Self-Shooting Uterus-Owners: Examining the Selfies of Pregnant Transmen within the Politics of Human Reproduction

  • Aireen Grace T. Andal Ural Federal University, Yekaterinburg, Russia


This work examines how transmen pregnancy is found within the discourse of moralizing and pathologizing reproductive health. Moralization criticizes the “artificial” character of transpregnancy, and pathologization sees transpregnancy as rather “abnormal”. This work analyses these discursive contentions with case of the increasing public visibility of pregnant transmen through selfies. A commonplace reading of these transpregnant selfies can be, on the one hand, extended forms of othering or, on the other hand, emancipation from moralization and pathologization. However, this work argues that the visual display of transpregnant bodies is neither a form of othering nor gaining recognition but rather a suspension to moralization and pathologization of trans-identities. Transmen pregnancy has the character of both disrupting the concept of pregnancy-as-usual and at the same time evokes a very familiar experience of human reproduction. This thus gives transpregnant selfies their liminal character of both abnormal and normal at the same time. Given that transpregnancy is still a new subject for philosophical inquiry, this work hopes to contribute to the literature by surfacing some of transpregnancy’s ethical dimensions when juxtaposed in the cyberspace.

Author Biography

Aireen Grace T. Andal, Ural Federal University, Yekaterinburg, Russia

Aireen Grace T. Andal is a graduate student and junior researcher at the Centre for Comparative Studies of Toleration and Recognition at Ural Federal University. She has a bachelor’s degree in sociology in the University of the Philippines. Her current research interests are in the fields of bioethics, identity politics, international relations and urban spaces. She also serves as a member of the 2019 Editorial Board of Dialogic Pedagogy Journal.


  • Barthes, R. (1981). Camera Lucida. New York, NY: The Noonday Press.

  • Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression. New York, NY: Routledge.

  • Bogdan, R. (1996). The Social Construction of Freaks. In R. G. Thomson (Ed.), Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York & London: New York University Press.

  • Bordo, S. R. (1989). The Body and the Reproduction of Femininity: A Feminist Appropriation of Foucault. In Alison M. Jaggar and Susan R. Bordo (Eds.), Gender/Body/Knowledge: Feminist Reconstructions of Being and Knowing (pp. 13–33). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

  • Burkett, E. (2015, 6 June). What Makes a Woman? The New York Times. Retrieved from

  • Chua, T. H. H., & Chang, L. (2016). Follow Me and Like My Beautiful Selfies: Singapore Teenage Girls’ Engagement in Self-Presentation and Peer Comparison on Social Media. Computers in Human Behaviour, 55, 190–197.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.011

  • Cockerham, W. C. (2012). The Intersection of Life Expectancy and Gender in a Transitional State: The Case of Russia. Sociology of Health & Illness, 34(6), 943–957. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2011.01454.x

  • Coleman, R. (2008). The Becoming of Bodies. Feminist Media Studies, 8(2), 163–179. DOI: 10.1080/14680770801980547

  • Čuš Babič, N, Ropert, T., & Musil, B. (2018). Revealing Faces: Gender and Cultural Differences in Facial Prominence of Selfies. PLoS ONE, 13(10), 1–12. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205893

  • Duggan, M. (2015). Mobile Messaging and Social Media 2015. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from

  • Fancy, D. (2018). Affirmative Freakery, Freaky Methodologies: Circus and Its Bodies Without Organs in Disability Circus. Performance Matters, 4(1-2), 151–162.

  • Foucault, M. (1996). What is Critique? In Schmidt (Ed.), What is Enlightenment? (Kevin Paul Geiman, trans.) (pp. 382–398). Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Garland-Thomson, R. (1997). Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

  • Gillespie, R. (2000). When No Means No: Disbelief, Disregard and Deviance as Discourses of Voluntary Childlessness. Women’s Studies International Forum, 23(2), 223–234.

  • Gillespie, R. (2001). Contextualizing Voluntary Childlessness Within a Postmodern Model of Reproduction: Implications for Health and Social Needs. Critical Social Policy, 21(2), 139–159. DOI: 10.1177/026101830102100201

  • Gerbner, G. (1972). Violence and Television Drama: Trends and Symbolic Functions. In G. A. Comstock & E. Rubenstein (Eds.), Television and Social Behaviour (pp. 28–187). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  • Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

  • Gill, R. (2007). Gender and the Media. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

  • Graham, M., Hill, E., Taket, A., & Shelley, J. (2013). Why are Childless Women Childless? Findings from an Exploratory Study in Victoria, Australia. Journal of Social Inclusion, 4(1), 70–89.

  • Grosz, E. (1996). Intolerable Ambiguity: Freaks as/at the Limit. In R. G. Thomas (Eds.), Freakery: Cultural Spectacles of the Extraordinary Body. New York & London: New York University Press.

  • Hanson, C. (2004). A Cultural History of Pregnancy: Pregnancy, Medicine and Culture, 1750–2000. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Hevey, D. (1992). The Creatures Time Forgot: Photography and Disability Imagery. London: Routledge.

  • Hoffkling, A., Obedin-Maliver, J., & Sevelius, J. (2017). From Erasure to Opportunity: a Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Transgender Men Around Pregnancy and Recommendations for Providers. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 17(Suppl 2), 332. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-017-1491-5

  • Houseknecht, S. K., (1982). Voluntary Childlessness – Toward a Theoretical Integration. Journal of Family Issues, 3, 459–471.

  • Jeffreys, S. (2014). Beauty and Misogyny: Harmful Cultural Practices in the West (2nd edition). New York: Routledge.

