 |
posted by Thomas on Wednesday November 27, @07:57PM
from the News dept.
|
|
|
|
|
With birth control, abortion, artificial insemination, cloning, and ovular merging, women are well on their way to becoming biologically independent of men. This has led to a very real threat of men being reduced to a "manageable," low percentage of the population.
The promise of male birth control, stem cells, and artificial wombs has helped to reestablish a balance of power, in which men would no longer be dependent upon women for reproduction. A missing link in all of this, however, has been the need to obtain eggs from women in order to clone a man or possibly merge the genes of two men into an offspring.
This article (registration required) describes a prospective attempt to create a human-mouse hybrid using stem cells. It seems it might be possible for such a (mostly) mouse to create human egg cells. If that is the case, in principle a man's genes could be inserted into such an egg cell and the resulting embryo carried to term in an artificial womb. If you think things are strange now, just give us humans a few more years.
|
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday November 27, @09:47PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I don't consider it "weirder" that men should have control of their fertility. I consider many of the advances in procreative technology ( which have empowered women ) to be as weird as it can get. I am sure it is possible to produce artificial ovarian tissue from stem cells and thus produce eggs. All the scientific theory is in place which would enable men to produce children of both genders without reference to the female reproductive tract. This is only being held back by modern "ethics" ie feminist ethics. Thus any research that empowers women is "ethical" and vice versa. I would consider an artificial uterus to be a safer environment for the fetus , as it would be safe from tobacco, alcohol, drugs and abortion. "Fertility control" was a slogan of the early feminist movement. The Mens Movement should follow suit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And if they do create such spare human baby parts for us, that would be so exciting...I wonder if a man wants to be pregnant for the first time in history!!!! hehehehehehehehehehehehehe!
Emmanuel Matteer Jnr.
Emanslave@aol.com
*****MASCULISM IS A BLACK MALE'S BEST FRIEND!!!!!*****
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We can only hope that all these technologies become cheaply available before the robots take over and make us all their slaves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday November 28, @01:39PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure about artificial wombs. How do we know that a baby in a real womb does 'not' need that human bond to even come out psychologically "normal". An artificial womb seems like a cold enviroment to start out life in. If fetuses can hear and benefit from things like classical music, and their parents calm voices then maybe their might be unforseen harm caused by not having that 24/7 very intimate closeness of human beings in a real live womb that you can't get in a laboratory. I think it's been shown that living in a stressfull enviroment (like arguing and yelling) within the womb can cause problems, psychological and even physical like having colic. I would just think that it would be too creepy and even abusive to create humans in an artificial sterile womb in some lab. I just don't think that's right. The kind of problems and humans this might create are just too much to experiment with in my simple opinion. Mens rights/womens rights, whatever, what about the babies natural right to have that connection to it's parent inside a womb that nature provided.
I mean, I think it would be way better to find a way to make a womb in a man than a sterile inhuman womb in a lab. That's really weird, and who knows how that could work, but I think it would be better for the baby to be connected to a real human being.
I think this stems from treating babies/children as property or tools. It seems very selfish to me.
That's just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday November 28, @06:01PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Valid points. However, an artificial womb need not be "cold", either physically or psychologically. Furthermore, I hardly think that the unborn child currently has any rights. It doesn't even have the right to live, if the mother so decides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's been the case for as long as humans have been human and before that most of the males could be eliminated without reducing the populations' reproductive potential. It's a just a fact of mammalian biology that males can father more babies than females can carry.
Technology (not reproductive technology) makes it easier to radically reduce the male population by making it easier for the survivors to maintain their living standard in the absence of all that male labor.
cheers,
sd
Those who like this sort of thing
will find this the sort of thing they like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The promise of male birth control, stem cells, and artificial wombs has helped to reestablish a balance of power, in which men would no longer be dependent upon women for reproduction. A missing link in all of this, however, has been the need to obtain eggs from women in order to clone a man or possibly merge the genes of two men into an offspring.
Not necessarily; the eggs of various female mammals might do just as well or even better-- the main issue is the chromosomes.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
