#Surrogacy Global

[surrogacyglobal]

Gestational Surrogacy in Argentina:Programs and Benefits

[coochiequeens]

Gay men and the wealthy are no longer content to exploit one woman now exploiting two at the same is becoming trendy

Why have one baby when you can have 2? People are paying $500,000 to hire 2 surrogates at once and have 'twiblings'

By Kelsey Vlamis  Jul 16, 2024, 3:04 PM EDT

Some people are hiring two surrogates at the same time to carry their babies.

Concurrent surrogacy can be complicated and costly, with prices reaching up to $500,000 or more.

Many people who do it are in their 40s and trying to build out their family quickly.

Bill Houghton still vividly remembers the moment he met his son.

He was sitting in the hospital waiting room, right outside the birthing room, when a nurse appeared carrying a little green bundle.

"I just held him in my arms and just started crying. It was so overwhelming. My husband was like, 'Oh my God, I can't believe that this is it. We're a family,'" Houghton told Business Insider. "This is my son."

Just one week later, Houghton and his husband would have the same experience all over again when their second child, another son, was delivered.

"And it has been like that ever since," he said. "To this day, I still look at them and I think, 'Oh my God, these are my sons.' My father had sons. I never thought that I would have a son."

Houghton and his husband opted to become parents via concurrent surrogacy — a process in which two surrogates are hired to carry two babies at the same, or overlapping, time.

The resulting children can be born anywhere from one week apart, like Houghton's, to nine months apart, and have been referred to by some people in the industry as "tandem siblings" or "twiblings."

Surrogacy agencies told BI that concurrent surrogacy journeys are not uncommon, with some saying it's a rising trend in a growing industry that was valued at $14 billion in 2022 by Global Market Insights and has attracted the investments of private equity firms.

All kinds of people — couples or singles, straight or gay, young or old — have opted to build out their family two at a time via concurrent surrogacy. But there is one thing that most parents of twiblings have in common: the ability to afford them.

While Houghton hired surrogates abroad, couples who choose to go through US-based agencies can easily spend $300,000 to half a million dollars or more on concurrent surrogates, according to five surrogacy agencies that spoke to BI.

"It is a luxury, absolutely," Brooke Kimbrough, cofounder and CEO of Roots Surrogacy, told BI. "Most American families don't have $200,000 in cash to go through surrogacy generally, and then $400,000-plus in cash to be able to go through that twice at the same time."

Still, the use of concurrent surrogates could grow as surrogacy generally grows in the US, in part because celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Chrissy Teigen have started opening up about using surrogates, as well as depictions in film and TV that have made the practice more mainstream. Teigen was even pregnant at the same time as her surrogate.

Surrogacy is also becoming increasingly relevant as more and more people are opting to have kids and start building their families later in life.

Chrissy Teigen and John Legend have opened up about using a surrogate. Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for Sports Illustrated Swimsuit

Concurrent surrogacy can help build a family quickly

Concurrent journeys typically look like regular surrogacy journeys, just times two. Gestational surrogacy, when IVF is used to place a fertilized embryo into a surrogate, is the most common form of surrogacy in the US today. Parents can use their own egg and sperm or that of donors.

Like many gay couples, Houghton and his husband each used their sperm for one of the babies, as well as the same egg donor, so their sons are technically half brothers.

While there has been increased awareness around what some call "social surrogacy" — using a surrogate when it's not medically or biologically necessary — the majority of people who conceive via surrogacy do so because they have to.

"Typically, when people come to us, they've been through a lot. This is not their plan A, it's often not plan B, maybe it's plan C," Kim Bergman, a psychologist and senior partner at Growing Generations, told BI. "They've had a lot of disappointment, and they've had a lot of trials and tribulations."

Many hopeful parents are in their 40s and are simply eager to build their families, the agencies said. A surrogacy journey can easily take one and a half to two years, so for intended parents who know they want multiple kids, concurrent surrogates can be appealing.

Certainly, some people who opt for concurrent surrogates do not fit the definition of medically necessary, at least according to the standards laid out by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM).

Some people have mental health reasons or a fear of giving birth. Others are actors or brain surgeons who spend 12 hours a day on their feet and who can't get pregnant and continue to do their jobs. All the surrogacy agencies BI spoke with said it's essentially never the case that someone opts for surrogacy simply for vanity reasons.

David Sher, founder and CEO of Elite IVF, told BI they've helped coordinate surrogates for celebrities, politicians, and people in demanding careers like finance or tech. He said he currently has a client who serves on the cabinet of a Western country and is trying to have a baby via surrogate in part due to her demanding schedule.

Sher said he thinks concurrent surrogacy has long been an option for intended parents but that there does seem to be an uptick in people who are opting to do it.

Part of the reason for that could be because fewer and fewer agencies are willing to do double embryo transfers, which were previously more common and could result in a twin pregnancy. The ASRM recommends against them, as twin pregnancies come with heightened risks for both the surrogate and the babies. So concurrent surrogacy is a safer option for intended parents who want to have two kids at the same time or in close succession.

Costly and complicated

Though it's viewed as a safer option, concurrent surrogacy is controversial. The ASRM guidelines actually recommend against concurrent surrogacy, as well as against social, or not medically necessary, surrogacy. But all five surrogacy agencies that BI spoke to will facilitate concurrent surrogacies.

The agencies said they've seen many concurrent surrogacy journeys be successful and that a lot of care and prior planning goes into making them happen.

"It's not taken lightly," Bergman said, adding that concurrent journeys are rarely chosen by 30-year-olds who have plenty of time to build their families, though that does occasionally happen.

Surrogacy, in general, is expensive — commonly ranging from $150,000 to $250,000 for one child. The costs go toward surrogate compensation, agency fees, legal fees for contracts, and clinical bills.

The agencies BI spoke with said a concurrent surrogacy journey would essentially cost twice that. Meaning there's no two-for-one special.

But cost isn't the only factor to consider. Perhaps the primary drawback to pursuing concurrent surrogacy (that is, besides the high price tag) is the logistics of it.

All the agencies emphasized that concurrent surrogacy should only be pursued with full transparency and the fully informed consent of every person involved. That means matching intended parents to surrogates who are fully aware and OK with the fact that they will not be the only surrogate.

Gestational surrogacy, in which a fertilized embryo is implanted in a surrogate, is most common in the US. Jay L. Clendenin/for The Washington Post/Getty Images

There's also tons of planning and talking through hypotheticals. Are the surrogates based in the same area? Can the parents attend both births? Are we staggering expected delivery times enough? What's the plan if one surrogate gets pregnant on the first try but the other doesn't?

There's also a psychological aspect. Will both surrogates feel fully supported? How will one feel if she doesn't get pregnant right away and the other does?

"All of these conversations are front-loaded. Anytime in the conversation, the surrogate can say, 'I'm not comfortable doing this,'" Bergman said, adding that sometimes, after thinking through the logistics, some parents will change their minds and plan to space the deliveries out further than they initially wanted, like to six or nine months.

