Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Exclusive: The Sun defends call for identity of ‘first trans man to give birth’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. DJ Sheepiesheep 16 Feb 2012, 12:32pm

    Where someone has done nothing legally or morally wrong, how can an individual’s right to privacy be outweighed by the public interest (in reality, the Sun’s self-interest). It’s a non argument that only goes to show that certain elements of the press cannot be trusted.

    Anyway, just so they know, it was me!

    1. No, I’M Spartacus!

    2. In the context of this story, this is beutifully hypocrical: http://www.theweek.co.uk/uk-news/sun-crisis/45392/sun-journalists-show-sudden-interest-human-rights

      So revealing the identity of an innocent person in the interest of purient gossip is fine, but revealing the identity of potential paid police informants is a breach of human rights. Scum!

    3. the sun confuses ‘public interest’ with something the public might be interested in. anything goes just to sell few more copies

      1. How anyone connected to News International can begin to use either human rights or public interest as a defence is beyond me. The hypocracy is astounding.

      2. to kane. EXACTLY you’ve hit the nail on the head. this kind of “journalism” is amoral gossip and fear mongering. its a great marketing strategy and i think there’s a place for it in society, right next HEAT and OK magazine. how publications like this are considered a legitimate source of news is beyond me. the fact that so many people read them without a pinch of salt is disheartening.

        i hope the lady the article is based on gets her right to privacy and if she doesn’t id be happy to make a donation to fund a lawsuite.

        1. This is an article about a man, not a lady..

          1. whoops sorry. wasn’t trying to make a point there, was an honest slip of the tongue. and truthfully it is an easy mistake to make when your discussing someone who is giving birth.

    4. Squirrelbot 17 Feb 2012, 5:26am

      oh man every trans dude in the UK should borrow a toddler from a friend, call in to the Sun and claim reward money.

    5. Well, because the UK only very recently included a right to privacy in law, and it is very much in debate quite how it is supposed to work, because parliament provided no details.

      When the press says “we are using normal methods” they are trying to assert that their practises from before this law do not need to change, when clearly they do. But to what extent do we still want a free press?

      Our situation is very much relevant. Its outrageous that we live in fear of a baying press pack and “talk to us or we print smears”, but we need some laws and procedures reforming. And we need a better informed and more at ease public.

  2. Jennie Kermode 16 Feb 2012, 12:33pm

    I wonder why it is considered to be in the public interest if the NHS supports a trans man’s pregnancy but not if it supports a cis woman’s pregnancy, as it does several hundred thousand times a year and often at considerable expense.

    1. DJ Sheepiesheep 16 Feb 2012, 12:48pm

      Exactly. The NHS exists to support people of whatever gender in relation to their medical needs. If the Sun cannot get it’s small minded head round the concept of a pregnant trans man then that’s it’s problem.

      If it wants to be exercised by a pregnancy related story it should turn it’s attention to the plight of the unplanned babies of 14 year old crack addicts, not the story of a properly planned pregnancy.

  3. If it was a private individual acting as The Sun directs its’ employees, they would be dealt with under stalking laws!

    1. UMM There are no stalking laws, just harrassment laws unfortunately

    2. It would be very worthwhile asking why the police do not count this press technique as stalking.

  4. “What if the person also turned out to be a serial killer? There can be no guarantees either way. More likely, if it was NHS funded, that could put a different light on it.”
    – because obviously all transgender people are homicidal deviants stealing from the taxpayers purse to pay for their surgery. The implication here is disgusting..

    1. I doubt the guy from The Sun thought through his comment linking transgender people to serial killers. In a sense that makes his comments all the worse because it speaks of a culture which correlates transgender with extreme criminality and deviancy.

    2. that was the part that got my goat too!
      Would he have added that in if he was talking about a Cabinet Minister or someone else?! Just goes to show they haven’t changed at all!

    3. “What if the person also turned out to be a serial killer? There can be no guarantees either way. ”

      That is the most incredible and mind-boggling ‘argument’ I’ve ever read. I should expect nothing less from The Sun.

