Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Do you think men will ever be able to have babies?


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#41
Lily

Lily

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 720 posts
  • LocationBerlin
Don't worry, I am not offended by your statement. I simply think that it is a good idea to analyze, examine, and understand all of the sides of a specific argument/position so that one is fully able to understand it. (As a side note, one can still have an opinion/position on something even if this thing/issue does not personally affect him/her, since to say otherwise would be an ad hominem fallacy.) I'm glad that you were not offended by my argument. Yeah, some men and women are uninterested in fully "exploring" the body and whatnot of the other gender, but some people such as myself (and transgender people, et cetera) are very interested in the fully "exploring" the body of the other biological gender. I don't know about other men who want to be pregnant, but knowing that you and some other women never get and never want to get pregnant isn't something that I'm upset about or something which is hard for me to handle. Everyone should have the right to do whatever he or she wants with his or her body as long as they do not violate anyone else's rights (or the rights that someone else should have*). If you never want to get pregnant, that's perfectly fine with me. After all, it's your body, not mine. I am disappointed that I do not have the ability to be pregnant, though. I am probably willing to endure a lot to get this ability, even a sex change (which, despite the fact that I am not transgender in a strict sense, is actually a very appealing idea to me in the future once trans-women are able to become pregnant and once sex changes and everything that comes with them becomes less risky, troublesome, and burdensome). In addition, I am annoyed by my gender due to the current stupid abortion and child support laws. I don't see why a (straight) man such as myself should automatically risk being forced to pay child support when having sex with a woman, even if the woman promises this man before sex that she will get an abortion and then changes her mind later on and gives birth. Women have an opt-out after s*x (abortion), while men don't even have an opt-out before s*x which allows them to actually have s*x later on. Hopefully male contraception such as RISUG (which, even though they say it is 100% efficient, I fear is more like 99.99% or 99.95% efficient, but still way better than the status quo) will make things fairer for men such as myself in the near future in regards to this. Also, another thing which I strongly like about the female body are the magic female nipples. Even though my own (male) nipples are seductive, they are not nearly as magical as the nipples of a woman such as yourself (if you catch my drift).

As a side note, and I truly apologize if this is offensive, but I think that in gay-friendly countries, gay/lesbian (I know that you dislike this term, but it is the English dictionary term for a woman who likes another woman) and bisexual women "have it better" than straight women, since in my honest opinion women are so much hotter than men, and such women can also please themselves (if you catch my drift) by hearing hot clothes and outfits themselves rather than by having someone else war these hot clothes and outfits.

 

And don't worry--you don't sound naive and/or stupid at all. :)

 

As for this part (the *), an example to what I was referring to is abortion. If one thinks that embryos and fetuses should have legal personhood, then in his/her view it could be morally unjustifiable to for a woman to deny an embryo/fetus the use of her body (at least in most cases) even if this woman genuinely wants to deny this embryo/fetus the use of her body.

 

Yes, I agree with you that current abortion and child support laws are quite unfair for men. In my opinion, both parties should be held fully responsible for their actions, so a woman can't just change her mind and expect the man to support her. That's just not right, in my eyes - if they had agreed on a certain thing beforehand (no child will come out of this, or - we want that child), then it should either be followed - or the woman faces the consequences for her decision. 

 

The problem is that men have, in the end, no say if a woman decides to interupt her pregnancy because she changed her mind, even though he wants that child. That's definitely an issue. Seeing the whole issue from this point of view, it's much more understandable that men would want to have the ability to carry children.

 

Do you think you would find your own nipples so...magical (for a lack of a better term) if they were yours? Isn't the fact that they are not withinin your "reach" (meaning: a part of your bown body) what makes them so attractive and mysterious? I'm just asking - I mean, I understand you all too well (...), but there might be some extra factors to be considered.

 

I don't believe that gay/lesbian/bi (I know it's the right word, I just don't like the ring of it ;) Also, in Germany it's often used derogatorily, so my rejection might stem from that) women have it "better" than straight women.

