Creating Babies Without Men

[Saiwania]

For me, my relationship preferences are skewed due to my biological nature as I'm almost dead center in the pansexual/bisexual zone. I have said option due to my sexuality being skewed to where I can have what I want and how I need it without depriving myself of having a family.

Well yes, if the sort of sex change we were discussing eventually becomes reality, people could easily change their sex to the opposite given enough money, surgery, and time, and this could include being able to get pregnant (if MtF) or impregnate (if FtM) in the normal way that cisgender and heterosexual people currently do.

[Ifreann]

For me, my relationship preferences are skewed due to my biological nature as I'm almost dead center in the pansexual/bisexual zone. I have said option due to my sexuality being skewed to where I can have what I want and how I need it without depriving myself of having a family.

Well yes, if the sort of sex change we were discussing eventually becomes reality, people could easily change their sex to the opposite given enough money, surgery, and time, and this could include being able to get pregnant (if MtF) or impregnate (if FtM) in the normal way that cisgender and heterosexual people currently do.

And wouldn't that just be terrible?

[The Hobbesian Metaphysician]

Children without a mother and a father would be a tragedy.

Test tube babies would be taken care of the state the ultimate parent.

It wouldn't hurt anyone.

[Ethel mermania]

Children without a mother and a father would be a tragedy.

Test tube babies would be taken care of the state the ultimate parent.

It wouldn't hurt anyone.

This is kind of a threadjack,

But yes it would be aweful. The basis of Love is from the bonds of parenting. The world would be a much more terrible place without love.

[The Hobbesian Metaphysician]

Test tube babies would be taken care of the state the ultimate parent.

It wouldn't hurt anyone.

This is kind of a threadjack,

But yes it would be aweful. The basis of Love is from the bonds of parenting. The world would be a much more terrible place without love.

I was taking the thread title to the logical extreme to be honest.

[Blackwing Coast]

The Japanese have actually fixed the issue with genetic degradation over multiple generations of cloning - they created 25 successive generations of mice without ill effects i.e. they had a normal lifespan.

As for genetic diversity, there has been research in creating sperm from stem cells.

[Ethel mermania]

This is kind of a threadjack,

But yes it would be aweful. The basics of Love is from the bonds of parenting. The world would be a much more terrible place without love.

I was taking the thread title to the logical extreme to be honest.

I got scared.

[Esternial]

The Japanese have actually fixed the issue with genetic degradation over multiple generations of cloning - they created 25 successive generations of mice without ill effects i.e. they had a normal lifespan.

As for genetic diversity, there has been research in creating sperm from stem cells.

Interesting. Do you have a link to that article?

[Maudlandia]

So, uhh, NS, while in a friend's house someone sparked a debate about homosexuality and LGBT marriage and told me that we can now create babies without men.

Searching for it, I have found this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tists.html

It says of the implications about doing so. With the female baby being genetically identical to the mother, one can only think of the genetic consequences about this; "My fear is that, as with cloning, there will be horrific developmental abnormalities and accelerated aging of these embryos. One dreads to think what they may suffer in the name of science." said the article.

More, the article also says that at the extreme end it "could lead to the science fiction nightmare of a female-dominated society where men have little or no role."

What do you think, NS?

Your right, it is possible to have lesbian couple procreate, by taking a stem cell from one of the mother's bone marrow, then modify it into a female sperm cell and then later get the other mom pregnant, making a daughter. A daughter with both genetic traits from two different mothers. It only results in a daughter though. Plus they have tested this experiment on chickens and mice and it probably very likely to work for humans.

[Chessmistress]

It may be due lesbians don't like having sex with males...

But they oddly do like dildos...hmm that gives me an idea.
What if we made a dildo with a chamber to load the "genetic material" into so when you use it it acts like a real penis but you use it with two women.

I cannot know. I'm living as lesbian but I'm bisexual, 2 on the Kinsey Scale: my feelings about such idea cannot be worthy.
I guess my partner, 6 on the Kinsey Scale, wouldn't like so much such idea.

[Lanoraie]

I think, try it, and if it doesn't work out, do it the ole' fashion way.

I've seen feminists advocate for this in order to, and I quote, "breed out the patriarchy". That's modern talk for breeding out the "inferior" Jews. It also denotes the existence of a man to procreating, which if I remember correctly, is something women have been branded for in the past. Kind of hypocritical. And sexist. And awful.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

Dolly the sheep was not a happy creature.
We are not half as smart as we imagine we are in this area.

Wasn't her lifespan shortened by the fact that the cells she was made of came from an old sheep?

[Kraeshia]

So, uhh, NS, while in a friend's house someone sparked a debate about homosexuality and LGBT marriage and told me that we can now create babies without men.

Searching for it, I have found this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tists.html

It says of the implications about doing so. With the female baby being genetically identical to the mother, one can only think of the genetic consequences about this; "My fear is that, as with cloning, there will be horrific developmental abnormalities and accelerated aging of these embryos. One dreads to think what they may suffer in the name of science." said the article.