Most agencies recommended staggering the planned deliveries by at least three months. But at the end of the day, parents need to be ready for the timeline to not go exactly as planned.

Houghton and his husband had actually planned to have their babies six weeks apart, but when one of the babies was born five weeks premature, they ended up with birthdays one week apart.

Concurrent surrogacy may not be for everyone — even if you can afford it

Although the cost of concurrent surrogacy makes it prohibitive for most people, that could change in the future as more and more companies expand their fertility benefits.

There are also more nonprofits popping up that will provide grants or partial funds to people who want to build their families via surrogacy but may not have the means to.

Jarret Zafran, founder and executive director at Brownstone Surrogacy, told BI that it's not necessarily only the ultrawealthy who pursue concurrent surrogacy. He said he currently has clients who are lifelong educators on the older side who are getting ready to start the surrogacy process. They recently asked about what it would look like for them to do a concurrent journey.

"I guess it is still a luxury in the sense that most Americans would not even be in a financial position to afford it the first time," Zafran, who also had a child with his husband through surrogacy, said. "But for them, this is not a frivolous decision, and they're scraping together every single little penny that they have, all of their savings, their retirement funds, and I get it."

By using surrogates abroad over a decade ago, Houghton and his husband, who are based in Spain, spent much less on their concurrent surrogates than they would have in the US. But he's still not totally sure why they chose to do concurrent journeys rather than space the children out a bit more.

"We just liked the idea of having two kids that were about the same age that would sort of grow up together," he said, adding, "I didn't realize at the time the challenges that would come with having two kids."

In reality, he said having the two boys grow up so close together in age, not twins but in the same class in school, ended up leading to a lot of conflict and constant competition as they were growing up. He said it has gotten better now that the boys are facing their teen years and developing their own identities.

Still, if he could do it over again, he thinks he would stagger them more.

"They're unbelievable young men, and I'm so proud of everything about them," he said. "But having the two together has been a challenge."

Have a news tip or a story to share about concurrent surrogacy? Contact this reporter at kvlamis@businessinsider.com.

If a brain surgeon or politician can't do their job while pregnant have they thought about how kids in general will impact their job? What if their kid wakes them up the night before surgery because they got of had a nightmare? Are they counting on a reliable spouse or a nanny to take care to the unpleasant parts of parenting.

Finally at the very end of the article they address how being born so close together impacts kids. We're they really surprised that there was a lot of competition? And they article just touched on how one of the twins was born 5 weeks premature. That means at one week old the dudes in charge of its care were focused on its twibling. Considering that surrogacy pregnancies are more likely to have complications do the parents consider how they will care for one baby while another baby is in the hospital longer than expected?

[normalfem]

Absolutely deranged comments on a post from BBC News' instagram about a woman donating her womb to her sister. We need to un-normalise surrogacy asap

[yuri-for-businesswomen]

i deeply hope the western world will look back in a few decades and shake our head in horror about the current state of things. the normalisation of consuming hardcore porn. the legalisation and trivialisation of prostitution. the transitioning of mentally ill people. the grooming of young women into onlyfans. surrogacy. the continuing devaluation of female labour, of labour in the health, education and social sector. the normalisation of beauty surgery, the distortion of female faces and bodies with extreme conturing and fillers. the attack on womens rights by claiming there is no such thing as a woman. letting people drown in the ocean, pushing people back to countries where they will be tortured and imprisoned. the commodification of everything including sexuality. technological progress that serves corporate interest instead of the common good. the systemic exploitation of people from the global south. im trying not to give up hope but its hard.

[someone-will-remember-us]

Elton John and David Furnish have done it, and so have Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian and Kanye West.

There’s a bloke from Essex who recently joined the club via an undisclosed overseas location and a 72-year-old Scotsman has just been recognised as the legitimate owner of an American one he bought back in 2020.

What we are talking about here is surrogacy: the incubation and effective purchase of babies after the careful selection of their component parts.

The global market – already worth almost $18 billion (£14 billion) – is projected to rise to $129bn by 2032, according to the research firm Global Market Insights, with anywhere between 5,000 and 20,000 babies incubated to order annually.

This covers the whole caboodle in which you can DIY things with a friend at one extreme, or go for the full Lamborghini treatment where, in some countries, an agent will help you shop around the globe for the finest sperm, eggs and wombs money can buy.

For those opting for the international pick and mix route, there are BOGOF deals (two implants for the price of one), the option of sex selection and a pay-as-you-go plan.

And that’s because you, the customer, are always right. As one agency, New Life Conceptual Limited, based in Lagos, Nigeria puts it: “…it takes four ingredients to make a baby: an egg, a sperm, a womb to grow in, and a family to go home to. You have the last ingredient, but you need a place for your baby to grow, and that’s why you’re here.”

Some companies even offer legal guarantees around defective foetuses that have to be aborted.

If you think I’m making this up, think again.

In the UK, where commercial surrogacy is banned but international imports are not, there are now between 400 and 500 new surrogate-incubated babies registered each year, while globally the business is more than doubling in value every two years.

Some call it a “miracle” and point to the invisible hand of the market creating a profitable multi-billion dollar industry in which everyone wins; a benign system of supply and demand the libertarian economist Leonard Read might have called I, Baby.

And while there is no suggestion that the multi-millionaire celebrities who have used surrogacy, like Elton John and the Kardashians, have exploited the surrogate mothers who bore their children, for others – including feminists like myself – the global surrogacy trade reeks of false entitlement.

It has been sanitised by the liberal “rights” agenda and the same self-serving logic that brands prostitutes “sex workers”. If it brings to mind a book or essay, it is Brave New World, Aldous Huxley’s dystopian novel about social engineering and evil hiding in plain sight.

To what extent, for example, is the lack of regulation around surrogacy driving impoverished women into unsafe and unconsented arrangements, as it once did so extensively with domestic and international adoption?

And what do we really know of all those hundreds of Brits now shopping for children around the world.

Can it really be right that you can effectively buy a baby overseas but raise it in Britain where commercial surrogacy is supposed to be banned?

Just as in the 1950s, ‘60s and ‘70s, when we thought of adoption as a favour to unsuitable mums whether they be “wayward” teens or impoverished Mexicans, surrogacy is being sanitised.

Delve into the subject on the Internet and you will find that almost everywhere you look, it’s celebrated. These babies, magicked into welcoming arms, are seemingly a modern miracle for childless couples of every stripe. TikTok is full of it.

Here in Blighty, we have only “ethical surrogacy”, says Surrogacy UK, a leading non-profit “providing a safe, supportive environment for surrogates, intended parents and families”.

Such organisations emphasise the benefits to infertile couples, and the “great gift” bestowed by women (aged 16 or older) who are happy to “altruistically” lend their womb to another for nine months.

Whilst such arrangements do work for some, there is no reliable data on what is really going on in the UK. This is because the sector is governed by a bizarre mish-mash of statute and common law, and because regulation, where it exists at all, is opaque.