Your argument is that we have the advantage of being able to fully appreciate the beauty of the female body and the like, but then - that's because we are interested in those things, just like you are. A straight woman will find men much more pleasing and sexy, she'll find the male body incredibly attractive and be content with that. You are straight, and interested in woman, so you think them much more attractive than men, but that doesn't mean that people who have other preferences have it "worse" or anything - they just like something different than you do.

 

Also, what you find attractive in other people, you might don't like when you are wearing it yourself, for example.


"All scientific advancement due to intellegence overcoming, compensating, for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates. Works other way too. Advancement before culture is ready. Disastrous."

There's definitely truth in that...


#42
FutureOfToday

FutureOfToday

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,685 posts
The point I was trying to make is that this should be VERY low on humanity's list of priorities. It's just not as important as so many other issues, and we'd be stupid to waste a lot of time and effort on this when we could be focusing on other more important things that we need to sort out. I'm not completely disregarding the idea, I just think it's a ridiculously petty thing for humanity to try to "achieve".

#43
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth
Yes, I agree with you that current abortion and child support laws are quite unfair for men. In my opinion, both parties should be held fully responsible for their actions, so a woman can't just change her mind and expect the man to support her. That's just not right, in my eyes - if they had agreed on a certain thing beforehand (no child will come out of this, or - we want that child), then it should either be followed - or the woman faces the consequences for her decision. 

 

The problem is that men have, in the end, no say if a woman decides to interrupt her pregnancy because she changed her mind, even though he wants that child. That's definitely an issue. Seeing the whole issue from this point of view, it's much more understandable that men would want to have the ability to carry children.

 

Do you think you would find your own nipples so...magical (for a lack of a better term) if they were yours? Isn't the fact that they are not within your "reach" (meaning: a part of your own body) what makes them so attractive and mysterious? I'm just asking - I mean, I understand you all too well (...), but there might be some extra factors to be considered.

 

I don't believe that gay/lesbian/bi (I know it's the right word, I just don't like the ring of it ;) Also, in Germany it's often used derogatorily, so my rejection might stem from that) women have it "better" than straight women.

Your argument is that we have the advantage of being able to fully appreciate the beauty of the female body and the like, but then - that's because we are interested in those things, just like you are. A straight woman will find men much more pleasing and sexy, she'll find the male body incredibly attractive and be content with that. You are straight, and interested in woman, so you think them much more attractive than men, but that doesn't mean that people who have other preferences have it "worse" or anything - they just like something different than you do.

 

Also, what you find attractive in other people, you might don't like when you are wearing it yourself, for example.

Technically speaking, the man is not supporting her, but supporting the child, but Yes, the reason that this child exists in the first place was because the woman decided to go through with her pregnancy and give birth to this child. Had she decided differently, this child wouldn't exist right now. Yeah, I am extremely annoyed when people get extremely outraged if someone tells a woman to keep her legs closed and yet have no problem telling men to keep it in their pants. I am also extremely annoyed and tired of people who say that a woman should never (or almost never) be judged for getting an abortion but have no problem with judging men (even male victims of rape) for not paying or not wanting to pay child support. In regards to preventing women from getting abortions without the consent of the child's father, the problem with that is that there would be a lot of hurdles which one would need to overcome in order to implement such a proposal into law. These hurdles would probably not be worth it for many people.* However, a legal contract proposal for allowing men to opt-out of paying child support which the man and woman both sign before they have s*x is a very enforceable option. I'm not sure if such a proposal would ever get implemented (currently, in the U.S., even male victims of rape* are often/sometimes ordered by stupid courts to pay child support), but this proposal makes a lot of sense and would probably get a fair amount or even a lot of support from the people if more people actually become aware of it and think about it. In regards to nipples, magical is a euphemism for arous*ng. Basically, much more women than men are able to get arous*d and t*rned on by rubb*ng their nipples and whatnot. I'm not able to get arous*d by rubbing my own nipples as a man, and I don't really get aroused when I rub the nipples of another woman while I am still a man. In regards to lesbians (and gay men), they also have the advantage of having as much pleas*re as they want with each other without the risk of pregnancy. As for me being aroused by what I wear myself, back when I was a little kid I occasionally (once or twice) wore
short(ish) shorts and knee socks and got pretty aroused when I was wearing them. However, I eventually felt and realized that it is awkward and out of place for males to wear such clothes, especially due to all of their body and facial hair. If I ever get a sex change in the future, I thus see no reason why I wouldn't be aroused (again) in wearing short shorts and knee socks, especially if I will now be a woman. Honestly, I think that my body (once I fully get in shape, literally get all of the hair on my body with the exception of on top of my head, and get facial feminization surgery) removed could be quite attractive as a female body. My arms and legs are of the size which I find attractive for female arms and legs, and I already have a somewhat feminine face for a male when I am shaved (shaven?) in my honest opinion.

