Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join   
     Login      Register    

Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Via PayPal




Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view


whats new at ieet
2057: Human Civilization

Moving Forward - Technological Unemployment

Robots will steal your job, but that’s OK: how to survive the economic collapse and be happy

Multi-Tasking

MIT Media Lab’s folding CityCar

‪BMW shows off their semi-autonomous driving system‬

Autonomous Transportation for the Year 2030

Automated Cars: Redux

Russell Blackford: Freedom of Religion

‪Jason Silva on Psychedelic Rapture, Ecstatic Awe‬ and Technology


ieet books

Smart Mice, Not-So-Smart People: An Interesting and Amusing Guide to Bioethics
Author
by Arthur Caplan

From Transgender to Transhuman: A Manifesto On the Freedom Of Form
by Martine Rothblatt

Freedom of Religion and the Secular State
by Russell Blackford

The Olympics: The Basics
by Andy Miah and Beatriz Garcia


comments

Peter Wicks on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Peter Wicks on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Peter Wicks on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Peter Wicks on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Christian Corralejo on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv


IEET > Rights > ReproRights > Life > Innovation > Vision > Bioculture > Fellows > Athena Andreadis

Print Email permalink (2) Comments (1398) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


Equalizer or Terminator?


Athena Andreadis
Athena Andreadis
Sentient Developments

Posted: May 27, 2009

Athena Andreadis is guest-blogging at Sentient Developments this month. Years ago, I saw a short in an animation festival.  It showed earth inhabited by men who happily bopped each other and propagated by laying eggs.  A starship crash interrupted the idyll.  Presaging Battlestar Galactica, the newcomers proved miraculously interfertile with the men who handed them the job of propagation along with all other disagreeable chores.  Things went swimmingly, at least for the men, until a rescue ship arrived.  After the women left, the men were once again free to pursue manly things – until they realized they had forgotten how to lay eggs.

The short was a wry, science-fictional version of the animal wife tale.  But it’s interesting that we can program starships to ricochet from planet to planet and routinely use in vitro fertilization – yet if women want direct genetic descendants, they still have no alternative to pregnancy unless they are rich enough to hire a surrogate, an option burdened with ethical baggage.

Of course, a womb is much more than a warm sac of nutrients.  The endocrine inputs alone would tax a medium-size factory, leaving aside those from the immune system.  The complexities of its function have made an artificial womb remain a distant glimpse and attempts with mammalian embryos still fail at early stages.  Yet cultural politics have been as decisive in this delay as biological challenges: think of the lightning speed with which Japanese officials approved Viagra versus their decades-long ban on oral contraceptives and you get the picture.  And the upheaval brought about by contraception will be a mild breeze compared to the hurricane that will be unleashed if we ever succeed in creating an artificial uterus.  Its repercussions may equal (and possibly reverse) those that accompanied the invention of agriculture.

Prior to agriculture, gatherer-hunters lived semi-nomadic lives in small groups of relatively flat hierarchies.  Family configurations were fluid and quasi-egalitarian and children were few, spaced far apart and collectively raised.  This persisted when the nomads first settled.  The earliest agricultural communities show little social stratification: there are no ostentatious palaces or tombs.  But with the ability to hoard food reserves, dynamics changed – and so did the status of women, now burdened with multiple children and deprived of mobility and the gathering skills and knowledge of their foremothers.  Wombs became commodities and have remained so, with minor fluctuations, ever since.

If we succeed in creating functioning artificial wombs, they will remain luxury options (like surrogate motherhood) until/unless they become relatively cheap.  At that point, it’s virtually certain that they’ll be heavily used for reasons outlined in many analyses elsewhere – primarily the sparing of both mother and child from the health problems associated with pregnancy and birth (1, 2).  And if they’re used, they will have a predictable outcome: all parents will become fathers, biologically, psychologically and, possibly, culturally.

Women will be able to have as many children as men, even multiplets without the severe problems of extreme prematurity now inherent in such a choice.  Additionally, women will not undergo the hormonal changes of pregnancy, which means they will be as much (or as little) emotionally invested in their offspring as men.  And of course cheap working artificial wombs will also mean that women will become biologically redundant.