Echoing the words of a Tarantino script, surrogacy is legal in the UK but not a hundred per cent legal.

It’s legal to enter into an agreement with a surrogate, it’s legal to pay her “reasonable expenses”, and, if you’re the owner of a womb, it’s legal to grow a child (made with your eggs or someone else’s) and give it away once it’s born.

But it’s illegal to advertise you are looking for a surrogate in the UK or solicit for business if you want to become a surrogate. It’s also an offence to arrange or negotiate a surrogacy arrangement as a “commercial enterprise”, but that doesn’t really matter because, get this: “reasonable expenses” can stretch beyond the average annual wage.

If money is still an obstacle, you can always rent a womb from a woman in a country like California, Cyprus or Greece where for-profit surrogacy is legal, before bringing the child back home to the UK.

Another oddity of the UK system is that, while it is a criminal offence to advertise surrogacy services, there are “some exemptions for not-for-profit organisations”. It is not clear how these agencies are selected but they are organisations that officials at the Department of Health and Social Care deem trustworthy. It is how agencies like Surrogacy UK and Brilliant Beginnings are able to proactively recruit and advertise a willing pool of surrogates in Britain.

“All our surrogates benefit from being a part of our thriving community and can enjoy a range of events and gifts along the way,” says the Brilliant Beginnings website. “Surrogate retreats” and “milestone gifts” such as chocolates, flowers and even bellybuds - speakers that allow mothers to play music to babies in the womb - are all part of the service.

Brilliant Beginnings says “expenses” payments to surrogate mothers in the UK typically range between £12,000 to £35,000. It is not known how well off the typical UK surrogate is in relation to the intended parents check, but there is potentially a stark economic divide.

“For surrogates who receive means-tested state benefits, it is important to be clear about whether benefits might be affected by any expenses received,” says the Best Beginnings website. “We would always recommend surrogates are upfront with their benefits office”.

Evidence for the benefits and harms of surrogacy in the UK are almost entirely anecdotal.

Disputes do occur but no one really knows their frequency or what they entail because they are heard in the secretive Family Court, which sits mainly in private and from which detailed reporting is banned.

An obvious problem in the UK, is that the flash point for disputes typically arises after the fact - that is, after a child has been born. This is the point at which the intended parents (or parent) must apply to the Court for a “transfer of legal parenthood” and, in most cases, will be the first time the state even becomes cognisant of the surrogacy arrangement.

An application for such a transfer can only be made with the surrogate’s consent but the decision hinges on what the Court considers to be in the best interests of the child, not the surrogate mother.

“The parental order process takes place after birth and involves the family court, and a court-appointed social worker,” says the DHSC website. “This provides a valuable safeguard for the best interests of the child”.

There is a growing recognition that the regulation of surrogacy in the UK is inadequate but the agencies who run it want legislative reforms that favour the would-be parents rather than the surrogate mothers.

They are especially exercised about the fact that written agreements between surrogates and intended parents are ultimately unenforceable in the UK courts.

Others, including myself, want the practice banned – as it is in many countries across the world. Miriam Cates, the former Conservative MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge, caused a storm in January when she said surrogacy was “just ethically not acceptable”.

“Of course adults have a strong desire to be parents, both men or women. Of course it’s a sadness if that’s unfulfilled for whatever reason – they can’t conceive, don’t have a partner, whatever it is.

“But to deliberately bring a child into the world in order to separate it from its mother at birth I think is just ethically not acceptable,” she said.

Alan White, chairman of Surrogacy UK, told a webinar hosted by the Royal College of Midwives in February that those of us who see the practice as unethical and exploitative were limiting choice and free will because we failed to properly understand the motivations of surrogate mothers.

“Surrogates don’t see themselves as mothers, they see themselves as extreme baby-sitters,” he said. “[They are] doing that wonderful thing of doing the part of having children women or gay men can’t do for themselves”.

To survive the psychological impact of giving away a child, there is little doubt that this sort of thinking helps.

As Helen Gibson, the founder of Surrogacy Concern points out, surrogates are encouraged to see themselves as a bystander – just the “the oven” or “the microwave”, as some describe themselves.

But this sort of psychological dissociation doesn’t always work, and perhaps seldom does.

I spoke to one UK woman who feels deep regret at her decision to enter into a surrogacy arrangement. Sandra, whose name I’ve changed, was 32 with two children of her own. She had escaped a violent husband, and was struggling to make ends meet.

A friend suggested she could make money by carrying a baby for an infertile couple. And, after approaching a UK agency she found via Facebook, she was told that in return for having the baby, she could enjoy “unlimited expenses, within reason”.

She was introduced to a gay male couple who wanted her to carry an implanted embryo, engineered with selected eggs to give them the best chance of a “tall, blonde child”. Sandra, by contrast, is short and dark.

The embryo transfer failed three times, and the IVF process made Sandra extremely sick. Eventually, the couple decided to go to California, but not before admonishing her for wasting “their time, and a lot of money.”

“I felt like a broodmare,” she told me.

If the UK surrogacy market is a classic British muddle, the global market is the wild west.  

And because no UK Court or Home Office official can possibly check the provenance of all the elements that go to make up a child (the sperm, the eggs, the IVF, or, crucially, the free agency of the surrogate mother), anything goes for the unscrupulous.

Although most countries around the world still ban the practice, there are more than enough who don’t.

In Greece and various US states including California, Washington DC and Arkansas, commercial surrogacy is fully legal. In many other countries it is either unregulated or very lightly regulated, enabling the trade to flourish. Countries in this bracket include Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Argentina, Guatemala, Iran, Kenya, Nigeria, the Philippines, Russia and Ukraine.

WFI Surrogacy, one of America’s biggest providers, offers its customers what it calls a “live birth guarantee” – the promise that a birth will occur once the process is underway.

“The high quality of our egg donors and surrogate mothers enables us to make this type of guarantee”, says WFI. “Our live birth guarantee programs are available for either: singleton or twins [or] one specimen source or two specimen sources”.

“All our surrogate mothers are medically and psychologically screened,” it adds.

This is Big Fertility, whose business model relies on the commodification of every aspect of pregnancy.

A healthy overall budget for a Brit using the US surrogacy route sits between £250,000 to £320,000, according to the UK agency Brilliant Beginnings.

Often freelance agents or “fixers” will shop around the world for their clients to increase choice and reduce costs. A surrogate mum in Los Angeles, California costs a whole lot more than one from rural Mexico, for example.

Denmark has long been prized for its sperm, its tall blond donors making the most of their viking heritage.

For eggs, there are also options galore – and all pushed with a good dose of fairy tale genetics.

Egg Donor number “241222_01” on the World Center of Baby website (motto: every person deserves to be a parent) conforms precisely to the modern notion of female beauty as defined by Instagram.