*I can elaborate on this if you want me to.
*Rape includes statutory rape, since people who are victims of statutory rape de jure cannot consent, even if they de facto consented.


Edited by Futurist, 04 July 2013 - 05:57 AM.


#44
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth
The point I was trying to make is that this should be VERY low on humanity's list of priorities. It's just not as important as so many other issues, and we'd be stupid to waste a lot of time and effort on this when we could be focusing on other more important things that we need to sort out. I'm not completely disregarding the idea, I just think it's a ridiculously petty thing for humanity to try to "achieve".

I agree that there are other priorities that we should focus on first, but I think that this is something which will eventually need to be addressed, both to help transgender people (and myself) to fully become the other biological gender like they want to, and to learn more about how we can manipulate and change the human male body.



#45
RayMC

RayMC

    F̷̲̅ᴜ̷̲̅ᴛ̷̲̅ᴜ̷̲̅ʀ̷̲̅ᴇ̷̲̅

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 262 posts

So I am guessing you think treatments that allow sterile woman to get pregnant is also pointless too? Since the technology that allows for this would likely help in that area as well. One could say that going to the moon was unnecessary, unnatural, and dangerous yet we did it any way. The reason why, is  because if there is something that we want to do, we should do it. It is going to happen, in time, I am pretty sure about that. Humans are curious and as our knowledge expands we are going to do stuff like that, for no other reason than because we can and it will be a good thing. I am not sure how you can say it is pointless. If it makes even a single person happy, then it worth doing.

This technology is pointless and you cant compare it with going to the moon or even on orbit for that matter. See , the differences between this idea and space flight are huge. If humanity ever masters space flight than just imagine the possibilities. They are almost infinite. So many habitable planets and lets not forget the resources. There are million to billion asteroids on the solar system alone, which , if mined would make everything like 99.9% cheaper because of plentiful resources. Even the moon has some small deposits of helium-3 which may be used on fusion power plants to power everything for centuries to come.While space flight/exploration/mining gives us so many advantages, what does man pregnancy actually gives us? I can't think of a thing.SO with that said, my proposal is for humanity to ditch this idea and continue research on important technologies like fixing the energy issue, global warming, curing diseases, anti aging, poverty, food&water, space exploration and anything space related,and many other things.

“Wʜᴀᴛ ɪs ɴᴏᴡ ᴘʀᴏᴠᴇᴅ, ᴡᴀs ᴏɴᴄᴇ ᴏɴʟʏ ɪᴍᴀɢɪɴᴇᴅ.” - Wɪʟʟɪᴀᴍ Bʟᴀᴋᴇ


#46
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

So I am guessing you think treatments that allow sterile woman to get pregnant is also pointless too? Since the technology that allows for this would likely help in that area as well. One could say that going to the moon was unnecessary, unnatural, and dangerous yet we did it any way. The reason why, is  because if there is something that we want to do, we should do it. It is going to happen, in time, I am pretty sure about that. Humans are curious and as our knowledge expands we are going to do stuff like that, for no other reason than because we can and it will be a good thing.    I am not sure how you can say it is pointless. If it makes even a single person happy, then it worth doing.

1. This technology is pointless and you cant compare it with going to the moon or even on orbit for that matter. See , the differences between this idea and space flight are huge. If humanity ever masters space flight than just imagine the possibilities. They are almost infinite. So many habitable planets and lets not forget the resources. There are million to billion asteroids on the solar system alone, which , if mined would make everything like 99.9% cheaper because of plentiful resources. Even the moon has some small deposits of helium-3 which may be used on fusion power plants to power everything for centuries to come. 2. While space flight/exploration/mining gives us so many advantages, what does man pregnancy actually gives us? I can't think of a thing. 3. SO with that said, my proposal is for humanity to ditch this idea and continue research on important technologies like fixing the energy issue, global warming, curing diseases, anti aging, poverty, food&water, space exploration and anything space related,and many other things.

