Okay, this I just don't get. She is not a she or a he. She was born a she. She wants to be called a he. It's super-mega-uncool to call her a him.

She gave birth. I think that's kind of creepy, but I've certainly no right to legislate or block what she does with her body, so I'll restrict myself to writing in forums that she kind of creeps me out.

Here is my problem: words mean things. Granted, our definitions aren't always fixed, and if enough people agree a definition can change. But giving birth is a female activity. It is quintessentially female: if men can give birth, then we need to completely redefine what it means to be male and female. OKAY, but then this person insisting on being called a "he" is patently rediculous. She has redefined what being female is.

Why must we call her a him? Why can't we just agree that she has radically redefined what it means to be a woman? She has every right to control her own body, and so had every right to undergo sex reassignment and to have this child. But language is by-definition a communal thing. She has no right to force me to try to think of her as a him than I have a right to force her to think of herself as unable to produce babies.

Frankly, the PC Police are wearing thin on me, a relatively liberal west-coaster.