Weighing in at just 66kg, she’s also “an artistic soul with a flair for creativity”. If you would prefer a sporty one, just go for donor number 241222_02 – “an athletic enthusiast, deeply engaged in fitness and sports”.

Embryos can be made up from the customers chosen eggs and sperm in any number of IVF labs around the world. They are then frozen and shipped to wherever the chosen surrogate may be. Fixers facilitate the entire process, including the negotiation of complex legal agreements and the careful arbitrage of international and domestic laws and regulations.

The wording of commercial surrogacy contracts is telling, the text reflecting the economic disparity between carrier and client.

“If Gestational Carrier suffers a loss of her uterus as a result of the performance of her obligations under this Agreement, she shall receive $5,000.00 from Intended Parents”, stipulates one contract.

It continues: “If Intended Parents jointly request Gestational Carrier to terminate the pregnancy because of the Child’s medical condition(s), she will do so promptly. If Gestational Carrier refuses to terminate, Gestational Carrier will have materially breached this Agreement and Intended Parents’ obligations under this Agreement shall cease immediately”.

Natalia Gamble, a director at Brilliant Beginnings, says the agency made an active decision “to only facilitate people going to places that we felt were ethical, secure, and safe”.

Although Ms Gamble is adamant that her approach is ethical, she helps clients go to Nigeria, Cyprus, and Ukraine, where commercial surrogacy flourishes.

“We made the active decision at Brilliant Beginnings to only facilitate people going to places that we felt were ethical, secure, and safe – we have very much focused on the US, but through our law firm (NGA Law) we have helped people go into places like Nigeria, Cyprus, and Ukraine because our role is much more not to help them do it in the first place but to help them bring their children home and resolve all the legalities afterwards,” she said.

Northern Cyprus even allows sex selection, with several clinics there advertising the service on their websites.

“The cases that are happening in Nigeria or Cyprus where it’s very unregulated and there’s no legal framework are a very, very small percentage of the overall international surrogacy landscape,” she said.

“We do need to be very alert to the risks of exploitation and those risks are greatest in places where there is no legal framework regulating how surrogacy is run [...] but, it’s about not overinflating those risks when the majority of people are going to what you might call ‘good surrogacy destinations’.”

Ms Gamble is pushing for a change to UK law that would grant commissioning parent(s) legal rights to the child (embryo) at the point of conception.

“It’s in the best interest of the child,” she says. “If you speak to any surrogate mother they will say ‘Look, I am not the mother of this child, I’m always very clear that it’s someone else’s child that I’m carrying’ – no one wants the surrogate mother on the birth certificate, including her.”

But is that really true – are surrogate mothers really so detached?

I spoke to Liane, who said her own experience of surrogacy caused “a huge amount of grief and hurt”.

She described the market as being infected with a sort of “toxic positivity”.

She added: “It’s painted as a wonderful thing to do, a beautiful selfless act which can only bring joy when for me, I felt used, manipulated, and devastated”.

Ms Gibson of Surrogacy Concern says cases involving “coercion and regret” are not uncommon, even within the UK’s surrogacy model.

“Surrogacy prioritises the wants of the adults ahead of the needs of the child, and creates a societal sense of entitlement towards women’s bodies,” she said.

The practices of single men buying children abroad, white couples using black surrogate mothers, and the growing trend towards using cut price surrogacy destinations such as Mexico, Colombia, Kenya and Ghana are all on Surrogacy Concern’s radar.

Physical harms to surrogate mothers are real. Carrying a baby always involves serious risk but, for surrogates, those risks are often greatly magnified.

Linda Khan, an epidemiologist based in the departments of Paediatrics and Population Health at NYU, says surrogates run an “increased risks of all kinds of pregnancy complications, which lead to adverse outcomes for women and children”.

One factor, she says, is that the embryo is not biologically related to the woman and implanted via IVF. Another is that “many women are carrying multiples because it’s so expensive. They want two for the price of one”.

“Twinning is not safe, even when it occurs naturally. It is a huge burden on women’s bodies, it gets all the risks of complications sky-rocketing.”

Whilst it would be difficult (though not impossible) to ban or abolish surrogacy entirely – changing laws to ban the ‘womb traffickers’ as many campaigners refer to the brokers, should be a priority.

The marketing of surrogacy should also be made subject to tougher regulation, say some experts, although many others favour a blanket ban.

“Surrogacy is a trade that makes commodities of children, of embryos and of eggs, and reduces women to being seen as machines,” said Ms Gibson. “It should not masquerade as a progressive solution to the problem of infertility.”

Further, any legal protections introduced in the UK should be for the benefit of the surrogate mothers giving birth and the babies, rather than for the commissioning parents or agents, adds Ms Gibson. A commissioning parent should never have a legal right to remove a baby if a woman has changed her mind.

In March last year, experts from 75 countries signed the Casablanca Declaration, which calls for a global ban on all forms of surrogacy. And in April this year, an international conference was held in Rome with an aim to provide all States with a legal instrument banning the practice of surrogate motherhood.

Implicit within it is a rejection of the fanciful and dangerous notion that anyone, anywhere has an inalienable right to a child.

“The regulations of each country are not enough to stop human trafficking globally,” said Bernard Garcia Larrain, the Executive Director of the Casablanca Declaration for the Universal Abolition of Surrogacy.

“We need an international treaty to prohibit surrogacy because this is a global market that moves a lot of money and knows no borders,” he added.

[waitmyturtles]

(Source)

The Lower House (House of Representatives) will be hearing Thailand’s marriage equality bill at 9:30 am Bangkok time (10:30 pm Eastern for those of us in the States). The bill, if passed, would still have to be approved in Thailand’s Senate.

(Source and source)

Below the fold is Bloomberg.com's report on the happenings (source):

Bill to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage in Thailand Heads to Parliament

Bill is supported by most major parties, needs king approval

Thailand would be first in region to codify marriage equality

By Patpicha Tanakasempipat, March 26, 2024 at 2:00 PM PDT

A bill to legalize same-sex marriage could face a vote in Thailand’s parliament as early as Wednesday. If it passes, the country will be the first in Southeast Asia to establish marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.

The House of Representatives will take up the legislation, technically an amendment to the Civil and Commercial Code, for second and third readings when it meets at 9 a.m. Lawmakers may vote later in the day.

The bill would legalize marriage for same-sex partners aged 18 and above, along with rights to inheritance, tax allowances and child adoption, among others. Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin’s administration has made it a signature issue, and advocates say it would also burnish Thailand’s reputation as an LGBTQ-friendly tourist destination.

Taiwan and Nepal are the only places in Asia that currently recognize same-sex marriage, and recent efforts elsewhere in the region have had mixed results. Hong Kong has yet to comply with a 2023 court order to establish laws recognizing same-sex partnerships, and India’s Supreme Court refused to legalize same-sex marriage, saying it’s an issue for parliament to consider.

The Thai bill would change the composition of a marriage from “a man and a woman” to “two individuals,” and change the official legal status from “husband and wife” to “married couple.”