  5. I’m not sure where the public interest element is in the story “thing that is biologically able to happen does happen”. We all know that many trans people are able to have children. That is not news.

    It’s not even “thing that doesn’t usually happen has, for unexplained reasons, happened now”, it’s more “thing that people have taken the usual steps to cause to happen has in fact happened”.

    This is just as much a non-story as “Black person eats cake, nutrients digested” or “Overweight person walks dog, feels tired after” or “Old person has hip replacement, mobility improved”.

    1. The problem might arise from the fact that Gender Recognition in the UK is open to cancellation, and it isn’t clear on what grounds. That is the only supposed justification for the permanent maintenance of a complete file of the most intimate details of everyone who has been granted it, together with current contact details, linked to the NHI/Tax/Benefits database. Whereas other countries would never create such a file, and would seal pre-transition records, on privacy and human rights grounds, this UK innovation seems to be the price for pioneering the legal recognition of “gender reassignment” without requiring (or recognising) a change of physical sex (the UK does not legally recognise that sex can be changed).

      So transphobic campaigners could try to have any Gender Recognition of the man in question revoked. The family can certainly not hide from officialdom, so getting the best light on their story in the press might be advantageous.

  6. I can see why a ‘male mother’ is of interest to the press. This transman is a male mother and that is the type of story that the Sun really hypes up.

    1. A couple of years ago some trans men activists were working on getting “mother” redefined as not necessarily female, but I would think most of those involved would prefer “father” to including the bearing of the child.

    2. Paddyswurds 17 Feb 2012, 11:30am

      @dAVID…..sorry to contradict you but this woman
      was no more a man than i am a woman. Simply a woman who’d had a double mastectomy. She can pretend to be a man and drag up but at the end of the day she is a woman. If she were genuine trams she would have been rid of all vestiges of womanhood when she “became a man” If she truly felt in her head that she was a man in the wrong body she would not have been able to abide having any woman parts either on or within her. I expect the usual screaming chorus of “transphobe” for this post but it will not change reality, spoken or unspoken.

      1. Thia Jones 17 Feb 2012, 3:00pm

        The reality is that the reproductive organs someone has is NOT what defines their gender – he’s a man because he identifies as a man, that is simply all there is to it and your failure to grasp this fact does nothing to change it.

        1. Paddyswurds 17 Feb 2012, 3:09pm

          That’s so not what I said …Read the post again moron.
          “If she truly felt in her head that she was a man in the wrong body she would not have been able to abide having any woman parts either on or within her”…… is what I said and I stand by it.
          I did not say they defined the person, but were, in the persons mind, alien and should be removed at any cost.

          1. He is a man because he identifies that way. You have no idea why he has not had a hysterectomy or SRS, and it’s none of your business. It has no bearing on his identity. He is a man and you are cissexist for denying that.

      2. Wow, sorry. I didn’t realise you knew this guy more intimately than he does himself. Presumably you’ve seen his MRI scans and been inside his head from birth, and have a better idea of his gender than he does. Or perhaps you’re just a little obsessed with what’s downstairs than what’s upstairs.

        It is of course true that he has some woman in him. So what? What cis-woman hasn’t a bit of man in her? The difference is that he feels like a guy and she doesn’t. So a reasonable person with even a shred of respect would treat him as he asked, not as their prejudices dictate.

        You’re not transphobic, you’re just being a bit of an idiot, so don’t worry.

        Oh, and yes, I am a girl with a malformed downstairs region, and whatever I decide to do with it is none of your business, thanks.

  7. “Interim Managing Editor David Dinsmore asserted that restrictions on reporting in this case were in danger of shackling the freedom of the press to report.”

    Well maybe you should have thought about that before acting in a totally irresponsible way and misusing the latitude that you’re currently given. If a person starts driving around at 130mph and gets their licence revoked they can’t then complain about being ‘shackled’ to using the bus.

  8. I have to agree with The Sun (I can’t believe said that) based on previous trans “men” that have given birth, he will most likely sell his story to the highest bidder.

    1. All trans people are the same arent they!

      We should just steroetype trans people and jump to conclusions.

