Feminists fear the artificial womb because it takes away their power

[LJ_Reloaded]

Long live technology!

http://www.newsweek.com/fetuses-artificial-wombs-medical-marvel-or-misogynist-malpractice-263308

Women no longer give birth in Aldous Huxley’s classic Brave New World. Instead, surgically removed ovaries are fertilized then bred in artificial receptacles. That was all pulled out of Huxley’s imagination with the help of LSD, but he might have accurately predicted our impending brave new future regarding birth.

Transhumanist journalist and scholar Zoltan Istvan wrote on Monday about current concrete developing research in artificial womb technology, called ectogenesis. The practice would allow humans to breed without giving birth in perhaps 20 years, Istvan predicts in his Motherboard column. The term ectogenesis was coined by British scientist J.B.S. Haldane in 1924, a friend and inspiration of Huxley’s who predicted that live human births would make up less than 30 percent of all births by the year 2074.

Reproductive Health and Social Justice’s Soraya Chemaly wrote about developments by two leading scientists in the ectogenesis field. In Japan, Yoshinori Kuwabara of Juntendo University successfully nurtured goat embryos in a machine filled with amniotic fluid, while Helen Hung-Ching Liu, of Cornell University’s Reproductive Endocrine Laboratory at the Center for Reproductive Medicine and Infertility, grew a mouse embryo in an artificial womb in 2003, and kept a human embryo alive for 10 days in 2011.

Current legislation halts research projects involving human embryos after 14 days. So it will be a while—at least a decade, according to Istvan—before ectogenesis research can fully gestate human embryos.

Although it holds the potential to be an efficient and occasionally life-saving procedure, ectogenesis has already sparked debate. Is “human” still applicable if embryos are not technically bred of a human womb? What about “mother”? Istvan notes that the most prevalent philosophical issue driving ectogenesis is that it will shift perceptions of women in society. “Will the feminine mystique be lost by such an artificial process replacing what’s been long a mainstay of the female domain?” he asks.

This question has caused a rift between leading scientists and feminist scholars, who state that ectogenesis “could hand over women’s sacred birthing ability to science.” In her book The Captured Womb: A History of the Medical Care of Pregnant Women, Ann Oakley claims that ectogenesis encourages long-standing misogynistic medical practices appropriating women’s wombs for science’s sake. Ectogenesis is problematic for the socially conservative and religious, too. Journalist and Green Mountain College professor John Nassivera wrote in America, the National Catholic Review that depriving a growing fetus from the intimacy of its mother’s body “is a very serious thing.”

 

[badbabysitter]

the " fear" the feminists shows is something every rational being should

when you can grow a person, it becomes property

it's a slippery slope to slavery

 

[Palamino19]

the " fear" the feminists shows is something every rational being should

when you can grow a person, it becomes property

it's a slippery slope to slavery

Exactly.

 

[ToPleaseHim]

the " fear" the feminists shows is something every rational being should

when you can grow a person, it becomes property

it's a slippery slope to slavery

Yes, this.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

the " fear" the feminists shows is something every rational being should

when you can grow a person, it becomes property

it's a slippery slope to slavery

You forgot one little tiny thing in your hilarious attempt at hysteria:

THE 13TH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION FORBIDS PEOPLE BECOMING ANYONE'S PROPERTY.

And that, folks, is why I always win debates on Lit: you people lack even the most BASIC knowledge of, well, anything.

 

[hashtag45]

I'm a bit confused on this. Unless I misunderstood some of the above posts,
Shouldn't femminists be supporting this?
It offers hope to those who can't carry a pregnancy to full term etc. And it seems to carry fewer complications or ethical issues, as compared to surrogacy.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I'm a bit confused on this. Unless I misunderstood some of the above posts,
Shouldn't femminists be supporting this?
It offers hope to those who can't carry a pregnancy to full term etc. And it seems to carry fewer complications or ethical issues, as compared to surrogacy.

Indeed you are right. Look past this hilariously unfounded "this makes people into property" argument. The real point feminists are making is that this takes control of childbirth away from them and they don't want to lose that power, even while they're whining about how oppressed they are because of their wombs.

With artificial wombs men can just go to an egg bank and have a child without having to go through a woman to do so. Just like women can now have kids without having to deal with a man.

Think about how that damages feminists. Not feminism, but feminists. As long as men have to bust their ass to get a woman to let him impregnate her, feminists have GREAT POWER over men.

If you think about it for a while, you see that artificial wombs upset an apple cart the size of the moon.

 

[badbabysitter]

You forgot one little tiny thing in your hilarious attempt at hysteria:

THE 13TH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION FORBIDS PEOPLE BECOMING ANYONE'S PROPERTY.

And that, folks, is why I always win debates on Lit: you people lack even the most BASIC knowledge of, well, anything.

yeah, because as we all know.. no one ever breaks the law when it comes to labour


and ps, you almost never win debates.. because you typically go into derp mode repeating yourself ad nauseam when called on your bullshit

 

[hashtag45]

I just noticed badbabysitter's signature. How come I haven't noticed it before? Those quotes are so funny.

And, whereas most quotes are in reference to some serious troubling issues,
LMAO… I wonder how LJ is feeling about being chastitized towards the subj. of "doing the dishes"

 

[Pairaclities]

The only men cheering this can't get laid anyway so now they can at least jerk off with purpose.
The rest of us - this means not you LJ - will still enjoy the pussy.
The more of you there are, the more pussy for the rest of us.

 

[hashtag45]

The only men cheering this can't get laid anyway so now they can at least jerk off with purpose.
The rest of us - this means not you LJ - will still enjoy the pussy.
The more of you there are, the more pussy for the rest of us.

Oh boy. Saw your name and I knew there was trouble.
Do you always do a slimey - like in your av?