Thai laws have protected LGBTQ people from most kinds of discrimination since 2015, but attempts to formalize marriage rights have stalled. In 2021, the Constitutional Court upheld the law recognizing marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman. Last year, a bill to recognize same-sex civil partnerships failed to clear parliament ahead of elections.

Rights advocates have higher hopes for the bill pending now, noting that it has broad support from most of the major parties. If it passes, it will need to be approved by the Senate and endorsed by the King. Then it would be published in the Royal Gazette and take effect 120 days later.

Srettha’s government has also promised to work on a bill to recognize gender identity, and the health ministry has also proposed legalizing commercial surrogacy to allow LGBTQ couples to adopt children. Thailand is seeking to host the WorldPride events in Bangkok in 2028.

Legalizing same-sex marriage could have positive effects on tourism, which contributes about 12% to the nation’s $500 billion economy. In 2019, before the pandemic froze international tourism, LGBTQ travel and tourism to Thailand generated about $6.5 billion, or 1.2% of gross domestic product, according to industry consultant LGBT Capital.

Formal recognition could boost the reputation of a place already considered one of Asia’s best for LGBTQ visitors, said Wittaya Luangsasipong, managing director of Siam Pride, an LGBTQ-friendly travel agency in Bangkok.

“It will become a selling point for Thailand and raise our strength in the global stage,” Wittaya said. “It will create a relaxed and safe atmosphere for tourism and help attract more and more LGBTQ visitors. We could also see more weddings by LGBTQ couples, which could generate income across industries and local communities.”

[athinginmotion]

so you agree? you agree it’s impossible to meaningfully establish consent when money is being exchanged? especially if the woman accepting the money is most often from an impoverished and/or marginalised group which makes surrogacy an appealing option? so you agree you shouldn’t be able to buy access to a woman’s body? especially for something that exposes them to great physical risk? you agree that individuals willingly choosing to become surrogates and reporting positive experiences doesn’t stop it from being an inherently exploitative framework in which the surrogate is always at a disadvantage no matter how good the pay or conditions? you’re capable of thinking about this through a structural and material lens rather than a purely individualistic one??

Can someone explain to me why being anti -surrogacy is a relatively uncontroversial, respectable and mainstream opinion among feminists/leftists (as that recent poll attests) but criticising sex work is a regarded as regressive if not ontologically evil

[womenaremypriority]

The absolute dystopian horror that is commercial surrogacy where western privileged women buy the bodies of poorer women in the Global South. The way so many celebrity women have done it. Just the absolute height of patriarchal capitalism, in a world where we’re so disconnected from our bodies, and our communities, and everything must be a commodity. It’s all so banal and surreal and people are so focused on the hypothetical situation where it could be moral instead of the reality. How can you see Ukrainian women being made to “rent out” their wombs in a war and condone this.

[kvetcher2]

Do you have any good sources to why gender neutrality is harmful to (biological) women and how trans ideology is related to that? (ex: stuff like abortion, periods, surrogacy or cervix cancer not being reffered to as WOMENS rights/issues, but as an issue for "people who menstruate / can give birth / have a cervix.") I know its erasing and dehumanizing, but Im having a hard time building a solid argument:/

hey! sorry I took so long to get to this. really need to check my inbox more often

here’s a peer-reviewed article in an academic journal about the importance of sexed language in the medical field: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/global-womens-health/articles/10.3389/fgwh.2022.818856/full

and here is a fantastic opinion piece in Ms. magazine that lays out the importance of sexed language in identifying sex-based oppression: https://msmagazine.com/2022/06/23/women-abortion-bans-inclusive-language-pregnant-people/

[surrogacyglobal]

Your Guide to Surrogacy in Georgia: Programs & Legal Details

[makiruz]

Even if any of these stories were true, the common theme is capitalism, not surrogacy

[coochiequeens]

Wait...wait... Ireland is passing surrogacy regulations "which would ban compensation of surrogates abroad, could risk creating 'hidden payments' that could be used to coerce intended parents."

By Sarah McInerney

Advocates for surrogacy in Ireland say they are concerned proposed new laws, which would ban compensation of surrogates abroad, could risk creating 'hidden payments' that could be used to coerce intended parents.

The legislative proposals, which are due before Cabinet in the coming weeks, will seek to regulate both domestic and international surrogacy arrangements involving Irish couples.

They include a proposal to ban any payment or compensation to a surrogate, beyond pre-agreed "reasonable expenses".

Mary Seery Kearney, a Fine Gael Senator and a member of the Oireachtas Committee on International Surrogacy, told Prime Time she is concerned that if provision is not made in upcoming legislation for a "goodwill payment" to be given to a surrogate, it risks creating a system of "hidden payments".

"If goodwill payments are included in the legislation, this will mean that the entirety of the transaction is transparent," she said.

"It is my belief that for the regulation to work correctly it must honestly face the reality of such payments. Banning them won't mean that no payment will be made, it will just mean that the payment will be under the table, leading to coercion of vulnerable intended parents. Transparency is the key."

Senator Seery Kearney is not in favour of legislating for commercial surrogacy, which involves an agency being paid to facilitate a surrogacy arrangement. However, she said there should be provision for a 'goodwill payment' to be given directly to the surrogate from intending parents.

Sam Everingham, Global Director of Growing Families, an Australian organisation which provides advice to parents on international surrogacy, said Irish parents could struggle to find surrogates abroad at all if payments are banned.

"That's unrealistic," he said. "That's really unrealistic to make that rule to... put our laws on another country. It's just not culturally appropriate to say if a country like the USA believes compensation is fine from a moral point of view, I think you can't say that's not good enough for our citizens. What you're doing then is you're forcing a black market for people to go under the table."

Questions have also been raised about Government plans to create a 'green list' of agencies or countries which the State has deemed to meet strict standards that will be imposed here.

Dr Andrea Mulligan, Assistant Professor of Law at Trinity College Dublin, says this will be very challenging. "I think Ireland can't regulate what happens abroad, but what it can do is essentially avoid giving tacit acceptance to regimes that we think are problematic," she said.

The surrogacy landscape is constantly changing. India has banned international surrogacy; Georgia will follow suit next year; while Ukraine – previously a very popular destination for Irish couples – is now not a safe option. Given that, it’s difficult to see how the Irish State will be able to keep track of what countries, or agencies, should be considered problematic.

This problem was starkly highlighted just last month in Greece, when eight people were arrested at a major fertility clinic in Crete, and are now under investigation for trafficking vulnerable women from countries like Georgia and Albania to become surrogates for foreign couples.

Police say the women were brought to Crete under false pretences and made to undergo hormonal treatments, egg extraction and insemination for surrogacy. Greek investigators claim the clinic has exploited more than 160 women, orchestrated illegal adoptions and offered counterfeit IVF treatment to intending parents. It was advertised widely on the internet, including on the Growing Families website, which said the Mediterranean Fertility Clinic had "an excellent surrogate support programme".

