A Hypothetical Scenario of Future Reproduction

[Velaniz]

Hope I'm gone before this happens. HF with a woman dominated world, where men is only used for their physical strength.

How would this come to pass in OP's scenario?

[Vizardlorde]

I would never allow this my potential children belong to tissue paper and the shower drain/public water& sewage? I will not give them away unless I receive some sort of compensation. If the compensation is tempting I would support it without qualms however

[Velaniz]

His scenario isn't realistic. Artificial sperm is where it's at, and byebye to men.

Artificial sperm aren't necessary beyond lesbian couples wanting to produce a biological offspring. Sperms in general are too immensely abundant to warrant wasting resources harvesting artificial ones. Human-kind also stands to benefit from the presence of males. Males, for whatever reason, also seem to have drastically higher variations in intellectual ability, and this has led to the majority of people responsible for all of society's advances thus far being males. Unless you also neutralized the libido of women, or somehow made them all lesbian, they wouldn't like the lack of men either.

Also, couldn't artificial eggs be produced eventually, too?

[jellmoo]

This, to me, is a summary of biological advantages, which may certainly exist. Maybe this would save lives, offer a better quality of living, and give mankind a bevy of advantages.

The question for me is: What about the societal disadvantages? The loss of bodily control. The impact on the family. The creation of sterility in what has traditionally been a messy but joyful time. Could we as a society adapt to such a drastic change? Can we trust a government that would be more powerful and more controlling than we have ever known? Can we lose a fundamental part of our biological makeup and remain intact?

Part of the problem is that I don't think there is any way to truly know until it happens, and that is a very scary thought. Lining up a series of tangible advantages to go against a series of intangible disadvantages and hope that it works out is one heckuva gamble. Once we take that step, is it even possible to turn back?


A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain

[GennGreymane]

projections show our population leveling off at 10 billion and then likely going down from there.

We may not even need to really do population control since as long as we educate we will not need to. One of the big factors in lowered birth rates is womens education/job prospects.

[Revi]

The day they start removing our ability to reproduce naturally, by force (as it would have to be in your example), is the day i join an armed rebellion.

[Manhands]

So the world is united and government controlled instead of corporate controlled (...whatever that means...guessing it means democracy makes decisions instead of lobbying?), but we've consented to handing over control of reproduction?

This world does not follow organically from ours.

[Velaniz]

The day they start removing our ability to reproduce naturally, by force (as it would have to be in your example), is the day i join an armed rebellion.

You would still be able to reproduce. Arguing for your rights to have it done naturally when a superior system for that is in place wouldn't be well-advised. Doesn't seem like a cause worth dying for, in any case.

[Dezerte]

Would anyone be able to use one of these devices, without any cost or added inconvenience?

[Reeve]

Seems like many people would lose the ability to feel like their baby is theirs.

[Yvaelle]

His scenario isn't realistic. Artificial sperm is where it's at, and byebye to men.

I would be okay with this if women all agreed to genetically engineer themselves to become hot Asari lesbians: I would accept the extinction of men as a necessary step on the road to a galactic empire of space lesbians

[Stir]

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.

The 'why' explanation is not a logical consequence of the artificial uterus. Ergo: The entire question is invalid.

I am in favour of the artificial uterus. Just like I am in favour of sperm donation banks.

I am not in favour of government-controlled reproduction. Controlled reproduction is not the best thing for our species; not if we wish to maintain our individual abilities. Government or corporation doesn't matter; ultimate control over the populace is a bad thing.

[Vizardlorde]

I would be okay with this if women all agreed to genetically engineer themselves to become hot Asari lesbians: I would accept the extinction of men as a necessary step on the road to a galactic empire of space lesbians

Oh yea well that will never come to happen unless the method of execution is crushed pelvis, then we can all die happy.

[OzoAndIndi]

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.

No, because ovaries produce the hormones, lack of eggs would not cause menopause.

Though I imagine they'd be hard to collect it all while leaving the ovaries alone and unharmed.

But, with ingeniuity of science, specially by this future I am talking about, a woman should be able to remain fertile till her sixties

No eggs then no fertility, and whenever menopause does happen, usually 50s, things are not quite the same down there...

Because now females now have all there eggs removed at the time of puberty.

Ohh no no no no no... O.O Like women who are trying to concived in vitro, I assume it would have to be done similarly with a treatment of hormone medications and long needles to the abdomen! Um, no thank you. I'm pretty much horrified by needles as it is. There is no way to make it easy for women. :\

[Skayth]

Would anyone be able to use one of these devices, without any cost or added inconvenience?

Correct. If you have a partner/married/w.e. you will need consent from them to use their genetic material. If you are single, then you get a randomized other genetic material. But, there are no costs, as at this time, health care should be free... Ontop of that, they took your genetic material anyways.

No, because ovaries produce the hormones, lack of eggs would not cause menopause.

Well then natural births would not need help, as eggs would be taken, and you would still be able to produce hormones.

No eggs then no fertility. when ever menopause does happen, usually 50s, things are not quite the same down there.

The fertility is not the eggs, but the hormones, since once a woman hit menopause, then fertility is unable. By the way, I am saying fertility by being able to carry, not the ability to have eggs. Think of it as being a carrier. You are given back your inseminated egg, if you wish for a natural birth.

Ohh no no no no no... O.O Like women who are trying to concived in vitro, I assume it would have to be done similarly with a treatment of hormone medications and long needles to the abdomen! Um, no thank you. I'm pretty much horrified by needles as it is. There is no way to make it easy for women. :\

Nope, not at all, as by this time, its less with needles, and simply a quick procedure where they simply cut you open, take them all out, and then sew you back up (well regenerate your skin as if you have never been cut open) and you would not even have a scar within 10 minutes of the procedure.

[Windfury]

Yeah, I'm sure invasive, non-consensual surgery at puberty will totally not damage people at all.

[Skayth]

Yeah, I'm sure invasive, non-consensual surgery at puberty will totally not damage people at all.

Invasive? Not really. Damaging? Hardly. it sounds like a conservative point of view on such a subject. Non-consensual? yea, but at this point, everyone is doing, and so should you. It is your duty for the Human Race, not yourself, the human race. Selfishness only gets you so far. Conservativeness is not the way of the future, rather causes problems. If the human race is to expand amongst the stars in a great expanse, a mere 10 billion humans would be spread thin. Not only that, humans waste their eggs throughout their entire lives. At most, how many children will you have? 5? 10? Great, you wasted 499990 eggs that the human race could have needed.

At a certain point in time, in our dear future, probably something people hardly think about, as they only think 5-20 years ahead of them, not the next 500 years, the human race will spread out. At this time, every egg will count. Selfishly thinking about ones self over the entirety of a single species shows how humans think now adays. Greed, corruption, power, and the putting ones self before another.

[Xargoth6634]

I'm personally not interested in having kids, so I'm ok with everyone else having to deal with this reproductive BS if it means that I don't have to worry about birth control anymore.

[mmokri]

Edit. deleted.

[Worgoblin]

Okay, I'm in. But only if I can choose who milks me.