A Hypothetical Scenario of Future Reproduction

[Skayth]

So, let me put a hypothetical question in your hands. In the distant, or not so distant, future, artificial uteri (plural of uterus) are created. With this creation, population control becomes non-citizen controlled. Why? Because now females now have all there eggs removed at the time of puberty. Men are “milked,” thus taking out equation of natural births. Now, children are not normally born through natural births, rather artificial births.

What it would take away would be pain from the women side of things. As it is, women use birth control to control there cycles and lessen them already. Not only that, it helps them to prevent pregnancy, as it is... “birth control.” Would this induce menopause? Honestly? I would think so, even though would leave a woman's ovaries rather than removing them completely, there still are no eggs. But, with ingeniuity of science, specially by this future I am talking about, a woman should be able to remain fertile till her sixties, if she so wished, and be given her own egg and her partner's semen, to have a natural birth, if she so wishes.

Humans still feel pleasure from sexual intercourse, so it would not take away this pleasurable thing. It would completely cut out all the birth controls (if we have a cure for hiv/aids/stds, otherwise condoms might still be a plus). There would no longer be any sort of debate over the rights of a pregnancy (is it alive? Is it not? Is an Amoeba alive?) to the point it was no longer up to an individual to decide, rather, the human race itself.

Would this take away your right to have children with your partner, if it was artificial? No, not at all. You would still have children through the form of artificial uteri. You would be able to raise your children and everything, like now a days. You just bypass the pregnancy.

It seems like there are only pluses to this. But, here is the thing. A woman, by the time they reached puberty, has around ½ a million eggs, and most modern family, right now, have 3 or less children. Not to mention each healthy adult male, in a single ejaculation, can release between 40 million to 1.2 billion sperm. What happens with all the left overs? Well, they can create population on a hair's notice. Need more soldiers? Need to colonize a future planet? Need a new work force?

A little bit of faq's before you decide to comment positively or negatively to this scenario. Would there be regulations? Of course. Would the world be unified by now? It should be, and not corporation controlled. Why the hell am I even asking this? Well, its a little something I am writing about in a sci fi story, and wanting to see the reaction of your views.

Tell me what you think. And tell me why.

[Deleted]

Against it because lack of ability to consent.

[cityguy193]

Needs to happen to become more efficient as a species. Of course no one will be for it right now, but natural processes, such as reproduction, should be transitioned into a more mechanical and regulated process in order to create the most beneficial outcomes for society as a whole, provided that the government or entity controlling the process is actually working in the benefit of its people.


I would not trust something like the US government with something like this. But imagine in 500 years, when society figures out the best kind of organization that benefits society as a whole, I would be for it if I was born in the future. Population control needs to happen, and nothing is wrong with using an "unnatural means."

Medicine as a whole is unnatural, yet humans practice it en mass. Who ever is against unnatural means for anything is just afraid of new things.

[Blueobelisk]

I'm for population control but not in this unnatural way.

[Skayth]

Against it because lack of ability to consent.

Talking about the removal of the eggs/milking? I can understand that. But the thing is, would you rather waste hundreds of thousands of eggs per person, when they could be used to enhance the human race? When do we take individuality into consideration for the greater numbers? Its basically asking, would you rather kill one person or 500,000 in this instance.

Otherwise, there is still needed for consent for "pregnancy" of both individuals.

Needs to happen to become more efficient as a species.

Though It comes at the cost of consent like mooneye said. It also comes at cost of not knowing all of your offspring.

And since your edit. Yea, that is basically how I see this scenario, and how I am using it.

I'm for population control but not in this unnatural way.

Population control in this way seems more natural. Rather, you do not waste anything, considering. You need a birth? Ok. you dont? Well the eggs are still frozen, and so is the sperm. No waste.

But if you are talking about using rubber condoms, pills, creams, sponges, abortions, and the such vs just having a female lose all of her eggs.... sorta feels more natural the way I suggested it, than our current unnatural ways. Think about that.

I like the part where we're going to use this newly created reproductive efficiency to breed an army to send to die on some pitiful backwater planet.