During an interview following a recent conference in Dublin, Prime Time asked Sam Everingham why his organisation had recommended the clinic. He initially disputed that contention, saying his organisation does not recommend any clinic or agency, and that simply it provides information. However, after further questions he conceded that the language on his site represented a recommendation.

He said Growing Families was "hoodwinked" by the Mediterranean Fertility Institute for "years".

"We're horrified, horrified by what we saw coming out in the press there," he said.

"It was just, for us and for doctors who'd also recommended that clinic to patients, it's just something that's come out of the blue. And we think, 'how can an organisation be so deceptive to surrogates, to intending parents?'"

Mr Everingham also conceded that Growing Families cannot stand over the accuracy of any of the content provided on its website. He said the website constitutes a repository of information provided to it by others and therefore his organisation is not responsible for the veracity of the material provided.

At the heart of the proposals from government is an attempt to deal with the legal lacuna in which surrogacy currently exists. Under current Irish law, the woman who gives birth is always legally recognised as the mother. This means that when a surrogacy arrangement takes place - even when the egg and sperm of intending parents are used - it is the surrogate who is recognised in law as the child’s mother.

"A genetic father can apply to court for a declaration of parenthood, so he's recognised as the father," said Dr Mulligan. "An intended mother, even if she is the genetic mother, cannot get a parental recognition as the father can, so she can't be recognised as a parent."

Under proposed terms of the Health (Assisted Human Reproduction) Bill 2022, parents of children born through surrogacy will be recognised as legal parents, if they meet certain criteria in the jurisdiction in which the surrogacy is intended to take place, and also the criteria to be specified in the Irish legislation.

There is another problem, however. If Irish intended parents decide to ignore the new law, and go to a country where payment of the surrogate is permitted, or other strict Irish standards are not met, what happens then they return to Ireland with their newborn baby? Can Ireland refuse to grant a parental order?

It appears that is the plan.

An inter-departmental group charged with drawing up a policy paper for government on new surrogacy laws recommended that Irish courts should be "satisfied that all specified requirements are met before a parental order is granted".

It also rejected a recommendation from the Oireachtas committee on surrogacy that judicial discretion should be allowed in exceptional cases.

Dr Mulligan broadly agrees with that approach: "Ultimately there will be surrogacy arrangements that are unethical, that are not compliant, and I think the State has to take a firm line in saying that they are ones that will simply not be recognised and state will care for that child in some other way," she said.

However, Annette Hickey, a partner in Poe Kielty Hogan Solicitors in Kilkenny, who specialises in surrogacy, questioned whether refusing to grant a parental order to non-compliant parents is the right approach.

"The sanctions or the consequences, you keep coming back to, 'hold on a second, that's not good for the child, that’s not good for the child,’" she said.

"There has to be a means to ensure that whatever type of sanction, at the end of the day, the child has to be protected. When I look at it and study how this could actually possibly play out: it impacts the child. That is not what anyone wants."

Prime Time has spoken to three couples who have opted for surrogacy arrangements abroad. Before embarking on the process, they were all keenly aware of bad actors seeking to take advantage of parents and surrogates.

They researched clinics thoroughly, and throughout the surrogacy arrangement they were fully satisfied that their surrogates were well cared for, that they were fairly compensated, and they were happy to participate in the process.

The risk of exploitation - particularly in international surrogacy - is one of the reasons they believe the proposed legislation is so important, to protect the surrogate and the intended families.

Brian and Kathy Egan had always planned to have four children. But after having their first son, Harry, Kathy had eight miscarriages.

They began to consider gestational surrogacy, the process where a woman agrees to carry and give birth to a baby via IVF using the egg and sperm of at least one of the intended parents.

"Because it's new to you, you're second-guessing everything, you really want to make sure you have the right information. It's going to be the right clinic, the right surrogate, and everything is right for in every way," Kathy's husband Brian said.

Having researched clinics in the US and Canada, the Egans decided to go with a clinic in Lviv, Ukraine.

"We did Zoom or Skype calls with Mariana, our surrogate... She was in no doubt that this was helping us both," Kathy said.

Mariana carried the baby that was made with Kathy's egg and Brian’s sperm. Therefore, genetically, the baby which Marianna gave birth to is Brian and Kathy’s child.

Baby Luke arrived early May 2019 while Brian and Kathy were at home in Kilkenny. They travelled through the night to get to Lviv.

"You cannot get there quick enough. You'd swim there," Kathy said.

The entire process cost the Egans about €100,000, including payment to the clinic, legal fees, flights, accommodation.

Senator Mary Seery Kearney did 13 rounds of IVF before considering surrogacy. When she began researching, she was dismayed to find there was no central agency or authority to contact for information. She had to rely on Google and eventually settled for the most impressive website; a clinic in Kyiv. "We flew over, we gave them €12,000 upfront, and nothing came of that," she said.

After her experience in Ukraine, Senator Seery Kearney and her husband found a clinic in India.

"All in all, we're looking about €38,000 to €42,000. So that's eight years ago. Now [it] would be somewhere around 60 [thousand] as a starting charge. But then you have legal costs of at least another €10,000 on that," she said.

Adding on accommodation and flights, the final cost was closer to €70,000.

Cathy and Keith Wheatley remortgaged their house to front the cost. They paid just under €40,000 to a clinic in Ukraine, of which €14,000 was compensation for their surrogate Ivanna.

But with legal fees, flights and accommodation, their total spend was €70,000.

None of the families who spoke to Prime Time ever expected to have to use a surrogacy arrangement to have a baby. The process takes a huge emotional and financial strain. And even after all that, mothers find themselves with no way to be recognised as such in Irish law.

The challenge for the Government now is to find a balance of legislation which ensures the safety and protection of Irish families and surrogates, while also being workable and realistic in the international context. It is not an easy task, but families and would-be parents are waiting.

"We'd hope that legislation is in place properly soon for us and for all those families out there that don't want to be on this journey but want to make sure that things are right for everybody," Brian Egan said.

[haggishlyhagging]

The book list copied from feminist-reprise

Radical Lesbian Feminist Theory

A Passion for Friends: Toward a Philosophy of Female Affection, Jan Raymond

Call Me Lesbian: Lesbian Lives, Lesbian Theory, Julia Penelope

The Lesbian Heresy, Sheila Jeffreys

The Lesbian Body, Monique Wittig

Politics of Reality, Marilyn Frye

Willful Virgin: Essays in Feminism 1976-1992, Marilyn Frye

Lesbian Ethics, Sarah Hoagland

Sister/Outsider, Audre Lorde

Radical Feminist Theory –  General/Collections

Freedom Fallacy: The Limits of Liberal Feminism, edited by Miranda Kiraly and Meagan Tyler

Radically Speaking: Feminism Reclaimed, Renate Klein and Diane Bell

Love and Politics, Carol Anne Douglas

The Dialectic of Sex–The Case for Feminist Revolution, Shulamith Firestone

Sisterhood is Powerful, Robin Morgan, ed.