1. This technology could make some people much happier. Sure, it's not the same as going to the Moon, but by that rationale neither are sex changes, but people still study how to do them and make them available for people who really want them (despite these people probably being 0.1% or less of the total population). And actually, I support making space flight a much higher priority than making biological men (or former biological men) pregnant.

 

2. See my point #1, and also it could potentially allow us to determine how the human body works and how we can change it. Some people here have talked about turning humans into cyborgs and dramatically enhancing humans, and a lot of research needs to be done on this, and male pregnancy and help to do this research. 3. I'm cool with putting this issue on the "back burner," but I'd love to see you tell some trans-women and trans-girls that this idea should be permanently ditched.  


Edited by Futurist, 07 July 2013 - 07:47 AM.


#47
Alric

Alric

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,065 posts

We learned a lot going to the moon and we would learn a lot in the area of biotechnology if we were to do this. Mastering our own bodies with biotechnology is what is likely to eventually lead us to immortality, one of the greatest accomplishments we could achieve. 



#48
StanleyAlexander

StanleyAlexander

    Saturn, the Bringer of Old Age

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 975 posts
  • LocationPortland, Oregon, USA, Earth, 2063

Humanity doesn't pick and choose what to work on.  Individuals may enjoy free will; our species as a whole does not.

 

That said, the individual is becoming more and more enabled to shape his or her reality, and this trend will only continue.  If there's a will to do it, it will eventually be done.


Humanity's destiny is infinity

#49
tw88

tw88

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 304 posts
  • Locationeugene oregon
They have already successfully used gene therapy to cause mice to develop sexual features of the other gender. They even had full form ovaries turn into testes like structures that produced testosterone, though it wasn't a perfect change. I suspect once we have advanced gene therapy and nanobots, so that the nanobot could deliver changes to specific cells and alter genes in one part of the body and not other parts, it will make thing changing the human body very easy.

A good portion of the male and female reproductive organs are homologous to each other, so much of the conversion from male to female is purely structural. The uterus would probably be the biggest challenge in turning a man into a fully functional female sense the male equivalent of the uterus is lost at some point during fetal development, although i would imagine the prostate could somehow be converted into a uterus.



#50
Pwaa

Pwaa

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • LocationUK

I don't see why not, its just a question of whether anyone wants this enough to plow the resources into developing a method.

 

A transgender male has done it before...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019579/Worlds-pregnant-man-Thomas-Beatie-unveils-muscular-body-3-babies.html



#51
Raklian

Raklian

    An Immortal In The Making

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,050 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

The question is - will we figure out a way to grow a fetus in vitro (via an artifical uterus) before we figure out a way to engineer an uterus for a man?


What are you without the sum of your parts?

#52
tw88

tw88

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 304 posts
  • Locationeugene oregon
The question is - will we figure out a way to grow a fetus in vitro (via an artifical uterus) before we figure out a way to engineer an uterus for a man?

An artificial uterus would probably involve combining a series 3D of cell cultures in the proper shape for each tissue types that makes up the uterus and connecting the final structure into a supply of appropriate nutrients for a fetus to develop. This is, however, the same process of creating artificial organ for transplant. As far as humans are concerned, I think that a man will give birth to a child  before one is grown in a lab. When culturing animal cells there is always a huge risk of bacterial or  fungal contamination, which generally occurs when changing out the fetal calf serum (blood from dead cow fetuses) that's needed to grow animal cells. Culturing animal cells  is usually done in a room where the air pressure in carefully monitored (so as not to have microbes flow in), hepa filters are installs on the air ducts, handling the culture is done under glass hoods with hepa filters, and everything is meticulously disinfected - and even with all these precautions, bacterial and fugal contamination is a common occurrence in any cell culture lab.  No reasonable person will the resources needed to pay for a child to be grown in lab would choose such a process over hiring a surrogate to be artificially inseminated, or have a successfully grown uterus implanted in them. However, I would think though that before a human male gets a uterus transplant and gives birth to a child, there will probably be mice, rats or some other animal grown in a lab via an artificial uterus.