 

[Pairaclities]

Oh boy. Saw your name and I knew there was trouble.
Do you always do a slimey - like in your av?

And yet, millions with a sense of humour have enjoyed that av.
WTF is your issue?

As far as doing a slimey? You have no idea love

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

and ps, you almost never win debates.. because you typically go into derp mode repeating yourself ad nauseam when called on your bullshit

This, coming from the person who thinks slavery is going to flourish in a country where slavery is fucking illegal. Just because of artificial wombs.

You might as well say that murder happens ergo the laws against murder are invalid.

This is why you and everyone else here lose debates with me - you all knock yourselves out with stupid arguments like what you're putting forth right now.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

I just noticed badbabysitter's signature. How come I haven't noticed it before? Those quotes are so funny.

And, whereas most quotes are in reference to some serious troubling issues,
LMAO… I wonder how LJ is feeling about being chastitized towards the subj. of "doing the dishes"

Nobody effectively chastises me here.

Machines do the dishes now, and I look forward to robots replacing women at the kitchen sink. The automation of household chores has created many huge strides for women's liberation. This will be no different, even though the feminists will scream bloody murder.

The only men cheering this can't get laid anyway so now they can at least jerk off with purpose.
The rest of us - this means not you LJ - will still enjoy the pussy.
The more of you there are, the more pussy for the rest of us.

There's no pussy for mangina tryhards like you, Parasite. There's only this for you:
http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110519033812/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/0/02/Internet_white_knight.gif/500px-Internet_white_knight.gif

 

[badbabysitter]

This, coming from the person who thinks slavery is going to flourish in a country where slavery is fucking illegal. Just because of artificial wombs.

Oh yes, you're right... we live in North America.. and all the things that are illegal are never done...

we certainly dont have human trafficking hear, or sweat shops or illegal labour...

and if this technology did exist there is zero chance it would ever be used for anything even remotely resembling illegal

You might as well say that murder happens ergo the laws against murder are invalid.

Ummmm..... we have laws against murder because it does exist... that's why we have laws against slavery too.. because if we didnt, there would be no reason to not have it..

you're trying to argue that if this technology becomes widespread it wont be used illegally....

that's the ultimate form of Ayn Rand's reality denying vision of the free market magically correcting itself

This is why you and everyone else here lose debates with me - you all knock yourselves out with stupid arguments like what you're putting forth right now.

you keep proving my points.. and yet you declare victory

you're funny

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Oh yes, you're right... we live in North America.. and all the things that are illegal are never done...

we certainly dont have human trafficking hear, or sweat shops or illegal labour...

and if this technology did exist there is zero chance it would ever be used for anything even remotely resembling illegal



Ummmm..... we have laws against murder because it does exist... that's why we have laws against slavery too.. because if we didnt, there would be no reason to not have it..

you're trying to argue that if this technology becomes widespread it wont be used illegally....

No, I'm not. What I am telling you is that artificial wombs are no more of a slippery slope to slavery than kitchen knives are a slippery slope to murder, or the Internet is a slippery slope to pedophilia, or cars are a slippery slope to vehicular manslaughter, or violent video games are a slippery slope to mass shootings.

You have literally lost your mind. Once again you've kicked your own ass up around your ears and booted yourself into crazytown.

 

[Tigersman]

Fertilizing ovaries

Is a pure fallacy because the ovaries can not be fertilized. The ovaries are where the ova forms then is expelled each month for fertilization.

 

[John__1337]

I guess women are angry because it takes attention away from them.

 

[boomslanger]

I'm a bit confused on this. Unless I misunderstood some of the above posts,
Shouldn't femminists be supporting this?
It offers hope to those who can't carry a pregnancy to full term etc. And it seems to carry fewer complications or ethical issues, as compared to surrogacy.[/QUOTE
1. The whole thing regarding the babes thus being born becomes property has been dealt with in detail in the star Trek Next Generation episodes regarding the intelligent an Android named Data. Which is very interesting as artificial intelligence is almost upon us and it is quite possible that the Internet which is linked to millions of fairly powerful computers(getting more powerful as we speak(as I type tho my computer can type what I speak as does I think everyone's who is reading this, couple of years ago that would not be possible. Miscrosoft is now able to address all four cores in my computer To cut it short, networks are getting so fast that there is talk and some implementations of Routers and switching Neuronic pathways to switch data fast enough so the optical fibers shall be ripped off and our computers, about ten times faster than what you have on your desks will be connected to the internet with wires that kind a green inside if you cut 'em I am hoping that the new connection to the Internet is Vegan or our dogs and cats will freak. And with these freaking fast (to us) connection and millions of computers available The possibility of the internet getting self aware is not just a possibility but when that happens and will Humans be able to rein it in or will they still be wrangling over arcane laws? Think about it, the internet connects into the worldwide system of flight scheduling. It Is connected to all sorts of weapons specially nuclear are controlled by computers, the human mind is not quick enough for decision making and executing commands to control a weapon flying three or four times the speed of sound, Disbursing multiple warhead each of which may have been programmed to hit within a 5 Meter CPI (circular Probability of Impact).Common for most nukes. World wide electricity grids connected to the internet, unable to talk to each other because of Fire walling will now be able to do so, the important and life saving systems will and can be controlled by the net. Jeez :skynet" in Terminator would be a calculator compared to what control the internet can have over our planet and how, if it wishes, it can.. Not feeling too great folks, think I shall go to bed and complete the rest somewhere in timey'all Charlie Mike

Cheers
Boom now Doomed

 

[sybarite_1]

Men have to ask if the dishes in the machine are clean even when there's a light next to the word clean on the machine.
If they want to raise a child alone, who will they holler at to ask if the diaper is dirty or not?
Logistics.