Lol. Its not about breeding an army to take over planets, rather breeding enough people to colonize a planet and protect it. No matter how advance we become, there are always going to be good humans and bad humans. Its human nature. Plus, if you think we are the only "warmongering" race in the entirety of our own galaxy (not even saying the universe) then you are sadly mistaken. Its like asking if we are alone in the universe, in which any rational scientist will clearly state it is impossible for us to be alone in the universe, or astronimically to the point of basically being impossible, but there is always that fraction of a chance.

[Deleted]

Why do you need 'milking'. There is artifical sperm being researched and created today (if I read it correctly it only reproduces gurls). An all female society could be a good sci-fi way to go. The dying days of males where thier primary utility is physical labour and servitude. Equality is not a rule of nature, natural selection is. Technology and evolution have precluded natural sperm from procreation and the men are slowly being replaced as the gender fades into obsolescence.

[godofslack]

The loss of consent is inexcusable and I strongly disagree with giving any power complete control of reproduction, as it's going to end badly.

[Skayth]

Why do you need 'milking'. There is artifical sperm being researched and created today (if I read it correctly it only reproduces gurls). An all female society could be a good sci-fi way to go. The dying days of males where thier primary utility is physical labour and servitude. Equality is not a rule of nature, natural selection is. Technology and evolution have precluded natural sperm from procreation and the men are slowly being replaced as the gender fades into obsolescence.

You forget though, there are still men. As much as people think, the male gender will not simply vanish. As you state, artificial sperm is basically an egg. Why waste an egg when you can use sperm? Eggs are not able to "mass produced" and have a finite number in each female. While a male has basically infinite sperm, as he reproduces them. While, in the case of lesbians being able to reproduce, in this possible future, yes, an egg would be used from each partner, and would produce offspring.

The loss of consent is inexcusable and I strongly disagree with giving any power complete control of reproduction, as it's going to end badly.

You are talking about todays powers, that simply rely on greed and corruption and power. under a unified world banner, the possibilities are higher than you think. While greed, corruption, and power will never cease to be a thing, as humans are simply humans, and not all humans have the sight to see past their own existence, hopefully by this time, a majority should, and are striving for the simplest thing in the galaxy... 42.

[Underverse]

Pregnancy has not only many health benefits, but also allows the mother to bond with the child. So by getting rid of natural pregnancy, you're doing more than alleviating pain.

Consent, however, I don't think is much of an issue at all here.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do you need 'milking'. There is artifical sperm being researched and created today (if I read it correctly it only reproduces gurls). An all female society could be a good sci-fi way to go. The dying days of males where thier primary utility is physical labour and servitude. Equality is not a rule of nature, natural selection is. Technology and evolution have precluded natural sperm from procreation and the men are slowly being replaced as the gender fades into obsolescence.

Sexual dimorphism grants genetic security. Which is why so many organisms sexually reproduce.

But that aside, I don't really see a reason as to why we should want males to die out anyway. Males and females aren't so different that an entire set of behaviors can be quashed by removing one of the sexes.

[Skayth]

Pregnancy has not only many health benefits, but also allows the mother to bond with the child. So by getting rid of natural pregnancy, you're doing more than alleviating pain.

Consent, however, I don't think is much of an issue at all here.

Then you also have mother's that go batshit crazy post pregnancy.

There are some health benefits to it, yes, but also risks for and during pregnancy. Not to mention possibilities of death, from miscarriages, still births, accidents, and so on. The emotional scaring and such. If we get down to it, you have far more risks than benefits.

Bonding. Its like asking if parents that adopt children. Do they bond with them? yes.

[mvaliz]

I think we'd become Cybermen by that point in time.

"You shall be like us."

[cityguy193]

I'd rather there just be gigantic incentives to not reproduce. Something as simple as a gigantic tax break for single men/women and/or couples above 30 who do not have kids would probably do wonders.

Thats better only in the sense that over time it conditions society to not want to reproduce by themselves.

[vindicatorx]

I don't see the scenario you are describing happening anytime soon. I would personally expect to see something similar to Gattaca where they weed out genetic problems and enhance certain attributes and reintroduce them to the mothers womb.

