I talked to my boss when I first got hired about being pregnant and doing my job. It was a very physical job with long hours and could be quite dirty, but many women did it pregnant. He agreed with me that pregnancy was no hindurance to the job. For over a year I talked about becoming pregnant and he assured me it was okay. On the day I was supposed to fly out to meet the parents, he informed me that he would let me go if I went. I had my shift covered, everything was in line. I was dumb founded when he said that if I thought he was going to let me work there pregnant I was wrong. All that time he had been fine with it. So I prodded, trying to find out what changed his mind. His wife even did the same job while she was pregnant with their son! His response was "but she didn't sell the baby." He wouldn't let me explain, talk to him, or show him why he was wrong. He just told me to leave. I loved working there until that day and no amount of money could have brought me back after that. Selling my baby?? So far from the truth!
Based leftist boss fighting against human trafficking?? :so-true:
I mean, I gotta admit, like if someone's boss found out they were involved in selling children off to Little St. James and fired them, and I doubt anyone would fault them for it. And based on the thread we had the other day, it seems like a lot of this site believes that surrogacy is "literally buying babies" or equivalent to Murray Rothbard's "free market for infants" - or at least, a bunch of you think that's a reasonable position to have. So I'm curious if any of the 50 or so people who upbeared that thread see any problem with that boss's decision to fire his pregant worker for, as you would agree, "selling her baby." I'm curious to know if you'd make the same decision in his shoes, and if you see any problem with that situation - other than of course, that he couldn't hand her over to the cops as well.
I guess I'm just trying to better understand your positions. Like, is this something that you actually believe, or is it a superficial, exaggerated rhetorical flourish that you know is bullshit but use anyway because it provides a pretext for infringing on women's rights? You know, like "abortion is murder?"
I also wouldn't mind hearing from some centrists and moderates on the issue. Those who think both sides have a point, between, "Surrogate mothers are engaging in human trafficking by returning a child to their biological parent," and, "Surrogate mothers have a right to bodily autonomy." Is there one side that you think is more reasonable, or are you a true centrist, right in the middle of those two, equally extreme positions?
While I'm at it, I'd also like to open up the discussion more broadly. Is there anything else women's bodies do that you think is immoral, or maybe just plain gross? Anything else you think ought to be illegal? I'm really looking to hear from some men here, because I feel like we never get their perspective on that.
Anti-surrogacy is just anti-choice for anti-natalists.
Critique about surrogacy is more about how women's wombs should not be for sale. Because what ends up happening is rich and high status people taking advantage of poor people, usually from much poorer countries, even going on "procreation vacations" and forcing them to have their child.
Not sure what an ancient Reddit post has to do with it. Its nothing to do with anti natalism.
Also as a bi man I really, really hate how surrogacy is seen as progressive and intertwined into LGBTQIA rights. It is not homophobic to say that we don't have the right to rent someone else's womb.
Do you have resources where I can find out more about this?
Happens all the time in Ukraine, because of the way the laws are written (the surrogate mother does not appear on the birth certificate). The world's largest surrogacy clinics operate there and most "customers" are wealthier foreigners.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/15/the-stranded-babies-of-kyiv-and-the-women-who-give-birth-for-money
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60824936
https://www.financeuncovered.org/stories/surrogacy-law-reform-law-commission-cafcass-low-cost-surrogates-new-life-baby-broker
Thanks a lot for providing that information.
Some of the stories from Ukraine are heartwrenching, but being a warzone complicates things, it's a little hard to separate the harm caused by the practice compared to the more general tragedy. But I found the investigation in the third source more compelling. It definitely tracks with the sort of fly-by-night, sweatshop practices done by other multinationals in other fields.
I think there's a valid case to be made regarding international surrogacy restrictions, especially in the context of overexploited countries, because in that context it's a lot easier for scum to get away with a lot more. But I'm not convinced regarding domestic surrogacy, in the imperial core. In that context, what I've seen has given me a completely different picture (this study, for example). The impression I've gotten is that most surrogate mothers in the US do so because it's something they want to do, often as a form of altruism, and it can be helpful and lifechanging for couples that can't have kids, for whatever reason.
I tend to base my beliefs on actual consequences, and the line of "wombs should not be for sale," strikes me as, I mean, who gets to decide which body parts a woman is allowed to use to make a living, and on what basis is that decision made, if not material consequences? I'm not going to tell someone they're not allowed to host someone else's baby unless I can actually point to something and say, "See, this is the thing I'm trying to avoid, this is the reason behind this restriction." While you've made the case for that in certain contexts, I don't agree with your position universally.
deleted by creator