      Morality is not an issue for the media, is it?

      Grow up Andy Q

      1. Did this transman approach the Sunday Times to sell his story.

        Did he ask the Beaumont Society to speak to the press on his behalf.

        If the answer to either question is ‘yes’ then he has no right to whine about the Sun snooping about.

        If you make a deal with the devil then don’t act surprised when that decision comes back to bite you.

        1. @dAVID

          I was commenting on Andy Q’s presumptions about (and I quote) “…previous trans “men” that have given birth, he will most likely sell his story to the highest bidder.”

          Your comments about origins of the story have no connection to Andy Q’s prejudices.

          Thank You.

          1. Incorrect I am a huge supporter of the trans community. HOWEVER It does seem he has tried to sell his story which proves my point. Also I have issues with trans men keeping their womb. I have the right to have those issues and of course speak about them.
            It’s a cheap shot to regard this as prejudice.
            The action of this trans person has a reaction…
            It IS in the public interest. Being too left is just as bad as being to right.

        2. @Andy Q

          I call it as I see it. I see you comment as prejudiced and arguably transphobic (you claim otherwise).

          It seems you are also calling the journalism as you see it and presuming that the person this story is connected to has sold the story – when it appears the contrary is the case.

        3. He asked the Beaumont Society for confidential advice, which they then passed onto a journalist from the Sunday Times without permission – get the facts before you judge.

    2. Because you can tell all you need to know about a minority by what is printed in the press right? I’m sure you get a balanced sample that way *facepalm*

    3. Ben Foster 16 Feb 2012, 7:36pm

      If he does, that’s his choice. That’s different to being pursued by the Sun and FORCED into the open.

  9. I hope the latest round of arrests and the public outrage to follow folds the odious bloody rag. The Sun – All the “news” that’s fit to wipe your @rse on. Small minded ignorant cr@p for the knuckle-dragging moron fringe. May the whole damned thing crash and burn.

  10. Vauxhall-Boy 16 Feb 2012, 12:57pm

    I feel so reassured reading this story that The Sun are now beacons of morality and ethical consideration in reporting (for avoidance of doubt – that WAS meant to be sarcastic!).

    Actively seeking out to identify someone who clearly does not wish to be identified and refusing to confirm whether anonymity would be respected or not, demonstrates that The Sun has not changed its culture and needs to learn a great deal about what is both appropriate and ethical.

    Excellent reporting by Pink News whose joiurnalism in this case is far more honourable, thoughtful and considered than the trite comments of The Sun senior management.

    1. “Actively seeking out to identify someone who clearly does not wish to be identified”

      It has not been confirmed how the Times got hold of this story.

      If they acquired the story through the actions of this man then quite clearly he was expecting to be identified.

      1. It wasn’t through the man in question. The Times went fishing and (unfortunately) were given a quote from the Beaumont Society. He’s had nothing to do with it. Hence the hunt to find him.

      2. OrtharRrith 16 Feb 2012, 2:25pm

        The story did not come through the man in question but from another source entirely – the Beaumont Society. The man did not seek to be identified, therefore the Press should not be searching for him and certainly not hounding others and offering a reward – a bounty in point of fact – for information leading to the identity of this man.

  11. How exactly this in the national interest to know this person’s identity. The Sun is a dirty rag and it’s owners should be in jail for hacking.

  12. Sounds like a witch hunt to me. Cause lets face it, they’re hardly going to be kind to him if they do find him. I hope the guy they are looking for can complain to the police and press charges of some kind. And I hope he doesn’t sell his story.

    1. It is only a witch hunt if the story was released without his consent.

      It was the Sunday Times who revealed the story.

      If the pregnant man spoke willingly to them (or instructed the Beaumont Society to speak on his behalf) then he has no right to whine about invasion of privacy.

      It’s like these celebrities who use their children to wh0re out their own careers, but then whine about invasion of privacy.

      If you invite the press into your life then don’t whine when they turn on you.

      Has Pink News checked with the Beaumont Society about how the Times got this story.