More, the article also says that at the extreme end it "could lead to the science fiction nightmare of a female-dominated society where men have little or no role."

What do you think, NS?

Good Idea!!! *does not want to think about normal way*
*puke*

[The Nuclear Fist]

I'm fine with this.

[The Black Forrest]

Well yes, if the sort of sex change we were discussing eventually becomes reality, people could easily change their sex to the opposite given enough money, surgery, and time, and this could include being able to get pregnant (if MtF) or impregnate (if FtM) in the normal way that cisgender and heterosexual people currently do.

And wouldn't that just be terrible?

You understood all that?

[The United Colonies of Earth]

For me, my relationship preferences are skewed due to my biological nature as I'm almost dead center in the pansexual/bisexual zone. I have said option due to my sexuality being skewed to where I can have what I want and how I need it without depriving myself of having a family.

Well yes, if the sort of sex change we were discussing eventually becomes reality, people could easily change their sex to the opposite given enough money, surgery, and time, and this could include being able to get pregnant (if MtF) or impregnate (if FtM) in the normal way that cisgender and heterosexual people currently do.

Giggity giggity, giggity goo. You just made my day, mate.

[Tinfect]

So, uhh, NS, while in a friend's house someone sparked a debate about homosexuality and LGBT marriage and told me that we can now create babies without men.

Searching for it, I have found this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tists.html

It says of the implications about doing so. With the female baby being genetically identical to the mother, one can only think of the genetic consequences about this; "My fear is that, as with cloning, there will be horrific developmental abnormalities and accelerated aging of these embryos. One dreads to think what they may suffer in the name of science." said the article.

More, the article also says that at the extreme end it "could lead to the science fiction nightmare of a female-dominated society where men have little or no role."

What do you think, NS?

I think that the guy who wrote the Article has no fucking clue what Cloning actually is.

[Ifreann]

And wouldn't that just be terrible?

You understood all that?

"If science goes too far then trans people will, with sufficient science up in their junk, be able to conceive and (where applicable) gestate a babby post SRS." Apparently this is bad because it will make anti-trans ideologies obsolete.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

You understood all that?

"If science goes too far then trans people will, with sufficient science up in their junk, be able to conceive and (where applicable) gestate a babby post SRS." Apparently this is bad because it will make anti-trans ideologies obsolete.

"dey aint really wut dey sez-"
"Look, they're having children without anyone in the relationship being 46, XX! Isn't that amazi-"
*cries*

[The Nuclear Fist]

So does this all mean we're a step closer to clone troopers?

[Nocturnalis]

So does this all mean we're a step closer to clone troopers?

Literally the only reason I would support this kind of research tbh.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

So does this all mean we're a step closer to clone troopers?

YES!

[Saiwania]

"If science goes too far then trans people will, with sufficient science up in their junk, be able to conceive and (where applicable) gestate a baby post SRS." Apparently this is bad because it will make anti-trans ideologies obsolete.

It would certainly be revolutionary in turning "how things have always worked" on its head and would be difficult for me to comprehend. It would be giving the transsexual community exactly what they want and there would be nothing I could do about it. If someone is now a woman, and there is nothing that distinguishes her as being any different from other women who were born as such; then I must consider them a woman.

What a crazy world it will be if anyone you meet might've changed sex before. If in a relationship with an MtF and aware, I can only walk away thinking they have cooties or to shrug my shoulders and just accept that they were successful in changing their sex, acknowledging that there is no strong and valid reason for me to break things off, if they are now their chosen sex by every conceivable metric.

I must admit though, it would be cool to become the opposite sex for a day, but since the process is long, hard, and with expense, it wouldn't be suitable for people who want temporary experimentation as opposed to a permanent change.

[Alvecia]

So, uhh, NS, while in a friend's house someone sparked a debate about homosexuality and LGBT marriage and told me that we can now create babies without men.

Searching for it, I have found this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tists.html

It says of the implications about doing so. With the female baby being genetically identical to the mother, one can only think of the genetic consequences about this; "My fear is that, as with cloning, there will be horrific developmental abnormalities and accelerated aging of these embryos. One dreads to think what they may suffer in the name of science." said the article.

More, the article also says that at the extreme end it "could lead to the science fiction nightmare of a female-dominated society where men have little or no role."

What do you think, NS?

Your right, it is possible to have lesbian couple procreate, by taking a stem cell from one of the mother's bone marrow, then modify it into a female sperm cell and then later get the other mom pregnant, making a daughter. A daughter with both genetic traits from two different mothers. It only results in a daughter though. Plus they have tested this experiment on chickens and mice and it probably very likely to work for humans.

I feel it should be pointed out that animal studies are stil a looooong way from viable human treatment.

[Zeravsjan]

Am I the only one who thinks this sounds like an excellent idea to further science and improve our society and quality of life for a lot of people? Sure, there will be consequences following experiments but that goes the same for EVERY new major discovery. You cannot learn if you never commit any mistakes. Think of the benefits of this! So many possibilities!