From: D.den Otter (neosapient@geocities.com)
Date: Wed Dec 29 1999 - 09:10:26 MST
----------
> From: Robert J. Bradbury <bradbury@www.aeiveos.com>
> At the risk of provoking a firestorm, I'll poke the ashes of
> the gender differences discussion by asking the men of the
> list -- "How many men would actually want the ability to
> become pregnant and give birth if it were a relatively
> inexpensive and safe medical therapy?"
Hell no! If I wanted any offspring at all (which isn't the case),
I'd wait for the advent of the exo-womb. Who'd want to be
a walking incubator if s/he had the choice?
> If you don't want
> to avail yourself of that "enhancement", then doesn't that to
> some degree imply an inherent bias in how you view women?
Well, though gender-related problems are just a relatively minor
issue compared to the deplorable state of the human condition
as a whole, it *is* pretty obvious that women, being the incubators
and nurturers of the species, have an extra heavy burden to carry.
Both biologically and socially, life is (and not to mention *was* in
ye olde days) much easier for men, IMHO. Being born male is still
a distinct advantage almost anywhere on the planet, even in this
modern day and age. And it's procreation, with its related mental
and physical traits, which is keeping women down.
> Contrast it in your mind with say the enhancement of increased
> height, stronger/faster muscles, etc.
These are true enhancements because they help to empower an
individual. You can never be too strong, too intelligent etc. The
ability to get pregnant, on the other hand, doesn't offer any advantage
to women. Quite on the contrary; it's a handicap which makes them
weak and vulnerable. To burden men with this now (about to become)
obsolete function would be rather silly, and certainly not very
"transhuman".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:13 MST