State support for uterus transplantation (UTx), whether in terms of funding or supporting provision more broadly, has been criticised on expressivist grounds. This chapter explores these criticisms and their focus on the ‘message’ that may (consciously or otherwise) be sent or received through state support for UTx, as well as the broader social harms to which this may contribute. Beginning with an exploration of expressivist critiques and their key features, the chapter then provides an in-depth account of the expressivist argument against public funding for UTx forwarded by Mianna Lotz. This is followed by an exploration of the limits of expressivist arguments given the inevitable opacity of human communication and the concept of reasonable interpretation. The chapter then concludes with a discussion of how it may be possible to satisfy the reproductive preferences of women with Absolute Uterine Factor Infertility (AUFI) while simultaneously remaining sensitive to the inevitable opacity in the meanings that individual and group actions express, thereby reducing the potential for state funding of UTx to cause expressive harm.