Having equally invested parents is standard in other species whose offspring have long periods of helplessness – birds are an obvious “nuclear” example, social insects an “extended” one.  Adoptions in humans show that biological connections are not a prerequisite in forming kinship bonds, although adopted and step-children are often treated less well than biological ones.

If we go the friendly route, ending pregnancy may finally usher in true equality between the genders since women will no longer be penalized physically, psychologically, financially and socially for having children: many problems, from autism to bed wetting, will cease being automatically the mother’s responsibility or fault.  Such a change may perhaps allow us to play with alternative family arrangements, from Ursula Le Guin’s Ki’O sedoretu to Poul Anderson’s Rogaviki polyandry.

If we go the other route, women could become extinct as soon as a decade after artificial wombs become widely available, except as trophies or zoo specimens.  Those who think this is unlikely need only to be reminded that there are now regions of China and India where the ratio of boys to girls is two to one, courtesy of sex-selective abortion and infanticide. People may bemoan a potential world without women, but such pious thoughts didn’t stop us from extinguishing countless other species.  Personally, I think that never getting born is preferable to a devalued life.

An all-male culture need not resemble a prison or an army barracks.  Nevertheless, I suspect that such a society will have either slavery or indentured service even if it has advanced technology, as humans seem unable to avoid rank demarcations (although their natural ranking system is not the fixed rigid pyramid of canine bands).  Their romantic Others may be transgendered men, or Wraeththu-like bishōnen boys in a revival of the erastes/eromenos scheme of Periclean Athens.  But like the men in the cartoon short I described earlier, even with artificial wombs these guys will eventually bump into another wall: ovarian stocks.

Like wombs, ova are not passive nurturing chambers.  For one, they select which sperm to let in when the hordes come knocking.  Additionally, beyond transmitting half the nuclear and all the mitochondrial genes, eggs also contain organized spacetime gradients that direct correct formation and epigenetic imprinting of the embryo.  Re-creating this kind of organized cytoplasm makes an artificial womb seem simple by comparison and if there are any trophy women left at that point their fate may be grim.

Wanting to hear another person’s views on this matter, I asked my partner, without any preamble or explanation, “What do you think will happen to women if we create working artificial wombs?”  And he, proving yet again how much he deserves the title of snacho, replied without missing a beat, “Nothing.  Women are the reason men want to get out of bed in the morning.”  I couldn’t help smiling… and I reflected that, as long as even tiny pockets of such people continue to exist, we may get to travel to the stars, after all.


Athena Andreadis served as a fellow of the IEET from 2007 to 2009, and is an Associate Professor of Cell Biology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, and the author of To Seek Out New Life: The Biology of Star Trek.
Print Email permalink (2) Comments (1399) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


COMMENTS


I find it interesting how we often fear the obsolescence of one sex or the other, and how this is always tied to reproduction. Mike Treder wrote here in IEET about it some time ago.
The 1984 Polish sci fi comedy movie Seksmisja ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexmission) saw it from pretty much the same perspective.

Personally I don't think men or women will be redundant unless gender as a whole becomes something we change at will, in which case it will be something all can do. If reproduction gets 'outsourced' to artifical wombs, why would that make women obsolete? If parthenogenesis becomes a possibility, why would that make men obsolete? I have had splendid intellectual, romantic, friendly and erotic connections to both men and women and I see no reason why reproduction technology should lead to a society where either gender's contributions would be less worth.



Lars, we will never be able to change sex quickly even if we can. The easiest way to do it is to start with an intersex hermaphroditic configuration and tilt from there. Even then, it will take a lot longer than the instant changes into werewolves etc shown in film.

In my post I briefly outline several possible outcomes if this particular technology becomes available. I don't regard any as a foregone conclusion -- social and cultural conditions will determine that. However, what is not conjecture but fact is that 1) almost all human activities still posit the male as default, the female as human manqué, 2) women are still tied to reproduction more than men (legally, medically, you name it) and 3) the estimated number of missing girls in India and China is 1% of the entire population of the earth. This shows the intrinsic value placed on the gender at the "grass roots" level, where it counts most.



YOUR COMMENT

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:




Next entry: How to stop global warming. Or not.

Previous entry: Face-to-Face Still Beats Byte-to-Byte

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT 06106 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376