[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Men Are Redundant for Reproduction? So Are Women
posted by Nightmist on Sunday February 10, @02:38PM
from the science dept.
Science This story in the Guardian Unlimited claims that the invention of an artificial womb has become reality. Scientists have created prototypes made out of cells extracted from women's bodies. Embryos successfully attached themselves to the walls of these laboratory wombs and began to grow. However, experiments had to be terminated after a few days to comply with in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) regulations. Interestingly, those concerned with ethics have already scheduled a conference in Oklahoma next week. 'There are going to be real problems,' said organiser Dr Scott Gelfand, of Oklahoma State University. 'Some feminists even say artificial wombs mean men could eliminate women from the planet and still perpetuate our species. That's a bit alarmist. Nevertheless, this subject clearly raises strong feelings.'

Source: Guardian Unlimited [newspaper]

Title: Men redundant? Now we don't need women either

Author: Robin McKie

Date: February 10, 2002

City Bans Clothed Public Erections | Domestic Abuse in Scotland  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by pbmaltzman on Sunday February 10, @03:37PM EST (#1)
(User #554 Info)
Hopefully, there are reasons why men and women need each other that have to do with our large heads (you know, the ones with the brains in them) and not just our small heads.


It's kind of hard to believe that anyone really wants to just get rid of the other sex or have nothing to do with them at all. Even most of the gay people I know have friends of the opposite sex. Sheesh!

Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:2)
by Nightmist (nightmist@mensactivism.org) on Sunday February 10, @03:52PM EST (#2)
(User #187 Info)
I'm curious as to why some believe these lab wombs will "rid the world of women" as well, considering the lab wombs were created from the cells of a woman's body, and a baby *still* needs to be created from an egg.

The only way I can figure women would be eliminated would be if the following two conditions were met:

1) an artificial womb could be created from the cells of a man's body;

2) An egg could be extracted from an animal other than a human female and the chromosomes of said animal ejected to make way for chromosomes from two humans.

Both may already be possible, but it sounds like a helluva effort just to get rid of women. :)
 
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:2)
by frank h on Sunday February 10, @04:07PM EST (#3)
(User #141 Info)
But it MAY be worth it !! :-) (Just kidding, ladies)

Frank H
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by crescentluna (evil_maiden@yahoo.com) on Sunday February 10, @04:25PM EST (#4)
(User #665 Info)
Suuuure, suuuure, Frank.
A friend of mine excitedly told me after her biology class in the near future it would be entirely possible to clone/modify a female embryo and impregnate another female, thus eliminating the need for sperm after a few thousand different embryos were developed [and frozen] to ensure genetic diversity for awhile. But, feminists should be looking at this from a different angle: The aforementioned scenarios prevents the need for men, but doesn't eliminate the danger of birth. Now nobody even has to have any interaction with anyone else, including the fetus, in order to have a child!
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by LadyRivka (abrouty@wells.edu) on Sunday February 10, @06:53PM EST (#6)
(User #552 Info) http://devoted.to/jinzouningen
Wow, they already got started on the artificial wombs! :) COOL!

I think I will write that story about the world with no women. I would willingly kill myself if it meant the world would be peaceful and prosperous. (OK, so it's hyperbole.) I think the all-male society is very intriguing...
"Female men's activist" is not an oxymoron.
Support Payments (Score:1)
by donaldcameron1 (aal@amateuratlarge.com) on Monday February 11, @02:28AM EST (#12)
(User #357 Info) http://www.amateuratlarge.com
So if I have a child and the child is cloned would this mean that I have to pay support for that child too.
Technically a DNA test would "Prove" my paternity.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by Mars on Monday February 11, @04:43PM EST (#16)
(User #73 Info)
But there is a huge difference on which sex is being eliminated: if women were to use advanced technology so that men would be unnecessary for reproduction, men would still be useful to have around so that a random male could be accused of being the father to provide eternal child support payments, in the interest of the child. Someone has to get stuck with the bill, and women and the state most certainly don't want to pay it, no matter what the child's interests are.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by pbmaltzman on Sunday February 10, @06:52PM EST (#5)
(User #554 Info)
I dunno... but a couple of my guy friends have asserted that if it weren't for sex, a lot of men would have nothing to do with women at all. Somehow, I grew up with the notion, even as a woman, that there was more to life than just reproduction, and that women were good for other things as well. *sigh*
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by Smoking Drive (homoascendens@ivillage.com) on Sunday February 10, @07:27PM EST (#7)
(User #565 Info)