      1. essexgirlbecky 16 Feb 2012, 5:00pm

        There has been considerable discussion about this among transgender people in other forums. It has been established that this story was (probably inadvertently) stood up by the Beaumont Society without the knowledge or consent of the individual concerned, who does not want to go public on this. There is much anger about the role the Beaumont Society has played in breaking this story, but it is now time to move on.

  13. So the Times revealed this ‘male mother’ to begin with.

    How did the Times find out about it?

    The Beaumont Society spoke fairly freely to the Times about this man.

    Who authorised them to speak on his behalf,. Was it the male mother?

    If the pregnant man approached the Times to sell his story (or requested the Beaumont Society to speak on his behalf) then there is no reason on earth why he Sun should not pursue this story.

      1. Makes a great deal of sense. Anyone with any experience of working with the reputable press knows the difference between a holding comment, no comment and comment. If the Beaumont Society don’t then they need better media training and awareness and they potentially endanger their ability to safely represent their community.

    1. http://janefae.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/oh-what-a-mess/

      Think that goes some way to giving you the answer.

      jane x

  14. “he thought most trans individuals would already be known to their local communities”

    Most certainly are not – including me – because of the kind of witch-hunts that the press thrives on.

    I believe that their “public interest angle” is some kind of campaign against trans treatment on the NHS, or perhaps compulsory sterilization of trans people. The media should not be allowed to set the agenda in this way.

    1. I agree with Rachel, I’m not “known” to my broader community in which I live niether are several of my trans friends. Is he suggesting that none of us ever pass?? then he has a very negative and dare I say a stereotypical view of trans people.

  15. I hope that the trans person to which this whole story relates does give their story, but just not to The Sun!

    As someone has said the story may be in the public interest and I have to say I would be interested in reading it. However, their right to privacy should far out weigh any attempt to “out” the family concerned.

    It could be that the family do not wish others to know they are trans as we saw with a participant of My Transexual Summer a few months back

  16. unless someones breaking the law or their a public figure engaging in gross hypocracy someones life shouldnt be in the paper! especially not without their consent!

  17. Robert in S. Kensington 16 Feb 2012, 1:29pm

    The Sun is arguably one of the worst if not the worst rag for yellow journalism and not even journalism, like it’s sister the Daily Mail. Disgusting to think this man is imlying even comparing transgender people to serial killers. Why that I wonder?

    1. The Sun is a nasty newspaper for sure.

      BUt how this story got into the public arena has not been revealed,.

      If the transman iniitiated contact with the Sunday Times (or asked the Beaumont Society to do so) then he cannot complain about press intrusion or invasion of privacy.

      If you make a deal with the devil then don’t complain when that decision comes back to bite you.

      1. Wow, reading thru these comments, you’ve posted the exact same thing a million times without reading the replies that completely refute it. If you haven’t got anything new to say, don’t keep saying it!

        ..hold on, dAVID? Are you secretly David Dinsmore?

  18. Helen Wilson 16 Feb 2012, 1:32pm

    No doubt the Sun is seeking to bribe NHS staff to reveal the identity of this guy. A national newspaper is effectively posting virtual wanted posters for a baby and its parents is sickening.

    I shall write to the Leverson inquiry highlighting News Internationals stalking of this family as a example of a out of control press.

    As for the Beaumont Society, I hope PinkNews investigates the treachery of this relic of the past. They have no right to even comment on anything to do with trans men they are nothing to do with the twin-set and pearls Beaumont inc. They are a utter disgrace and can obviously not be trusted.

    1. Who initiated contact with the Sunday Times about this story?

      If this man approached the press (or asked the Beaumont Soclety to do so) then it’s his own fault that they are now pursuing him.

      Actions have consequences.

      1. Who is voting this down?

        I am merely asking how the story got into the public eye (the Times) in the 1st place.

        If it is through the actions of the man himself then he only has himself to blame that the press are trying to track him.

        If he initiated the story, then he only have has himself to blame. Actions have consequences you know.

        1. Presumably people who disagree with you or disagree with your repeatedly saying the same thing, despite the facts being somewhat different.

