Creating Babies Without Men

[Ostroeuropa]

What is everyone worried about?

Presumably that it'll reduce genetic diversity, which has implications for species survivability.

The entire reason nature selected for two genders is that it increases disease resistance over a number of generations and such, which having a single gene source would undermine.

I'd say it's not really sufficient justification to bar the practice, and at most consumers should be forewarned that their offspring may have a slight disadvantage in immune system terms.

[Tierra Prime]

I was referring to male and female specific genes, such as the SRY gene. If you continually produce females through the method described in the OP, the male genes could be filtered out entirely, which could cause issues. A lack of male genes could cause issues, especially if they are used in females for functions we don't know about. Continually "cloning" children could also lead to genetic problems, including sterility.

So again can you show that a male X chromosome is significantly different from a female X chromosome. In the above scenario it is indeed possible that no more men would be produced (and as far as I am concerned that is not desirable), but I am not sure that would cause a problem. As you responded to me, where I said that cloning was not necessary to allow for female only reproduction I assumed we were no longer talking about cloning...

I'm talking about the Y chromosome. If the genes on it are filtered out, it could cause issues, because those same genes could also be used for other reasons in females. This is assuming I'm understanding how this all works, which is highly unlikely if I'm honest.

[The Serbian Empire]

Well that and the research that allows people to make female sperm and male eggs would also likely allow male sperm and female eggs to also be artificially be created, thus allowing infertile people to have offspring.

Yeh, good news all round.

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

[Tierra Prime]

Well that and the research that allows people to make female sperm and male eggs would also likely allow male sperm and female eggs to also be artificially be created, thus allowing infertile people to have offspring.

That is essentially saying that if someone can't reproduce then you should replace their sex organs or put new ones ontop of them.

That would be great it is was possible.

[Indo-Malaysia]

What is everyone worried about?

This:

This would be a terrible thing to do. Remember what happened to all the Genetically Identical Cuban Banana's? If the majority of population was cloned, and the genetic pool was really small, diseases would spread like wildfire. Cloning should be illegal unless it is for scientific purposes.

Why did nobody notice my post earlier.

[Ostroeuropa]

Yeh, good news all round.

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

I don't see how this could effect transwomen in a relationship with a lesbian. Presumably they would do the typical thing rather than have one partner opt for this measure.

[Neutraligon]

Yeh, good news all round.

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

Then "all" we need to do is allow trans women to have a womb and the associated organs and the such, or we need to create an artificial womb. Womb transplants have already been successful.

[Kelinfort]

What is everyone worried about?

Presumably that it'll reduce genetic diversity, which has implications for species survivability.

The entire reason nature selected for two genders is that it increases disease resistance over a number of generations and such, which having a single gene source would undermine.

I'd say it's not really sufficient justification to bar the practice, and at most consumers should be forewarned that their offspring may have a slight disadvantage in immune system terms.

I'm not worried, the gene pool is massive as it is with 7 billion people.

[The Serbian Empire]

What is everyone worried about?

This:

This would be a terrible thing to do. Remember what happened to all the Genetically Identical Cuban Banana's? If the majority of population was cloned, and the genetic pool was really small, diseases would spread like wildfire. Cloning should be illegal unless it is for scientific purposes.

Why did nobody notice my post earlier.

Technically, this isn't cloning. The odds of two women having identical X chromosomes with the exact same data is a longshot at best.

[Ifreann]

What is everyone worried about?

The rise of the Lesbarchy.

[Ancient Humans]

Yeh, good news all round.

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

I am completely aware this is off topic but I need to be sure and I don't mean to be offensive.

Are you saying you are a Trans-woman only because it was your 'only hope' of dating women? Again, not trying to be offensive.

[Ostroeuropa]

Presumably that it'll reduce genetic diversity, which has implications for species survivability.

The entire reason nature selected for two genders is that it increases disease resistance over a number of generations and such, which having a single gene source would undermine.

I'd say it's not really sufficient justification to bar the practice, and at most consumers should be forewarned that their offspring may have a slight disadvantage in immune system terms.

I'm not worried, the gene pool is massive as it is with 7 billion people.

I agree. We have access to more diversity now than in the past, and if these measures cause a problematic trend in lack of diversity we'll see it coming from generations away and can respond accordingly.

I can only really see it causing problems with multi-generational users of the service.
(As in, 10th generation users may find that the 11th generation has a weak immune system.)
Even breaking the pattern in the middle just once is going to be sufficient to drag it back on track.

[Mike the Progressive]

Well that's no fun.

[The Blaatschapen]

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

I don't see how this could effect transwomen in a relationship with a lesbian. Presumably they would do the typical thing rather than have one partner opt for this measure.

This.

Presumably, a relationship with someone is done for more reasons than just the ability to make kids.

[Neutraligon]

So again can you show that a male X chromosome is significantly different from a female X chromosome. In the above scenario it is indeed possible that no more men would be produced (and as far as I am concerned that is not desirable), but I am not sure that would cause a problem. As you responded to me, where I said that cloning was not necessary to allow for female only reproduction I assumed we were no longer talking about cloning...

