I don't want to engage in endless political flamewars, so this is my last
email on this list discussing the political substance of surrogacy, I
could, and I could do it with reliable sources, which were not asked in the
first place to justify WMIL statement.
But I don't meant to lobby here, because that's exactly what I'm opposing:
using the WMF and affiliates to lobby for political positions beyond its
mission.
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Mario Gómez <mariogomwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The anti-surrogacy movement may not be anti-LGBT, I basically said
that in my previous email. If you want to lobby against surrogacy,
there is no problem with doing so in the right forum, and as all legal
surrogacies over the last 22 years in Israel have been *100% for
heterosexual couples* as enshrined in the wording of the 1996 act, you
should be lobbying against that existing act, which by definition has
involved not one single same sex couple, so the only legal surrogacy
cases you can possibly discuss and lobby against have nothing to do
with LGBT+ parental rights or access.
As I said, I'm opposed to surrogacy regardless of gender of intended
parents. I'm against legalization of surrogacy, as well as any law
expanding it. This is consequential with the position of considering
surrogacy as exploitation. I understand you do not share this position, but
for those of us who do, what you call non-discrimination, is simply
expanding the population who can exercise a form of human exploitation.
I don't ask you to share my views on surrogacy, and I don't want WMF to
take sides with mine either. I think I have been clear about this from the
start. It was never my intention to speak up against surrogacy in any
Wikimedia venue. But I was not the one who officially brought up the topic,
so I think it is completely reasonable to debate political matters that are
brought up by WMF or its affiliates.
Your actions hijacking a statement by WMIL for LGBT+ equality, are
anti-LGBT+ as was your nasty stereotype of those that dare to speak
openly about LGBT+ equality as being right-wing supporting rich white
men.
This same stereotype has been used against LGBT+
rights discussion my
entire life, long before #fakenews was invented. It is untrue,
insidious, offensive, closes down civil discussion and deliberately
marginalising. I have no doubt that your purpose in being here is not
to help our open knowledge movement but to use any convenient soapbox
to be offensive and disruptive.
I'm really sorry I offended you with this example. I'm completely aware
that this stereotype is used that way, and that's why I compare it to an
equally insidious stereotype that is used against some people defending
women rights. In retrospective, it was not a good way to make my point,
since by no means I want to imply what you interpreted from my words.
Best,
Mario