Skip to comments.Brave New World: UK ethicist wants women to abandon motherhood, use artificial wombs
Posted on 01/23/2012 12:55:58 PM PST by Morgana
NORWICH, U.K., January 23, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) In remarks that critics have said are disturbingly reminiscent of Aldous Huxleys famous dystopian novel Brave New World, a UK ethicist has argued that since pregnancy causes natural inequality between the sexes, women must be liberated from the burdens and risks of pregnancy through the use of ectogenesis, or artificial wombs.
Pregnancy is a condition that causes pain and suffering, and that affects only women. The fact that men do not have to go through pregnancy to have a genetically related child, whereas women do, is a natural inequality, writes Dr. Anna Smajdor in an article that recently appeared in the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics.
In her Defense of Ectogenesis, published online December, 2011, Smajdor construes pregnancy as a medical problem, along with other conditions that cause pain and suffering. Smajdor is Lecturer in Ethics at the School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice in the University of East Anglia.
If there were a disease that caused symptoms and risks similar to those caused by pregnancy, I contend that it would be regarded as being fairly serious, and that we would have good reasons to try to insure against it, argues Smajdor, who lumps pregnancy along with diseases that continue for many months, such as the measles.
For Smajdor, currently men reap all the benefits of womens gestation, while women bear the risks and burdens.
Accordingly, in Smajdors worldview, women are disadvantaged as a group through brute luck, because men can reproduce without undergoing the risks of pregnancy.
In other words, to be a woman, for Smajdor, simply means to become biologically more like a man. To do this, a womans innate and natural potential to procreate, nurture, and bear a new human life must be stripped away and handed over to science and technology. Only when all human beings do not bear children will a genuine equality be more closely approached, she proposes.
Perhaps not all the dis-benefits of being a woman are attributable to childbearing, acknowledges Smajdor, but alleviating these burdens would surely help.
In Huxleys Brave New World reproduction is taken over entirely by the World State where children are created, decanted and raised in hatcheries and conditioning centres.
For Smajdor, the issue is simply a matter of sex equality: Either we view women as baby carriers who must subjugate their other interests to the well-being of their children or we acknowledge that our social values and level of medical expertise are no longer compatible with natural reproduction, she concludes.
What a freak, clueless hag.
UK ethicist fired for not having a clue regarding the nature of her responsiblities.
Liberals wake up every morning and ask themselves:
“(WWSD?) What would Satan do?”
You know what I want to say to her?
SHUT UP!! SHUT UP!! it comes from the Latin phrase “shut’ meaning “close” and “Up” meaning your mouth you idiot!!!
She should petition the UK govt to file sexual discrimination charges against God...
I am a lecturer and researcher in biomedical ethics. My research interests are focussed on the ethical implications of innovation and research in all areas of the biosciences, including: new reproductive technologies; research ethics and governance; justice and resource allocation. My doctoral research, funded by the Wellcome Trust, was on the ethics of using artificial gametes in reproduction.
In 2010 I obtained funding from the Wellcome Trust to collaborate with film-makers Tom Lloyd and Tim Fleming on the creation of a 20 minute film. 'In Vitro' tells the story of a female scientist who, frustrated by finding her research hampered by regulatory restrictions, fertilises one of her own eggs with sperm manufactured from her bone marrow.
I suspect that she's a rug-muncher, but I can't prove it. She's involved with something called the "Progress Educational Trust" ... looks like a tangled web of abortionists, eugenicists, and socialists.
my wife found it to be a beautiful experience, except during labor of course. then she wanted to kill me.
I felt the same with childbirth. Hated the actual birthing part-—but all else gave such joy and happiness. The process is necessary for the healthy development of a child—even the actually passing through the birth canal is an important element for the lungs.
This woman wants children to be brought up without biological connections—no loving mother and father—exactly like Marx wanted-—he hated the natural family. Without the natural family, children are emotion cripples and have no recourse from fascism. They are easier to make into slaves.
Everything which creates emotions of empathy, love and security in children-—she wants destroyed. She wants inhumane people-—like Charles Manson who never even knew his biological father, and was sodomized because his mother never protected him, creating an inhumane, angry, hateful person.
She wants to create drones for “human beings” so they can be managed and controlled by the Marxist government. Mothers and Fathers are the people who protect their children (usually)-—Orphanages were a source of constant child abuse—creating broken people who were easily manipulated or evil.
Speaking as a woman who has been pregnant and given birth, I would say that men are missing out on the opportunity to do so. Any woman who looks at it like it is a horrid burden - well, I have to question her womanhood. (Note: I am NOT talking about women who have really bad experiences, i.e. preeclampsia.)
Got to be satire. Even moonbat libs aren’t this mentally damaged.
“The proletariat doesn’t understand my genius.”
I can just picture it.
“Either we view women as baby carriers who must subjugate their other interests to the well-being of their children”
I’m sorry but every decent father has to do the same thing.
She? It? is a ‘lecturer’(???) at the University of East Anglia... a place with other questionable pursuits. What a waste of money and oxygen! Close the joint!!! Tell her/it to get a REAL job!
Yes, I caught that as well. At least the global warming fraudsters had actual data to misuse. This critter just seems to make things up as he/she/it goes along.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
Down the road apiece on the Rebellion Against Nature and Nature's Author highway to hell on earth.
Anna Smajdor read Genesis 2:18-25. GOD created Eve to be what the females are caringand loving. You Anna Smajdor are a moron.
She’s creepy & looks evil. The “I vant to suck your blood” kind. Wacko.
There are so many things wrong with this article I don’t even know where to begin. They really, really must HATE being women. The whole process from conception to birth and beyond is just miraculous. Even having been through it so many times myself, it never loses just how amazing it all is.
Dr. Anna Smajdor: Typical Ethics Girl
How quickly does it move from “artificial wombs free you” to “it’s best for the baby” to “it is illegal to reproduce except artificially”?
At which point, parenthood without a license is enforceable. And killing or altering those in artificial wombs without the parents’ knowledge or consent is quite easily managed.
OK, I write sci-fi, so it’s easy to draw from fiction to come up with these ideas. but as a woman, the push for artificial wombs equals a loss of reproductive freedom.
The author is bound to succeed, just as soon as she convinces women to love politics more than babies. Best of luck with that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.