[dacoolist]

I'm for it, but Bro - damn that's a lot of money instead of using a condom hahah! I've been with my Girl for over Ten Years now, She's never been on birth control, and we are way active - have never had an issue with kids (I don't want kids tbh). Just use a condom when your almost done? #10years

[Skayth]

I think we'd become Cybermen by that point in time.

"You shall be like us."

lol

pretty sure I did not take away your emotions, your bodies, your individuality. I simply took away your ability to completely reproduce to save the finite amount of eggs in order to mass reproduce humanity to the point of spreading out amongst the stars like rabbits, while controlling the population amount on the planet to a selected number, for the amount of resources it able to produce.

Pretty sure Agent Smith called us what we are correctly in our current state.

I don't see the scenario you are describing happening anytime soon. I would personally expect to see something similar to Gattaca where they weed out genetic problems and enhance certain attributes and reintroduce them to the mothers womb.

That is actually something I see being done as well, while using the artificial wombs, which will eventually force evolution upon us.

I'm for it, but Bro - damn that's a lot of money instead of using a condom hahah! I've been with my Girl for over Ten Years now, She's never been on birth control, and we are way active - have never had an issue with kids (I don't want kids tbh). Just use a condom when your almost done? #10years

Actually, it will take alot of money to create the first one. Then everyone after that will get cheaper and cheaper, not to mention more advance as technology advances faster and faster.

So, by the time we have a mass reproduction facility, it will need an update, at least until we get the perfect one. And then, they will be mass produced, and cheap (todays standards of economy, not futures) as it will have all the bugs tested out, will be on a production line of millions to be created. Then also, health care would be free, not the bullshit we have today. Think of an artificial uterus as a computer. In the beginning, computers were expensive as hell for what little they did. Now, they are so inexpensive and do alot of stuff.

[Kaleredar]

So... it's Brave New World, then?


You know, that book was supposed to be a warning, not a guidelines.

[mvaliz]

lol

pretty sure I did not take away your emotions, your bodies, your individuality. I simply took away your ability to completely reproduce to save the finite amount of eggs in order to mass reproduce humanity to the point of spreading out amongst the stars like rabbits, while controlling the population amount on the planet to a selected number, for the amount of resources it able to produce.

Pretty sure Agent Smith called us what we are correctly in our current state.

That's why I said "We'd be Cybermen by that point in time." Meaning before any of what you proposed would happen. :P

[Underverse]

Then you also have mother's that go batshit crazy post pregnancy.

There are some health benefits to it, yes, but also risks for and during pregnancy. Not to mention possibilities of death, from miscarriages, still births, accidents, and so on. The emotional scaring and such. If we get down to it, you have far more risks than benefits.

Bonding. Its like asking if parents that adopt children. Do they bond with them? yes.

You're going to need a much more compelling argument than this to suggest that our mechanism of reproduction is inherently bad for us, and that we should therefore no longer let it happen. Pregnancy leads to a reduction in cancer risk; is the suffering from cancer really less detrimental than a miscarriage? Fewer menstrual cramps, incentives to take care of oneself, improved immunity, etc. While the risk of death with modern medicine is extremely minimal, these benefits benefits the majority of women, if not all women.

Secondarily, you need to examine the cost of replicating an ex vivo reproductive system. The complexity is beyond imagining; you would need to replicate epigenetic and immune system modulations that happen during pregnancy and immediately after birth, not to mention things like flora and antigen access. And we don't even know what the psychological impact of an ex vivo birth could be on the baby itself. But even if we did know everything and were able to replicate it, my point is that the cost would be high. I don't ever see it being more efficient/beneficial to have an artificial system for reproduction.

[Deleted]

Whose property would these children be? Would two individuals with genetic imperfections be able to reproduce without the governments approval? Would we even use our own 'materials' for our own children or could you end up with an African or Asian kid as a white couple and vice versa? Would the government try to enforce racial preservation in form of race quotas having to be filled each year within a newborn population? How about gender? Try to enforce a 50/50 gender population?

Nah, I can already see a million ways the government could fuck us up the ass. I'm gonna say no to this. It's not in their place to have this kind of power.

[Sam the Wiser]

This gotta be one of the worse in the near future scenarios I've ever read.