.

What does this have to do with capitalism?

Good news boys, if we’re willing to use women this way, we can actually do the same for men! This is one unique sexual reproduction horror story that can in theory be inflicted on both sexes!

Pregnancy without a uterus, impossible! You say. But ectopic pregnancies are a thing. We all start out as parasites. As an embryo develops, it looks for a surface of flesh rich in blood vessels to latch onto. The primary function of the uterus is to provide an inner lining that is sort of a “disposable surface.” The inner lining is rich in blood vessels, the ideal environment for a zygote to latch onto and grow from. The embryo can integrate its blood vessels with the uterine lining and thoroughly mess those up. Then after pregnancy the whole inner lining is just sloughed off. That in inelegant terms is the uterus - an organ that produces a nice safe surface for the zygote to latch onto that won’t harm the person carrying the pregnancy.

But, things don’t always go well. If a zygote somehow tears through the uterine wall, then ectopic pregnancy, pregnancy outside the uterus, can result. And this a serious life-threatening medical condition. The fetus as it develops will latch onto not the intended uterine surface, but the vital abdominal organs. Giving “birth” in this case is done surgically, and it’s more akin to cutting out a cancer than a healthy live birth.

But while it hasn’t been tried due to the obvious health risks and huge medical ethics issues, there’s little reason to think that ectopic pregnancies couldn’t be carried in a male admomen. DNA and chromosomes shouldn’t be a barrier. The placenta that the fetus grows is evolved to prevent the fetus from being rejected like a donor organ. It’s not like mothers and infants share their DNA.

So in theory we could use men in vegetative states as one-time use surrogates. There has been research proposed and papers written on the possibility of trans women carrying children via uterine transplant, but this method, deliberate artificial ectopic pregnancy, is in principle a lot simpler. You don’t need to transplant a delicate organ and find a way to carry a pregnancy while taking anti-rejection drugs. You just implant an embryo in the surrogate abdomen and let it go to town. Let it latch in to whatever internal organs it wants. Then after nine months, just cut open and discard the surrogate father.

It wouldn’t be as simple as just implanting an embryo. The pregnant vegetative man would likely need to have his hormone profile monitored and heavily manipulated. But this is easy enough. Testosterone production could be nuked by simple castration, and erogenous estrogen and progesterone could then be introduced as needed before and during the pregnancy. After the pregnancy, it is unlikely the man would survive. So this is a one time deal. But if we’re OK treating people in persistent vegetative states like resources to be exploited, I see no reason to throw out half of our potential surrogate population simply because they happen to be men.

Jesus fucking Christ i want to schedule a hysterectomy and i don’t even have one of those.

One of the benefits of living and working in a liberal society is that stuff like this can get publicly published, discussed and rejected if deemed bad. Under totalitarian regimes that public forum is absent, which is why some of the worst ideas/atrocities of the Soviet Union only came to light years after they had happened (instead of being rejected before they could happen). When it comes to human rights, liberalism > communism, and it’s not even close.

That’s an incredibly expensive bad idea. Dialysis will likely be necessary and the beating heart corpse just kind of slowly breaks down over time with multi system organ failure. 9 months would require a heroic effort at life support. Makes sense it was suggested by a philosopher. She also suggested using male bodies as incubators. Might as well use pigs if you’re going that far. Humerous that the philosopher that suggested it was a woman though.

It is a good thought experiment to gauge where people stand on brain death and personhood too I guess. I obviously think a body with a brain that is dead to the stem is just a corpse. That brain will actually end up liquefying because it is actively necrotizing.

In reality, I also agree with the premise that actual surrogacy is worse. An economic trade where someone rich buys someone else’s health is no different than buying a kidney. So that point they made is absolutely not wrong. Surrogacy should be abolished, though this obviously has no chance of taking it’s place.

What does this have to do with capitalism? Did we just switch from “everything bad is communism” to “everything bad is capitalism”?

Gotta get that birthrate back up somehow, and having an equitable society obviously isn’t an option

we need the original author’s names.

they need to be on a list somewhere for… additional oversight.

just saying you don’t come to this ‘scientific conclusion’ in a vacuum, someone needs to check the rest of their… social circle.

WHAT THE FUCK!

The amount of babies isn’t the issue America, it’s the fact that we can’t afford them.

But like… why babies? We already have way too many of those. We need fewer babies.

If we’re going to delve into some seriously murky ethical water here, why not forcus on something there’s an actual need for, like organ and blood harvesting? And that would double donor pool by including men as poss-- …oh. Oh yeah. That’s why. -_-

Axlotl tanks?