Radical Feminism: A Documentary Reader, edited by Barbara A. Crow

Three Guineas, Virginia Woolf

Sexual Politics, Kate Millett

Radical Feminism, Anne Koedt, Ellen Levine, and Anita Rapone, eds.

On Lies, Secrets and Silence, Adrienne Rich

Beyond Power: On Women, Men and Morals, Marilyn French

Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law, Catharine MacKinnon

Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression, Sandra Bartky

Life and Death, Andrea Dworkin

This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, Gloria Anzaldua and Cherrie Moraga, eds.

Wildfire:  Igniting the She/Volution, Sonia Johnson

Homegirls: A Black Feminist Anthology, Barbara Smith ed.

Fugitive Information, Kay Leigh Hagan

Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black, bell hooks

Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, bell hooks

Deals with the Devil and Other Reasons to Riot, Pearl Cleage

Pilgrimages/Peregrinajes, Maria Lugones

In Search of Our Mothers’ Gardens, Alice Walker

The Whole Woman, Germaine Greer

Right Wing Women, Andrea Dworkin

Feminist Theory – Specific Areas

Prostitution

Paid For: My Journey Through Prostitution, Rachel Moran

Being and Being Bought: Prostitution, Surrogacy, and the Split Self, Kajsa Ekis Ekman

The Industrial Vagina: The Political Economy of the Global Sex Trade, Sheila Jeffreys

Female Sexual Slavery, Kathleen Barry

Women, Lesbians, and Prostitution:  A Workingclass Dyke Speaks Out Against Buying Women for Sex, by Toby Summer, in Lesbian Culture: An Anthology, Julia Penelope and Susan Wolfe, eds.

Ten Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution, Jan Raymond

The Legalisation of Prostitution : A failed social experiment, Sheila Jeffreys

Making the Harm Visible: Global Sexual Exploitation of Women and Girls, Donna M. Hughes and Claire Roche, eds.

Prostitution, Trafficking, and Traumatic Stress, Melissa Farley

Not for Sale: Feminists Resisting Prostitution and Pornography, Christine Stark and Rebecca Whisnant, eds.

Pornography

Pornland: How Pornography Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, Gail Dines

Pornified: How Porn is Damaging Our Lives, Our Relationships, and Our Families, Pamela Paul

Pornography: Men Possessing Women, Andrea Dworkin

Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality, Gail Dines

Pornography: Evidence of the Harm, Diana Russell

Pornography and Sexual Violence:  Evidence of the Links (transcript of Minneapolis hearings published by Everywoman in the UK)

Rape

Against Our Will, Susan Brownmiller

Rape In Marriage, Diana Russell

Incest

Secret Trauma, Diana Russell

Victimized Daughters: Incest and the Development of the Female Self, Janet Liebman Jacobs

Battering/Domestic Violence

Loving to Survive, Dee Graham

Trauma and Recovery, Judith Herman

Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men, Lundy Bancroft

Sadomasochism/”Sex Wars”

Unleashing Feminism: Critiquing Lesbian Sadomasochism in the Gay Nineties, Irene Reti, ed.

The Sex Wars, Lisa Duggan and Nan D. Hunter, eds.

The Sexual Liberals and the Attack on Feminism, edited by Dorchen Leidholdt and Janice Raymond

Sex, Lies, and Feminism, Charlotte Croson, off our backs, June 2001

How Orgasm Politics Has Hijacked the Women’s Movement, Sheila Jeffreys

A Vision of Lesbian Sexuality, Janice Raymond, in All The Rage: Reasserting Radical Lesbian Feminism, Lynne Harne & Elaine Miller, eds.

Sex and Feminism: Who Is Being Silenced? Adriene Sere in SaidIt, 2001

Consuming Passions: Some Thoughts on History, Sex and Free Enterprise by De Clarke (From Unleashing Feminism).

Separatism/Women-Only Space

“No Dobermans Allowed,”  Carolyn Gage, in Lesbian Culture: An Anthology, Julia Penelope and Susan Wolfe, eds.

For Lesbians Only:  A Separatist Anthology, Julia Penelope & Sarah Hoagland, eds.

Exploring the Value of Women-Only Space, Kya Ogyn

Medicine

Witches, Midwives and Nurses: A History of Women Healers, Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English

For Her Own Good: 150 Years of the Experts’ Advice to Women, Barbara Ehrenreich and Deirdre English

The Hidden Malpractice: How American Medicine Treats Women as Patients and Professionals, Gena Corea

The Mother Machine: Reproductive Technologies from Artificial Insemination to Artificial Wombs, Gena Corea

Women and Madness, Phyllis Chesler

Women, Health and the Politics of Fat, Amy Winter, in Rain And Thunder, Autumn Equinox 2003, No. 20

Changing Our Minds: Lesbian Feminism and Psychology, Celia Kitzinger and Rachel Perkins

Motherhood

Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution, Adrienne Rich

The Reproduction of Mothering, Nancy Chodorow

Maternal Thinking: Toward a Politics of Peace, Sara Ruddick

Marriage/Heterosexuality

Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence, Adrienne Rich

The Spinster and Her Enemies: Feminism and Sexuality 1880-1930, Sheila Jeffreys

Anticlimax: A Feminist Perspective on the Sexual Revolution, Sheila Jeffreys

Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman, Michele Wallace

The Sexual Contract, Carol Pateman

A Radical Dyke Experiment for the Next Century: 5 Things to Work for Instead of Same-Sex Marriage, Betsy Brown in off our backs, January 2000 V.30; N.1 p. 24

Intercourse, Andrea Dworkin

Transgender/Queer Politics

Gender Hurts, Sheila Jeffreys

Female Erasure, edited by Ruth Barrett

Testosterone Rex: Unmaking the Myths of Our Gendered Minds, Cordelia Fine

Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference, Cordelina Fine

Sexing the Body: Gender and the Construction of Sexuality, Anne Fausto-Sterling

Myths of Gender, Anne Fausto-Sterling

Unpacking Queer Politics, Sheila Jeffreys

The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male, Janice Raymond

The Inconvenient Truth of Teena Brandon, Carolyn Gage

Language

Speaking Freely: Unlearning the Lies of the Fathers’ Tongues, Julia Penelope

Websters’ First New Intergalactic Wickedary, Mary Daly

Man Made Language, Dale Spender

Feminist Theology/Spirituality/Religion

Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women’s Liberation, Mary Daly

Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism, Mary Daly

The Gods and Goddesses of Old Europe, Marija Gimbutas

Woman, Church and State, Matilda Joslyn Gage

The Women’s Bible, Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Pure Lust, Mary Daly

Backlash

The War Against Women, Marilyn French

Backlash, Susan Faludi

History/Memoir

Surpassing the Love of Men, Lillian Faderman

Going Too Far:  The Personal Chronicles of a Feminist, Robin Morgan

Women of Ideas, and What Men Have Done to Them, Dale Spender

The Creation of Patriarchy, Gerda Lerner

The Creation of Feminist Consciousness, From the Middle Ages to Eighteen-Seventy, Gerda Lerner

Why History Matters, Gerda Lerner

A Vindication of the Rights of Women, Mary Wollstonecraft, ed.