I dunno... but a couple of my guy friends have asserted that if it weren't for sex, a lot of men would have nothing to do with women at all. Somehow, I grew up with the notion, even as a woman, that there was more to life than just reproduction, and that women were good for other things as well. *sigh*

Quite likely they are right. There is little intersection of interests between many men and many women. How did the sexes relate before puberty where you went to school? Mostly they pretty stuck to their own territories and activities at mine, with the occasional battle over turf.

Without puberty what would cause this pattern of behavior to change? Arguably it persists in large part into adulthood for many people anyway.

sd


Those who like this sort of thing will find this the sort of thing they like.

Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Monday February 11, @07:19PM EST (#18)
Do you believe in gender separatism? This isn't a troll, just a question. I don't believe in it, but I do think there are some people who would be a lot happier living exclusively among their own gender.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Tuesday February 12, @06:00AM EST (#20)
When it was found that it was possible for two women to conceive a child without needing a man, the press went nuts, and I remember reading several articles in the British press about it; how the future is female, men are of no use anymore, blah blah....including one article that carried a page sized photo of a barechested man standing in a rubbish bin with a pitiful look on his face and on either side of the picture, two women smugly pondered the pros and cons of having men in society....can you believe that??!!

What's the betting that news about these new developments won't get quite the same coverage from TV, radio and columnists as it now means that women may well become useless too? In the majority of the press, I'm sure it will be relegated behind less newsworthy stories.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Wednesday February 13, @03:29PM EST (#22)
I don't personally believe in gender separatism, and I think it's sad that both men and women are now considered useless by so many people. I am interested from a philosophical stance in hearing viewpoints from gender separatists. I always wonder what they think the pros and cons of a one-gender world would be.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by plumber on Sunday February 10, @11:23PM EST (#11)
(User #301 Info)
Somehow, I grew up with the notion, even as a woman, that there was more to life than just reproduction, and that women were good for other things as well.

Some men have so little awareness of their potential that they think that life is just about having sex, which is just a small part of reproduction, to say nothing of life in its fullness. Of course men and women are good for other things as well. We should remind each other of this.

From a man's perspective, this means one should ask for more from a woman than sex. Too many men, it seems to me, accept sex as a good enough offering from a woman. Men should seek more from women, like active and empathetic participation in men's activism discussion forums. ;=)

   
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by pbmaltzman on Monday February 11, @03:33AM EST (#13)
(User #554 Info)
Some men have so little awareness of their potential that they think that life is just about having sex, which is just a small part of reproduction, to say nothing of life in its fullness. Of course men and women are good for other things as well. We should remind each other of this.


Well, I have long liked just hanging out with guys because I found them interesting to talk to, whether or not I was interested in them sexually.


From a man's perspective, this means one should ask for more from a woman than sex. Too many men, it seems to me, accept sex as a good enough offering from a woman. Men should seek more from women, like active and empathetic participation in men's activism discussion forums. ;=)


I won't argue with that. I'm all for men seeking intelligence and good conversation as well as sex. I have always had a hard time (no pun intended) with some men's preferences for bimbos... she may be dumb as a box of rocks, but she looks good, and that's about all that is required or desired by some guys, even when she turns out to be crazy as well (I have an ex-boyfriend with an ex-girlfriend like that--yecch). Beats the shit out of me why that should be so, because I personally can't stand dumb men (or dumb women).


Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by cwfreeman on Sunday February 10, @08:18PM EST (#9)
(User #588 Info)
Getting rid of men? I don't think so who would women get to pay for the little darlings? No and we won't get rid of women either. What I see is that NOW will start a campaign to patten endometrial cells and every baby born in an artificail womb would belong to the feminist collective. Sperm would be collected from all men and the men would be charged with a penis tax that would go dirrectly to the feminist collective and shared with its members. Sort of like a creation dividen. The collective could be called "The Village".
With out the need for sex as a procreation tool, sex will become a pleasurable luxury and therefor can be subjected to a tax. Of course it will be a tax only imposed on men, because we all no that women hate having sex with men, it always was looked at as a chore. The money collected from the sex tax could be used for daycare.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by crescentluna (evil_maiden@yahoo.com) on Sunday February 10, @08:55PM EST (#10)
(User #665 Info)
LOL, I'm going to forward that to some feminist group, you've gone solved the economy for 'em!
But you got it wrong, man, women don't see sex as a chore, it's rape. So the only sex that can commence is homosexual sex, so that should probably be taxed - for men... for, uh, I dunno, 'cause they're evil or something.
Re:Men and Women Redundant? (Score:1)
by wiccid stepparent on Thursday February 21, @07:18PM EST (#23)
(User #490 Info)
This woman finds sex neither a chore, nor rape; it's a prerequisite. Luckily my SO concurs.
Humans will be Redundant (Score:2, Insightful)
by Enthrad on Sunday February 10, @07:30PM EST (#8)
(User #404 Info)
I think we'll find over the next century or two that humans in their entirety will become redundant with advances in robotics, AI and nanotechnology. Humanity is about to become unnecessary - and not by one half of itself.

We'll have to accept that there are "beings" much more capable in probably every way, and enjoy life as a lesser species that is not really needed.

Growing Organs (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Monday February 11, @12:26PM EST (#14)

The real significance of the story is that it helps lay the foundation for being able to grow fetuses, render them mentally dead at an early stage of development, and then harvest fetal tissue and organs for our own medical uses, probably by cloning a patient's own DNA.

I'm all for it since it's not murder to kill a person that never existed since there aren't any abstract human consciousnesses (personalities) inside fetuses.

Of course, you can bet that religious interests would combat that sort of technology to the death, regardless of how many actual lives it might save or improve.


Re:Growing Organs (Score:2)
by frank h on Monday February 11, @03:19PM EST (#15)
(User #141 Info)
People don't seem to like silk flowers as much as the real thing, and I suppose it's because the real thing represents life, complete with its imperfections. Somehow, I think that, if we cheapen life by making living beings nothing more than a set of interchangeable parts, life itself becomes cheap and we run the risk of anhilating the species,not only our own, but many of the living beings on this planet. That would be sad. We've already gone some distance on that tack, with abortion, organ transplants, cloning, and now the artificial womb.

I'm not against forward progress to improve the human condition, but I think we are running into the box where the human condition is no longer human. It's just another technological wonder. Just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD do it. We do all we can to preserve the other species in their natural habitat. We have game preserves and zoos. Where's the "human preserve?"

Frank H
Re:Growing Organs--Christianity cheapens life (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Tuesday February 12, @12:39AM EST (#19)
This "cheapening life" argument is a common, false Christian dogma. The Christians just attach it to things they disagree with without putting up an argument for it. Like the term "pro life" to refer to either forcing people to forego the pleasures of sex or to birth children they do not want, it sounds good but the reality is that anti-abortion is anti-life-and-happiness-on-this-Earth.

Growing and harvesting organs from mindless fetuses would improve people's lives and it would be a sign of just how much we value life because the products of the harvesting would save people's life. In contrast, the Christians' beliefs cheapen life-on-this-Earth because they would prefer for people to die or suffer rather than receive medical treatment. With regards to abortion--they want to sacrifice the lives and well being of actual people to mere multicellular embryos.

In reality, it is Christian mysticism that cheapens life.

Re:Growing Organs--Christianity cheapens life (Score:1)
by crescentluna (evil_maiden@yahoo.com) on Tuesday February 12, @11:48AM EST (#21)
(User #665 Info)
Seems rather difficult to say what actually cheapens life when quality of life is up to opinion.
Didn't women do this to men? (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Monday February 11, @04:46PM EST (#17)
When they announced cloning didn't require sperm didn't women get all over the media saying they don't need men so lets kill them all. I think these very same women are worried cause that has come back to bite them in the ass.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]