Why a pregnant man really isn't that weird...

I am a little bit concerned.

I've just read The Accidental Scientist's post about a father and daughter in Australia who have just gone public about their relationship and have a 9 month old healthy baby together (full story on The Guardian). Yep, sick and wrong wrong wrong.

But there's something else that's worrying me. After collecting myself and recovering from the shock and uncontrollable cringing, I realised something far more alarming. I was more shocked by this story than the one about the pregnant man! Does that mean I think incest is more unacceptable than a man being pregnant?!

Clearly both stories are socially unacceptable at this point in time - but why was I less gobsmacked by a man carrying a baby? Surely a man and a woman conceiving a child (even if they are father and daughter) is more natural, and hence a smidge more tolerable? Maybe it's because the pregnant man was once a woman, but never fully got rid of his (her?) female reproductive organs. So 'his' pregnancy is not entirely as unnatural as we might have originally thought - he has a uterus!

Look!


(Pregnant man on Oprah)

The pregnant man who used to be a woman is also married to a woman. But they're not a lesbian couple as the transexual man is legally recognised as a male. Ah my head hurts.

So you see, I should be more shocked by this story. Shouldn't I?

But I'm not. A father and a daughter having a baby together still disturbs me more. Maybe it's because a few years ago, gay and lesbian couples getting married, having babies, changing sex etc were no where near as socially acceptable as they are now. And like The Accidental Scientist says, maybe incestuous relationships are heading in this direction too? They're just not there yet.