      2. Helen Wilson 16 Feb 2012, 2:28pm

        Looking around on the trans web it seems someone from the Beaumont Society may of come into knowledge about this guy and passed it onto the press without his permission.

        Its a deeply unethical act.

        1. Helen Wilson 16 Feb 2012, 9:19pm

          Joanna Darrell of the Beaumont Society revealed details of this story she has even boasted on twitter about it.

          “Doing telephone interview with Sunday times today about FTM trans people who have babies – wish me luck !!!!” — Joanna Darrell (@Joannadarrell) February 12, 2012

          I hope she is suitably shunned for her actions.

    2. @Helen

      I shall join you in writing to the Leveson inquiry. It is not acceptable for News International to act in this manner.

      1. Free speech and a free press are important

        1. Free speech and a free press are important.

          They need to have morals and ethics though.

          The Sun clearly don’t.

          Free speech and a free press need to demonstrate that they can act responsibly.

        2. Helen Wilson 16 Feb 2012, 9:43pm

          A free unhindered populous are important too, maybe even more important than the press.

        3. I’m not sure free press and “The Sun” belong in the same sentence …

  19. Once again, the Sun cannot distinguish between “public interest” and “of interest to the public”.

    The only element of the story which is in the public interest is the fact that some people have biological children after transitioning. Many people are ignorant about trans issues, and think that that gender is about genitals and that transitioning always equals surgery.

    Well, the Sun has now told its readers that trans people can have bio children – a fact which has nothing to do with any individual case.

    If the paper wants to investigate further, why not report on NHS support (or lack thereof) for trans people to have children, or give the views of expert researchers?

    But no. They want to track down one individual parent. An interview with him might help some readers grasp the story – it would be of interest to the public – but that does not make it in the public interest.

    The Sun put out an interview request, and were blanked. The paper should now back off.

    1. If however the story got into the public (via the Sunday Times) through the actions of the transman ie if he asked the Beaumont Society to speak to them on his behalf) then he has no right to whine about invasion of privacy.

      How this story got into the public eye is not clear and it is relevant.

  20. am pleased to see the Sun taking this arrogant position.
    It will hopefully lead to some proper legal controls when the enquiry is finished, rather than another watered down voluntary code of practice.

  21. Salacious gossip is not news. It would be good if our press, and our society in general, could move away from this. Other countries, even the Americans, are horrified by our gutter press.

  22. They are illiterate. “In the public interest” means something that could affect the well-being of the public, not something any prurient twirp could want to see on youtube

  23. Anti Widdecombe 16 Feb 2012, 2:04pm

    I’m a “cis man” (i.e. born male) by society’s standards.

    I hate the labels. I wasn’t allowed to accompany my gay “female” friend into a “lesbian” club merely because I’m “male”. Not to mention that “women” get paid less… Who the devil do employers expect to provide the next generation?

    Stupid labels grrr…

  24. From my blog: ‘..being ‘born this way’ and going through the process of transitioning has meant relationships, career and family have been put on-hold. In the ten months I have been injecting testosterone, I am more myself; I feel more stable and less anxious, which means I am somewhat closer to being ready to parent children. It’s a sad fact that as trans-individuals, we have to use what we’ve got. We get creative with our bodies.

    This man should be applauded for putting the creation of a new life above his own personal comfort. He wouldn’t have been able to take testosterone during that time and it also put him at risk from the ignorant masses. He has created life under difficult circumstances indeed. Despite all odds, he has managed to conceive.’

    1. This man should be applauded for putting the creation of a new life above his own personal comfort.

      Why? In this seriously overpopulated world we would do well to get past the antiquated idea that reproduction is the sole or principal purpose of existence.

    2. Do you realise that you are making the Sun’s case for publishing his story?

  25. I read the article and didnt even notice they were trying to find his identity, its shameful that they are really I mean its almost like a witch hunt and in a time when The Suns reputation is at stake you’d have thought they’d have been more clever than do do as such.

    Still its a foolish paper made for ‘proper men’ and Id rather read ‘i’ at least its quick but factual

  26. This is why I contacted the Leverson Inquiry. My submission to the Inquiry spells out this kind of intrusive gutter press activity.