  • Kang, M.-E. (1997). The Portrayal of Women’s Images in Magazine Advertisements: Goffman’s Gender Analysis Revisited. Sex Roles, 37, 979–996. DOI: 10.1007/BF02936350

  • Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London, UK: Routledge.

  • Kozinets, R., Gretzel U., & Dinhopl, A. (2017). Self in Art/Self as Art: Museum Selfies as Identity Work. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 731. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00731

  • Leibold, N., & Schwarz, L. M. (2015). The Art of Giving Online Feedback. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 15(1), 34–46.

  • Lindner, D., Tantleff-Dunn, S., & Jentsch, F. (2012). Social Comparison and the “Circle of Objectification”. Sex Roles, 67, 222–235. DOI: 10.1007/s11199-012-0175-x

  • Marwick, A. E. (2015). Instafame: Luxury Selfies in the Attention Economy. Public Culture, 27(175), 137–160. DOI: 10.1215/08992363-2798379

  • McLean, S. A., Paxton, S. J., Wertheim, E. H., & Masters, J. (2015). Photoshopping the Selfie: Self Photo Editing and Photo Investment are Associated with Body Dissatisfaction in Adolescent Girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 48(8), 1132–1140. DOI: 10.1002/eat.22449

  • Mitchell, D. T., & Snyder, S. L. (2000). Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

  • Moore, J. K. (2014). Reconsidering Childfreedom: A Feminist Exploration of Discursive Identity Construction in Childfree Live Journal Communities. Women’s Studies in Communication, 37(2), 158–180. DOI: 10.1080/07491409.2014.909375

  • Morison, T., & Macleod, C. (2015). Men’s Pathways to Parenthood: Silences and Gendered Norms. Cape Town, South Africa: HSRC Press.

  • Mulder, L. B. (2008). The Difference between Punishments and Rewards in Fostering Moral Concerns in Social Decision Making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(6), 1436–1443. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.06.004

  • Nagoshi, J., & Brzuzy, S. (2010). Transgender Theory: Embodying Research and Practice. Affilia, 25(4), 431–443. DOI: 10.1177/0886109910384068

  • Orekh, E., & Bogomiagkova, E. (2017). “Being on Trend”: Selfie as a Social Phenomenon. International Journal of Digital Society, 8(1), 1238–1243.

  • Park, K. (2002). Stigma Management among the Voluntarily Childless. Sociological Perspectives, 45(1), 21–45. DOI: 10.1525/sop.2002.45.1.21

  • Phelan, P. (1993). Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. London, UK: Routledge.

  • Rozin, P. (1999). The Process of Moralization. Psychological Science, 10(3), 218–221. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00139

  • Saltz, J. (2014). Art at Arms’ Length: A History of the Selfie. New York Magazine, 47, 71–75.

  • Schein, C., & Gray, K. (2016). Moralization and Harmification: The Dyadic Loop Explains How the Innocuous Becomes Harmful and Wrong. Psychological Inquiry, 27(1), 62–65. DOI: 10.1080/1047840X.2016.1111121

  • Shapiro, G. (2014). Voluntary Childlessness: A Critical Review of the Literature. Studies in the Maternal, 6(1), 1–15. DOI: 10.16995/sim.9

  • Shildrick, M. (2002). Embodying the Monster: Encounters with the Vulnerable Self. London: Sage.

  • Skidmore, E. (2011). Constructing the “Good Transsexual”: Christine Jorgensen, Whiteness, and Heteronormativity in the Mid-Twentieth-Century Press. Feminist Studies, 37(2), 270–300.

  • Skitka, L. J., Hanson, B. E, Washburn, A. N., & Mueller, A. B. (2018). Moral and Religious Convictions: The Same or Different Things? PloS ONE, 13(6), 1–18. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199311

  • Sorokowski, P., Sorokowska, A., Oleszkiewicz, A., Frackowiak, T., Huk, A., & Pisanski, K. (2015). Selfie Posting Behaviors are Associated with Narcissism among Men. Personality and Individual Differences, 8(5), 123–127. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.004

  • Stritzkea, N., & Scaramuzza, E. (2016). Trans, Intersex, and the Question of Pregnancy: Beyond Repronormative Reproduction. In S. Horlacher (Ed.), Transgender and Intersex: Theoretical, Practical, and Artistic Perspectives (pp. 141–164). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan US. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-349-71325-7_6

  • Stryker, S. (2018). Transgender History. Berkeley: Seal.

  • Stulman-Dennett, A. (1997). Weird and Wonderful: The Dime Museum in America. New York, NY: New York University Press.

  • Schwarz, O. (2010). On Friendship, Boobs and the Logic of the Catalogue: Online Self-Portraits as a Means for the Exchange of Capital. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 16(2), 163–183.

  • Tiidenberg, K., & Cruz, E. G. (2015). Selfies, Image and the Re-Making of the Body. Body & Society, 21(4), 77–102. DOI: 10.1177/1357034X15592465

  • Wilchins, R. A. (2004). Queer Theory, Gender Theory: An Instant Primer. Los Angeles: Alyson.

  • Verlinden, J. (2012). Transgender Bodies and Male Pregnancy: The Ethics of Radical Self-Refashioning. In M. M. Hampf & M. A. Snyder (Eds.), Machine: Bodies, Gender, Technologies (pp. 107–136). Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.

How to Cite
Andal, A. (2019). Self-Shooting Uterus-Owners: Examining the Selfies of Pregnant Transmen within the Politics of Human Reproduction. Changing Societies & Personalities, 3(1), 36-51. doi:10.15826/csp.2019.3.1.059