On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Fæ faewik@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