    Anyone can contact the Inquiry!
    http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/contact-us/

  27. Janet Lameck 16 Feb 2012, 5:20pm

    Ancient NEWS! Matt Rice gave borth to his/her son Nlake in oct 1999.
    Thomas Beattie gave birth to HIS/HER third child Susan on June 29 2008

  28. G.C. Astra 16 Feb 2012, 5:23pm

    So that’s how they want to play it do they? Let’s the their game. Before you get outraged, hear me out. Instead of helping them, why not offer a reward on the personal information of every reporter for this company? Since they obviously intend to use the personal information of this private individual who has committed no crime for ill, i’d say it’s fair play in regards of it being “In the interest of the public”.

  29. Craig Denney 16 Feb 2012, 5:53pm

    The legal definition of “in the public interest”

    is:
    The people’s general welfare and well being; something in which the populace as a whole has a stake.

    This story is not in the well being or welfare of the person/s involved and at least the LGBT community has no interest in reading it.

    So it’s ‘not’ in the public interest then?

  30. The private life of a member of the public is in the public interest? Yeah right! You’re just looking for a “sensational” story, and you don’t care who you step on, or what effect your actions will have. Disgusting. They haven’t listen to a word anyone has said. And you wonder why the trans community find it so hard to trust people? We’re not treated like normal people; we’re treated as entertainment. No different from animals in a circus.

  31. Lyn David Thomas 16 Feb 2012, 6:01pm

    There is a difference between the public interest and what the public is interested in. I would suggest the Sun has overstepped the mark – again.

  32. If you hate the sun get rid of sky

    1. The only Sky channel in my house is Sky News because it comes free on the other platform. I don’t watch it though.

      1. Ben Foster 16 Feb 2012, 7:44pm

        i have neither in my home.

  33. jamestoronto 16 Feb 2012, 7:04pm

    “What if the person also turned out to be a serial killer?” What an irrational and illogical leap. Then they should be conducting investigations into EVERY birth that is taking. They are more likely to find their future serial killer amongst them.

  34. Incidentally, where is it you go if you want to email or write to the Leveson inquiry to inform them of this? I’ve got a couple of email addresses from the website but I’m unsure which one is the correct one for this matter. Can someone point me in the right direction? Writing a “stiffly worded letter” in true British fashion right now, lol

  35. The Sun seems to still think that any trans person is a matter of public interest.

    Personally I’d think it would more in the public interest if all the journalists were arrested as a matter of public safety and the paper forced to close, rather than letter Murdoch claim any sort of moral high ground by closing it out of the goodness of his heart, as he did with the News of the World (RIP).

    Just leave trans people along you Sun scumbags and concentrate on your own parlous state of affairs. The national would not miss your pathetic comic. (I do hope at least one Sun journo reads this, but I expect not. But I feel better for writing it).

    1. Oh yes! They ‘will be’ reading the comments.

      1. Sun Journalist read? Christ you’ll expect them to respect private peoples right to privacy next. By the way anyone remember Spitting Image fron the 80’s it’s no coincidence that the puppets used to portray reporters were pigs is it?

    2. ‘Trans Media Watch’ is currently beavering away at getting more journalists interested in publishing T stories, and many more stories seem to be resulting. Their publicity officer has just launched a T magazine, and is trying to become a television presenter. And yet you suggest newspaper should not cover T people? With a free press (which we certainly need) you cannot control how things are reported.

      If coverage is encouraged, media who deal in pictures will look for people, and, as the Sun executive says, they will look for the more extreme story, out on the edge ones. So now the run-of-the-mill late transitioner can no longer repay their debts by selling their story, but the youngest child, the pregnant man, the person who has regrets, or the trans criminal or psychopath will be sought. And the paparazzi, and hacks will compete as hard as necessary to have the first, or most revealing version, because their careers depend upon that totally.