The Elizabeth Cady Stanton-Susan B. Anthony Reader: Correspondence, Writings, Speeches, Ellen Carol Dubois, ed., Gerda Lerner, Elizabeth Cady Stanton

The Suffragette Movement, Sylvia Pankhurst

In Our Time: Memoirs of a Revolution, Susan Brownmiller

Women, Race and Class, Angela Y. Davis

Economy

Counting for Nothing: What Men Value and What Women Are Worth, Marilyn Waring

For-Giving:  A Feminist Criticism of Exchange, Genevieve Vaughn

Fat/Body Image/Appearance

Shadow on a Tightrope: Writings by Women on Fat Oppression, Lisa Schoenfielder and Barb Wieser

Beauty and Misogyny: Harmful Cultural Practices in the West, Sheila Jeffreys

Can’t Buy My Love: How Advertising Changes the Way We Think and Feel, Jean Kilbourne

The Beauty Myth, Naomi Wolf

Unbearable Weight:  Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body, Susan Bordo

The Invisible Woman:  Confronting Weight Prejudice in America, Charisse Goodman

Women En Large: Photographs of Fat Nudes, Laurie Toby Edison and Debbie Notkin

Disability

With the Power of Each Breath:  A Disabled Women’s Anthology, Susan E. Browne, Debra Connors, and Nanci Stern

[olderthannetfic]

There's nothing that irritates me more than people thinking they're smart for dunking on religion but do so in completely incorrect ways.

The other month, the pope called for a global ban on surrogacy, and all these mouth-breathing blog-dwellers came out of the woodworks to write shit like "Oh, I got bad news for the pope!!!!!", alluding that Mary was god's surrogate.

No, you fucking idiotic fedora-wearing cunts, Mary is quite literally the mother of Jesus in the sense that she also raised him, she didn't just give birth to him. God didn't adopt Jesus the moment he was born. Everywhere in the Bible Mary is recognized as the mother of Christ and referred to as such. At best you can say that Mary got a deadbeat baby daddy, considering that god didn't care much for Jesus until he was an adult, but it's got nothing to do with surrogacy.

If you want to dunk on something or someone, learn how to do it the proper way, for fuck's sake.

--

It really is breathtaking how little a lot of people know about religions they dislike. You gotta know your enemy in order to counter them, people!

[f1ghtsoftly]

All The Women’s News You Missed This Week

10/14/24-10/21/24

Formal justice systems make headway on holding men accountable for violence against women in Bolivia, Malaysia, and Ivory Coast. An Indian researcher wins a prestigious grant for her work on Dalit (untouchable) women. A female politician heckles King Charles during his visit to Australia and Italy bans traveling abroad for surrogacy in another attempt to limit the ability of same-sex couples to have children.

Want this in your inbox instead? Subscribe here

US Abortion Rights: 

Missouri abortion-rights campaign fundraising total at $22M one month before election

3 states renew their effort to reduce access to the abortion drug mifepristone

Male Violence Against Women and Children: 

Bolivian ex-leader's looming arrest warrant triggers protests

Ex-Louisville officer who fired shots in Breonna Taylor raid readies for 3rd trial

Woman dies 2 days after co-worker shot her at Santa Monica College, police say

K-pop star gives tearful testimony on harassment

S Korean striker sorry for filming secret sex videos

Arrests Hundreds More Over Child Abuse Claims

Why fight for justice isn't over in India's 'horrific' widow-burning case, 37 years on

Duchess shocked by sexual exploitation of refugees

Murder, rape and torture allegations hit Ivory Coast student union

Buses to become safe spaces for vulnerable women

Women In The News: 

Susan Smith is up for parole 30 years after drowning her kids in a South Carolina lake

Bangladesh issues arrest warrant for ex-leader Hasina

The 'genius' Indian who shattered caste barriers

I'm not stupid, I've chosen to speak, says catfish victim duped for nine years

I’ll stand for Russian president when Putin's gone, Navalny’s widow tells BBC

New York Liberty claim first WNBA title with overtime win

WATCH: Moment King Charles is heckled by Australian politician 

Women's program aims to combat violence in Chicago: "The police cannot do this alone"

Le Sserafim: The K-pop band who want to change the industry

LGBT: 

Missouri now requires proof of surgery or court order for gender changes on IDs

Trans socialite did serve her jail term, Nigerian panel finds

Italy bans couples from travelling abroad for surrogacy 

In New York, a constitutional amendment provides election fodder for the left and the right

Arts and Culture: 

Harris interview with Fox News showcases a change in strategy for Democrats with network

Movie Review: ‘Smile 2' nicely targets pop star fame with the terrific Naomi Scott

Movie Review: Strippers, oligarchs and a fairy tale gone sideways, ‘Anora’ is a wild ride

For once — a true crime story that isn't focused on the killer

WATCH: Dawn Richard found freedom, clarity while working on new album

Becky G says ‘Encuentros,’ her second album of regional Mexican music, is a celebration of culture

Book Review: 70-year-old psychiatrist takes to the road in Anna Montague’s beguiling new novel

Half a Century After Title IX, Universities Are Still Failing Survivors: The Ms. Q&A With Nicole Bedera 

As always, this is global and domestic news from a US perspective covering feminist issues and women in the news more generally. As of right now, I do not cover Women’s Sports. Published each Monday afternoon.

[thatsonemorbidcorvid]

“Some view the practice as a means of gaining financial autonomy and draw parallels with sex work, arguing that women should have the right — and freedom — to so-called commodify their bodies if they choose. Yet others have drawn comparisons with practices like the sale of organs, and ask, if the option of becoming a surrogate is presented to vulnerable women who are desperate to lift their families out of poverty, how much can their decision ever really be construed as an active choice?

…

The transnational element to commercial surrogacy agreements — which overwhelmingly involve those from affluent countries traveling to poorer nations to source a surrogate — is another reason many are uncomfortable with the practice, leading some bioethicists to brand it a form of biological colonialism. Before the practice was outlawed in India — first for foreign couples in 2015 before being entirely banned in 2021 — stories in the country’s press abounded of women recruited from deprived, rural regions, being pushed into signing surrogacy contracts they were unable to read and, once pregnant, crammed together in dormitories. Surrogacy in Nepal generated headlines after the 2015 earthquake, when the Israeli government swept in to airlift a small group of Nepalese women carrying the babies of Israeli nationals out of the disaster zone, while other earthquake victims were left behind, bringing stark global inequalities into sharp relief. Commercial surrogacy flourished in Thailand until 2015 when the country banned it for foreigners after a series of high-profile cases, including an Australian couple who were accused of abandoning their “Baby Gammy,” who was born with Down syndrome.”