Can Men Get Pregnant?
| appetizing french pisswyrm toaster | 05/04/22 | | rusted territorial generalized bond | 05/04/22 | | cracking french chef theater | 05/04/22 | | Swashbuckling soggy den love of her life | 05/04/22 | | cracking french chef theater | 05/04/22 | | Swashbuckling soggy den love of her life | 05/04/22 | | Startled Queen Of The Night Giraffe | 05/04/22 | | frozen business firm | 05/04/22 | | rusted territorial generalized bond | 05/04/22 | | trip legend | 05/04/22 | | nyuug | 01/14/26 | | nyuug | 01/14/26 | | nyuug | 01/15/26 | | nyuug | 01/15/26 | | nyuug | 01/19/26 | | we are definitely claiming fraud trumpmos | 01/14/26 | | David Poaster Wallace | 01/15/26 | | UhOh | 01/15/26 | | jewhouls and goyblins | 01/19/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 4th, 2022 2:28 PM Author: rusted territorial generalized bond
"With our understanding constantly evolving, it’s important to honor the fact that one’s gender doesn’t determine whether they can become pregnant. Many men have had children of their own, and many more will likely do so in the future."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5101418&forum_id=2\u0026show=posted#44454608)
|
Date: May 4th, 2022 2:36 PM Author: Swashbuckling soggy den love of her life
“To our knowledge, there has not yet been a case of pregnancy in [a biologically male] individual.”
Is the “to our knowledge” qualifier really necessary here?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5101418&forum_id=2\u0026show=posted#44454641) |
 |
Date: January 15th, 2026 7:18 PM Author: David Poaster Wallace
Pregnancy via the abdominal cavity
It has also been suggested that it may be possible for AMAB folks to carry a baby in the abdominal cavity.
People have made this leap based on the fact that a very tiny percentage of eggs are fertilized outside of the uterus in what is known as an ectopic pregnancy.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5101418&forum_id=2\u0026show=posted#49592650) |
Date: January 15th, 2026 7:14 PM Author: UhOh
why won't shitlibs testifying before congress and scotus say what they mean: "man" and "woman" is purely psychological, can be chosen and changed at will by the individual, and is not subject to review. it is objectively meaningless. but then it's an invalid class for the purpose of the law - if you can't define it you can't distinguish it, and if you can't distinguish it you can't protect it. next up: whites start identifying as black on college applications and government contracts.
and why don't republicans just steal their language and define "woman" as "a person with a uterus and ovaries"? or "a person with xx chromosomes?"
this shit is so silly. what a joke of a country.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5101418&forum_id=2\u0026show=posted#49592636) |
|
|