  36. Staircase2 16 Feb 2012, 9:01pm

    God I fooking hate The Sun SOOOOO much!
    They are so bloody stupid.
    And Dominic Mohan is a bloody idiot too…(as have every single other Editor I can think of)
    You’d think after all the lies that have been exposed by the Leveson Enquiry that they would be trying to sort themselves out as opposed to carrying on their stupidity and bigotry as if nothing has happened….

    SHAME ON THEM!

  37. Staircase2 16 Feb 2012, 9:06pm

    “What if the person also turned out to be a serial killer? There can be no guarantees either way. More likely, if it was NHS funded, that could put a different light on it. There is no easy answer.”

    WHAT A BLOODY NUMPTY…
    How did someone this stupid end up getting elevated to that position in the first place? Beggars belief!

    They annoy the SH!T out of me – honestly….(they always have)

  38. In the public interest? It has nothing to do with the public. It has no more to do with us as any other birth.

    I hope this paper goes the way of the News Of The World…to helll!

  39. These people who have just had a baby are now probably sh1tting themselves wondering whether the world’s press is going to show up on their doorstep any minute, instead of enjoying the arrival of their new baby.

    The Sun is beyond contempt. Anyone who buys it is complicit in this vile behaviour and is also beyond contempt.

    In regards to the “public interest” comment, most people could not care less. Those that do need to get a life.

    Why don’t the Sun concentrate on reporting on more important things like the economy and the situation in the middle east etc etc etc.

    1. Those who have sold their stories, and made documentaries about doing the exact same thing have their share of blame to bear in media interest now. And the part of the Beaumont Society seriously needs explaining. The Sun is by no means the only media organisation involved either.

  40. I am a 29 years old lady,mature and beautiful. and now i am seeking a good man who can give me real love, so i got a username josedvilla on — Agelover.СòM —, a nice and free place for younger women and older men,or older women and younger men, to interact with each other.Maybe you wanna check out or tell your friends.

  41. This information is most certainly not in the public interest, it’s in the interest of the public. A massive difference! One is potentially for the common good, the other is to sell newspapers through sensationalised journalism! Contemptible!!

  42. The Sun is a revolting rag.
    Close it down

    1. Spanner1960 17 Feb 2012, 2:28pm

      It always was, but the News of the Screws was despicable.
      The sooner they close these cesspits of sensationalism and get back to true journalistic newspapers, the better.

  43. Jane Fae has stormed in without awareness of the history and subtleties. The Sun does actually have some record of doing very helpful and sensitive coverage of transsexual issues. An example is http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2741447/Lad-aged-14-in-NHS-sex-change-plea.html

    The Sun executive was outrageous in his NHS example, and in asserting that methods are acceptable because they are normal for his newspaper – so was phone hacking at their sister paper. Having lived for a couple of decades in the past myself in fear of tabloid hacks turning up at my door, I witness that techniques must be changed. He is also up a creek equating interest in reading about something to “in the public interest”. But what T stories is Fae suggesting the press should be allowed to cover? Many people – especially children – have suffered in the past from a lack of information in the press, for themselves and their families. Perhaps only those she writes?

    1. Perhaps only those that don’t damage innocent people’s lives? The article you used as an example of the Sun’s ‘sensitivity’ is barely so, with misgendering and only the faintest effort to grasp the facts, and articles even this tolerant are vastly outnumbered by the huge amount of vile, bigoted filth the Sun pumps out on a regular basis- see Trans Media Watch’s submission to the Leveson Inquiry for some more representitive examples, and the negative impacts these have had on the lives of people who’ve done nothing wrong other than being born with a widely recognised medical condition.

      I’d say it was you who was storming “in without awareness of the history and subtleties”..

    2. Helen Wilson 17 Feb 2012, 10:40am

      Try reading the Trans Media Watch submission to the Leveson enquiry and reconsider this post: http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Submission-by-Trans-Media-Watch.pdf

    3. Thia Jones 17 Feb 2012, 3:18pm

      ‘Sensitive’??? You are kidding, right? I don’t have to read past the title contained in the link, to see the oft-used, vile, abusive, deliberately misleading slur ‘sex-change’. Major example of gross insensitivity right there!

