sex gender relationships. There's no hormone treatment changing people from one ethnic race to another. However it is always used by people defending homosexuality as if it's equally unnatural. It's actually just an insufficient point used in desperation. Nearly every person in America is of a mixed race. If you don't understand that, then please kindly show me on the map where your ancestors of the countries of 'black' and 'white' are located...

I am certain that two different races can produce a child.
I am damn certain that two people of the same sex cannot.

You referred to the child as a science experiment, not Thomas' gender reassignment... perhaps that's why we're confused. Besides, his first child seems to be doing just fine.

If your argument is that it is selfish for Thomas and his partner to get pregnant (because science is involved), again, what does that say about heterosexual couples who use in vitro?

Seriously though, why can we not just accept the fact that he wants to live his life as a man? As CYL said earlier, he is delaying his full gender reassignment because his partner is infertile... just let him be.

Actually, the race argument is quite valid.

a) White supremacists used to view African Americans as genetically inferior to themselves. Since this discussion is largely an argument of biological sex vs cultural conceptions of gender it shows the same historical confusion.

b) The argument shows that something that was once considered taboo is now (for the most part) accepted. Hopefully one day we'll consider the prejudice and ignorance directed at homosexual/transgender/whatever people just as ridiculous.

If ignorance is bliss...I'll settle for content.