Edited by tw88, 12 July 2013 - 05:40 PM.


#53
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth
I don't see why not, its just a question of whether anyone wants this enough to plow the resources into developing a method.

 

A transgender male has done it before...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019579/Worlds-pregnant-man-Thomas-Beatie-unveils-muscular-body-3-babies.html

It is probably not that hard for a transgender man who was born a biological woman to become pregnant, since he already had a uterus. It is much more of a challenge for someone who was born a biological man to become pregnant, though I seriously hope that it will be accomplished eventually.


Edited by Futurist, 12 July 2013 - 10:35 PM.


#54
ReclusiveHitman

ReclusiveHitman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
Yeah I also agree with Ewan. we will artificial wombs before we invent a way to bear a child in men. Furthermore, there are other biological problems associated with men pregnancy. Where is the space for this ? how men can generate milk? and many other things... it is way too problematic. if some women do not want to bear a child than the answer is to create an external artificial womb

In regards to space, some organs/body parts inside the man's body might need to be moved around and/or rearranged to make room for this uterus. Also, as for breast milk, one can buy that at some stores, or hire a wetnurse to breastfeed this baby.

Would a man be a man if you give him parts of a female? No, he would be a hermaphrodite. Men can't have kids. They don't have wombs. Give them a womb and they aren't a man.



#55
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth
Yeah I also agree with Ewan. we will artificial wombs before we invent a way to bear a child in men. Furthermore, there are other biological problems associated with men pregnancy. Where is the space for this ? how men can generate milk? and many other things... it is way too problematic. if some women do not want to bear a child than the answer is to create an external artificial womb

In regards to space, some organs/body parts inside the man's body might need to be moved around and/or rearranged to make room for this uterus. Also, as for breast milk, one can buy that at some stores, or hire a wetnurse to breastfeed this baby.

Would a man be a man if you give him parts of a female? No, he would be a hermaphrodite. Men can't have kids. They don't have wombs. Give them a womb and they aren't a man.

For the purpose of this thread and question, I meant people who were born biologically male.


Edited by Futurist, 24 July 2013 - 06:30 PM.


#56
Italian Ufo

Italian Ufo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,190 posts

Someone stops this thread!!!!! :angry:



#57
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth
Someone stops this thread!!!!! :angry:

Why? This is a very legitimate question and topic to discuss.



#58
Thaizasaskand

Thaizasaskand

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,197 posts

Personally, while I do think that research into things that would help more people (e.g. dementia cures) would present greater benefit to society, I do feel that such an invention would be worth creating at some point (e.g. for post-op MTF transsexuals who want to be able to have a baby, or otherwise feel that the ability to do so would complete them as a woman).



#59
Zeitgeist123

Zeitgeist123

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,805 posts
In the words of Frankie Boyle; "The good news is you've delivered a healthy baby, the bad news is you've blown your cock off." .

 

hahahahah, this cracked me up.

 

going back to the topic, i was just about to ask questions regarding 2 male parents wanting to have biological children in which both of them are direct biological parents. ive read a few years ago that an egg cell or something from a woman can be converted into a sperm cell. i was wondering, if sperm cells or male dna can be converted into egg cell. then have it fertilized in a petri dish with the other male partner's sperm, then once fertilized IVF it to a willing surrogate mother. i am asking this because marriage equality has are starting to be recognized by governments/countries all over the world. surely, there will be gay couples who would like to have biological offspring of their own.


Edited by Zeitgeist123, 28 July 2013 - 07:46 AM.

“Philosophy is a pretty toy if one indulges in it with moderation at the right time of life. But if one pursues it further than one should, it is absolute ruin." - Callicles to Socrates


#60
Alric

Alric

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,065 posts

They are already doing the research into stuff like that, it is just a matter of time before two men can have a child in that manner. We will also have artificial wombs in the future as well, so it will not even require a surrogate.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users