  44. Father Ted 17 Feb 2012, 9:38am

    Let’s hope the days of governments being in thrall to the Murdoch empire are over.

  45. Paddyswurds 17 Feb 2012, 11:18am

    It is beginning to look as if we won’t have to worry about this rag for much longer. It may be joining the criminal NOTW in the dustbin of has beens of Fleet Street. ( arrests so far and more to come and the arch crim Murdoch scrambling about try to plug the holes in his crumbling empire, and not before time.
    I have longed for this since the vile Sun came out strongly against the Good Friday Agreement here in Ireland, and I will be first to dance on the grave of this unedifying gossip sheet. Good riddance….Now if only they could find something on Desmond and the Daily Wail…well we can all live in hope.

    1. Paddyswurds 17 Feb 2012, 11:19am

      nine arrests so far **

      1. TEN so far

    2. Spanner1960 18 Feb 2012, 8:44am

      Hmm. It looks like it might be totally the opposite.
      When they shut the NotW down, many claimed they would extend The Sun to Sundays, and News International completely denied it. Now just a few months on, even before the Levinson enquiry has even finished, let alone reported, and “The Sun on Sunday” has been announced.

      Just when you think this company can sink no lower, it reaffirms its depths.

  46. Spanner1960 17 Feb 2012, 2:26pm

    “I’m sorry, I’m not in right now, but if you leave your message on my voicemail, The Sun will get back to you…”

  47. Paddyswurds 17 Feb 2012, 3:33pm

    Just exactly why is this a story on a Gay News site anyway. Isn’t it time the Trans community stood on their own bloody feet. The GLB community is getting lumped in with these people who can’t seem to make up their mind what the hell they want or want to be. If your Trans then be trans. become either a man or a woman, not some in-between freak who wants to have his/her cake etc. Imagine what the poor kid is going to go through growing up. less “I want” and more “can I help” would suit better in these cases
    If you want a child then adopt one of the hundreds of thousands of kids who are languishing in orphanages worldwide.

    1. LGB are kind of natural “bed-fellows”, if you excuse the terminology!

      Transgender rights I support, although I’m not sure LGBT is always a great mix – sometimes we can all support each other but sometimes needs are competing.

    2. Go to the home page of the site. Scroll down to the bottom. Although the brief description is as “gay news site” the bottom of the page gives the full description of the intention of it site – that includes covering not just gay news but lesbian news, bisexual news, AND trans news.

      What is known as homosexuality and transgenderism now were very much intertwined. It’s GLBT history month, perhaps you should swap up.

      As for adoption – if you’re saying that they should adopt just because their trans, why should they when they have the biological ability and desire to use that ability? Because it icks you out? Then you’re as bad as the bigot who calls homosexuality unnatural and claims you’re all paedos.

      1. Paddyswurds 17 Feb 2012, 9:32pm

        @Steven..
        ….”and claims you’re all paedos.”…….says more about you than a book three inches thick. I’m saying that either you are a man or a woman . I have no beef with trans, but Be trans, not some in-between freak who wants it both ways. …. and btw, it so doesn’t “ick” me in the slightest. however I’m sure that it does “ick” those who lump us all together as biological freaks and that is best avoided until the “enlightenment” whenever that happens if ever.

        1. There are more than two genders, but this particular person that is being hounded is a man, pure and simple. I’m sorry that you’re so close-minded and unimaginative that you aren’t able to accept the reality of the diverse world of gender identities and the varied ways people transition.

    3. “Imagine what the poor kid is going to go through growing up.” I imagine that this kid will grow up with loving parents, one or more of which just so happens to be trans. You sound like people who say that children are endangered by LGBQ+ people.

  48. I despise tabloid media. Nothing but hideous people trying to make money off exploitation

  49. People give birth all the time, why the hell is this so exciting? Because the person who popped the kid out uses a different bathroom than the rest of the maternity ward? Holy crap people, we’ve discovered plastic eating fungi and made glow-in-the-dark cats–there’s a hell of a lot more interesting things to talk about than some poor guy’s kid.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all