I'm talking about the Y chromosome. If the genes on it are filtered out, it could cause issues, because those same genes could also be used for other reasons in females. This is assuming I'm understanding how this all works, which is highly unlikely if I'm honest.

Why would there be a Y chromosome? Women do not have a Y chromosome. They only have two X chromosomes. Thus men having a Y chromosome would not affect women? Right now the egg of a woman always provides a X chromosome. The sperm of the male determines the sex (normally) by providing either an X or a Y. Normally if an X is provided the offspring is female, and if a Y is provided the offspring is male. The scenario I gave would only ever produce females as women have no Y chromosome, but that would be the same as if a male only ever had females offspring because his sperm all had the X chromosome.

[Alvecia]

Could someone help me out here. As far as I can tell, the research in no way allows for two women to have kids, but instead creates embryos that cannot develop into kids.

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 5— In a development that may sidestep some of the ethical issues surrounding stem cell research, a scientist here says he has created stem cells that can turn into nerve cells using a kind of embryo that cannot develop into a baby.

This source and others are the only one I can find and they're all from at most 2001.

Is my Google-fu failing me or is this really 15 year old research?

[The Serbian Empire]

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

Then "all" we need to do is allow trans women to have a womb and the associated organs and the such, or we need to create an artificial womb. Womb transplants have already been successful.

Yet the Montreal Criteria forbid transwomen from ever getting a womb. Artificial wombs are merely theoretical at this time and may be a scientific impossibility. As a result, there's also bioethical issues that would occur with artificial wombs of the same variety utilized by transphobes as to prevent uterine transplants.

[Ostroeuropa]

Then "all" we need to do is allow trans women to have a womb and the associated organs and the such, or we need to create an artificial womb. Womb transplants have already been successful.

Yet the Montreal Criteria forbid transwomen from ever getting a womb. Artificial wombs are merely theoretical at this time and may be a scientific impossibility. As a result, there's also bioethical issues that would occur with artificial wombs of the same variety utilized by transphobes as to prevent uterine transplants.

So we repeal it.

[Neutraligon]

Then "all" we need to do is allow trans women to have a womb and the associated organs and the such, or we need to create an artificial womb. Womb transplants have already been successful.

Yet the Montreal Criteria forbid transwomen from ever getting a womb. Artificial wombs are merely theoretical at this time and may be a scientific impossibility. As a result, there's also bioethical issues that would occur with artificial wombs of the same variety utilized by transphobes as to prevent uterine transplants.

It says it has been proposed, but has it actually been accepted?

[The Serbian Empire]

I see this as a very bad thing for trans women though as they lack the uterus to house a embryo and thus allowing lesbians to create babies without men or trans women means my odds of having children have gone down the drain. Science has taken away my only asset in the dating market towards women. It's good news for most people who have access to a uterus, but transwomen are screwed until one can find a way to make uteruses with the XY chromosome configuration.

I am completely aware this is off topic but I need to be sure and I don't mean to be offensive.

Are you saying you are a Trans-woman only because it was your 'only hope' of dating women? Again, not trying to be offensive.

No, I'm saying I have no chance of reproducing without a cisgender woman as a transwoman. Man X Me =/= babies. Another MtF XMe =/= babies. Only me and a woman can equal babies at this time.

[Platypus Reborn]

There are plenty of orphans out there. I believe adoption would be much better.

[The Serbian Empire]

Yet the Montreal Criteria forbid transwomen from ever getting a womb. Artificial wombs are merely theoretical at this time and may be a scientific impossibility. As a result, there's also bioethical issues that would occur with artificial wombs of the same variety utilized by transphobes as to prevent uterine transplants.

It says it has been proposed, but has it actually been accepted?

I think the fact that we haven't seen a uterine transplant in a transwoman yet implies its' accepted.

[Ancient Humans]

I am completely aware this is off topic but I need to be sure and I don't mean to be offensive.

Are you saying you are a Trans-woman only because it was your 'only hope' of dating women? Again, not trying to be offensive.

No, I'm saying I have no chance of reproducing without a cisgender woman as a transwoman. Man X Me =/= babies. Another MtF XMe =/= babies. Only me and a woman can equal babies at this time.

Arighty, thank you. I apologize if I offended you (I'm pretty sure I have) and I now think I simply read your orignal post incorrectly.

[Novus America]

What is everyone worried about?

This:

This would be a terrible thing to do. Remember what happened to all the Genetically Identical Cuban Banana's? If the majority of population was cloned, and the genetic pool was really small, diseases would spread like wildfire. Cloning should be illegal unless it is for scientific purposes.

Why did nobody notice my post earlier.

This is not cloning.

And Again, why do you assume one lesbian will clone herself billions of times? And that no other humans will be born? Humans are not going to pick one set of genes to go with. Each person would have at most one or two clones.

[Renewed Imperial Germany]

Man X Me =/= babies.

Thanks for reminding me

But I do disagree with the premice that this means you can't find a woman to have a relationship with. Relationships are about much more than just having children.