Slog - Comments on Making Babies Without Men?

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:39:57 -0800

Aww, but that's no fun!

Comment by Y.F.

Y.F. — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:44:38 -0800

Congratulations ladies. But this has been done before...

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040503-629387,00.html

Hmm, I just thought of something...the offspring would all be daughters since neither parent would have an Y chromosome.

Comment by high and bi

high and bi — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:52:39 -0800

this could be done with two guys but you would need a surrogate mother to carry the baby to term (unless we develop an artificial womb or something), if you used two guys you could make sons and daughters.

but not to worry, there are still plenty of breeders out there to have 8 babies apiece and gay/les couples can (hopefully) adopt them instead of making even more babies to overpopulate the planet.

Comment by w7ngman

w7ngman — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:59:03 -0800

*snore*

"the offspring would all be daughters"

I think that's half the point.

Comment by COMTE

COMTE — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:30:03 -0800

Yah, but will they all be super-strong and carry magic lassoes?

Comment by SpookyCat

SpookyCat — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:34:30 -0800

I like to see people have more options. Clearly, once you can make sperm from stem cells, the next step would be to make eggs too. Good for not only the gay folks, but anyone who has defective gonads due to cancer, accidents, and other causes.

It's true that gay men would need an artificial womb as well; however, I see a lot more use to an artificial womb than just for gay males. Pregnancy isn't a lot of fun; and I'd bet that a lot of women (like me) would be quite happy to have the babies in an artificial womb once it was proved safe.

Nursing was fine, we'd need to figure a way to induce lactation without the pregnancy. Being able to just nurse without carrying around a whole pack of stuff made life much easier.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:34:52 -0800

@5: That would depress the market for Amazons, sadly.

Comment by Gitai

Gitai — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:37:42 -0800

Whatever. Even if this becomes a technique that can be commercially performed for under $100,000 a pop, it'll still be a total boutique procedure, and given the small numbers of lesbians vs. the huge numbers of infertile heterosexual couples, I have a feeling no one will bother trying to make it commercially viable.

Comment by yucca flower

yucca flower — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:00:24 -0800

Gay men wouldn't need an artificial womb, they could just outsource the job to India.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-12-30-surrogacy_N.htm

Comment by what what

what what — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:00:55 -0800

Yorick Brown was unavailable for comment.

Comment by Mr. Delicious

Mr. Delicious — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 19:56:52 -0800

Both sexes think the world is better off without the other. However, guys have pre-emptively put their plans into effect.

Comment by raindrop

raindrop — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:14:49 -0800

Hopefully I'll be long dead and buried before this appalling technology matures.

Comment by Big Sven

Big Sven — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:43:36 -0800

Uh oh.

Comment by idaho

idaho — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:34:09 -0800

It's not the latest at all. It's unpublished. Not peer reviewed. COME ON! You might as well pull something off the National Enquirer and say, Oh my! Werewolves exist! Jesus h christ in a handbucket. Stick to art and let Golob cover the science.

Comment by ecce homo

ecce homo — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:43:06 -0800

So all the useless cows wandering around this town with their designer handbags, mini-dogs and pointless lives will now be justified for not being able to have a relationship.

Plus, as Dan knows, and baby looks really cool with matching sunglasses and low cut pants with a thong hanging out.

Way to go whores!!! Now ECB can look forward to having a child.

Comment by Y.F.

Y.F. — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 07:57:24 -0800

"So all the useless cows wandering around this town with their designer handbags, mini-dogs and pointless lives will now be justified for not being able to have a relationship."

You sound a little bitter. Are you sure you're not angry anyone, cow or bull, doesn't want a relationship with you? Because I've got a feeling anyone who meets you probably develops a bad case of "commitment problems" within 5 seconds.

Yeah, Yeah folks. I know we're not supposed to bait the trolls.

Comment by M

Sat, 02 Feb 2008 10:45:48 -0800

I propose ecce for the first male to be impregnated and carry the fetus to term.
A c-section on stage at Key Arena with a laser show, blasting music and human sacrifice (ecce, not the baby)as a grand finale.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 11:16:22 -0800

Now can we get on with the other issue, of men not making babies except when they stop taking their pills / shots / etc.?

Comment by SpookyCat

SpookyCat — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 13:44:49 -0800

Well, there was that interesting article recently about the valve guys could have injected into their vas deferens, if they wanted to they could have the doc send it a radio signal to open, otherwise it'd be shut. It's very new (experimental perhaps?), so only guys who are considering a full vasectomy are candidates for now, the worry is that proteins will build up on it and glue it shut.

With two young sons, I'm happy to see advanced in BC for the guys too.

Comment by ecce homo

ecce homo — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 16:26:41 -0800

Making men into women...awesome.

You guys gonna starting sitting down to take a piss too?