Can Men Get Pregnant?
| razzmatazz disrespectful box office mexican | 05/04/22 | | razzle fanboi | 05/04/22 | | Glittery stage | 05/04/22 | | Outnumbered Associate | 05/04/22 | | Glittery stage | 05/04/22 | | Outnumbered Associate | 05/04/22 | | Lascivious Apoplectic Station Roast Beef | 05/04/22 | | wild home | 05/04/22 | | razzle fanboi | 05/04/22 | | up-to-no-good cowardly meetinghouse toaster | 05/04/22 | | Vibrant mustard plaza windowlicker | 01/14/26 | | Vibrant mustard plaza windowlicker | 01/14/26 | | Vibrant mustard plaza windowlicker | 01/15/26 | | nyuug | 01/15/26 | | nyuug | 01/19/26 | | nyuug | 01/20/26 | | Blathering Bat Shit Crazy Heaven Doctorate | 01/14/26 | | opaque psychic set | 01/15/26 | | Impressive Excitant Brunch | 01/15/26 | | jewhouls and goyblins | 01/19/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 4th, 2022 2:28 PM Author: razzle fanboi
"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#44454608)
|
Date: May 4th, 2022 2:36 PM Author: Outnumbered Associate
“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#44454641) |
 |
Date: January 15th, 2026 7:18 PM Author: opaque psychic set
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#49592650) |
Date: January 15th, 2026 7:14 PM Author: Impressive Excitant Brunch
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#49592636) |
|
|