Now, after that book, here is my 100th Dodger
Logic blog entry:
I just read the most insanely neat article called “Uterine
Transplants May Allow Men to Give Birth within 5 Years” on www.thegailygrind.com. The article was
written in response to the new information released on the Cleveland Clinic’s
new ability to potentially do uterus transplants in cis-gendered women who are
not able to reproduce. But this article discusses how scientists may be able to
develop technology to transplant uteri into men & transgender women in the
future, so that they can carry babies & give birth, just like cis-gendered
women can. Holy cow! Read the article for more specifics on how this works.
There is not a whole lot of scientific information, but it’s worth the read. You
can also check out my blog entry “Dodger Logic #69: A New Age of Procreation”
if you like similar topics. Now, I’m looking through the comments on this
article of course, and apart from some transphobic, bigoted jerks commenting,
people are posing some seriously interesting arguments (on both sides) about
whether or not this is a good idea. And of course, after reading the article,
my own arguments came to mind. So I’m going to go through the pros & cons
of this kind of research. You’ll notice none of my arguments will be “Ew,
that’s just gross.” The people who have commented these kinds of things on this
article annoy me, as that opinion is neither scientific, nor thoughtful, and it
is rude to anyone who may be in this situation. And please note that, any of these arguments can be used as a pro or con for any kind of new-age reproduction, whether it's for men/transgender women or cis-gendered women, whether it involves a transplanted uterus or an artificial uterus, etc.
First and foremost, I’ll go ahead & just throw out there
that this research is super interesting. When people said humans would never
fly, we did it. When people said humans would never touch down on the moon, we
proved them wrong. Breakthroughs in scientific research can be the difference
between life & death, misery & happiness, etc. Not to mention, it’s
just neat to see what humans can do! I mean, look at what we’ve already done so
far!
As an environmental science graduate, I think the best
argument is the one that immediately came to my mind after reading the article:
overpopulation. Lots of people will say overpopulation is a myth, or that it’s
not important. Lots of people will say there’s plenty of space for people to
live comfortably in this world, no matter what scientists say. Well, I implore
anyone who believes this to live in Atlanta for a week. It can take 2 hours to
get to your job that is only 20 minutes away. And I know that’s just in big
cities, but that’s where most people want to go, because that’s where most of
the jobs are. Besides, it’s not about space; it’s about resources. It’s about
how quickly this many people on the planet are using up our planet’s natural
resources, how much pollution we are creating that is killing the planet, and
how many species that we are wiping out with our growing “needs.” We are a
greedy species, and our wastefulness doesn’t seem to be slowing down at all. There
are already tons of people on this planet, including kids, who are homeless,
unemployed, & starving. Do we really want to try to fit more people into
this world? Do we really need more children in the world, while others live on
the streets, in orphanages, & in foster homes with no family or love? Or is
adopting the better choice, so we can save the lives that are already on this
planet before introducing more to the mix? Right now, only females are able to
reproduce. That’s slightly more than half of the population. Add
men/transgender women into the mix, and that’s 100% of the population who could
potentially reproduce. Imagine how the world’s population would skyrocket. Now
imagine what that would do to our planet.
(Of course, that is assuming that the technology became so good that
these procedures became common practice, easily accessible, & inexpensive
enough for the middle class to afford.) Yikes.
A lot of people are criticizing the unknown part of this
science. The article doesn’t give a lot of scientific information behind the
research & studies that have been or will be conducted, so there’s not much
to go off of right now. Commenters are saying this is selfish technology, because
people with male anatomy can not support or give birth to a baby the way an
anatomically female body can – even with hormones & organ transplants. So
how will the baby turn out? Would it have the physical and mental
characteristics as a “natural-born” baby? Would it turn out physically deformed
or mentally slow? Would this be the best thing for the baby? A lot of people
are adamant that something will go wrong in this process, and while there is no
scientific evidence in this article to support or deny these claims, I can see
where these commenters are coming from. Any time you try something new and
incredible in science, there are bound to be some problems that arise, whether
it’s just in the beginning or something that occurs once in a blue moon.
However, I will throw out there that scientists have been transplanting uteri
into cis-gendered women who do not have their own uteri for awhile with good
results. However, these are cis-gendered women who also contain estrogen, a
cervix, ovaries, & other reproductive parts that are pertinent for childbirth.
Some extensive studies still need to be, as it appears, and I think that’s also
something a lot of people don’t think is fair to the child – to have to be
apart of studies in this new research. These kids will be trial runs with this
new technology. We have been doing trial runs with children in similar studies
in the past. Is that ok?
Some people say this is unnatural/against nature. Ok, well
so are vaccines, in-vitro, antibiotics, birth control, & whole slew of
other things we use daily in this world. I don’t really view this to be a
reason not to advance our technology that could make tons of other people in
this world happy, but a lot of people hold this view.
Yup, you guessed it. Some people are even saying this is ungodly
or “playing God.” This kind of goes hand-in-hand with the “unnatural” argument.
We have been “playing God” for hundreds of thousands of years. Honestly, we “play
God” every day. If we don’t live in the wild with no electricity, running water,
tv, internet, cars, or any other kind of technology, then we are basically “playing
God.” The argument is still up in the air as to whether or not that makes this
ok. I understand this argument, and I’m not saying I fully disagree with it.
But I do love science, and I tend to hold the view that, if there is a God, why
would he give us such intelligence & expect us not to use it? You say “If
God wanted men/trangender women to reproduce, he would’ve given them the
anatomy to do so.” To that, I retort “If God wanted us all to sit around and do
nothing, then he wouldn’t have given us this massive brain power & all of
these beautiful resources in the world for us to work with.” You say “If God
wanted men/transgender women to reproduce, he would have given them the tools
to do,” to which I reply “Exactly.” Now, some people don’t believe in God, so
this is a completely invalid point to those people, but in general, I think
this a point that needs to be taken into account, since so many people do
believe in God & hold this view.
I may live in a fantasy world half of the time, but I am
also all about practicality. How practical are these procedures? Even if one
man/transgender woman in the relationship gets to carry the baby inside his/her
body for 9 months & deliver it, the baby will not be the spawn of both of
the people in the relationship unless one was able to provide an egg. But then
again, if you check out my blog entry that I mentioned above, “Dodger Logic
#69: A New Age of Procreation,” some scientists believe they may be able to
transform a sperm into an egg in the future, so maybe someday, two
men/transgender women will be able to have their own baby with their own DNA. But
if this does not happen, then not only will the person trying to have the baby
have to have a uterus implanted inside him/her, but he/she will also have to undergo
in-vitro (although, there has been talk of people using artificial external
uteri, rather than growing the babies in their own bodies, but this came from
my other blog entry I just referenced, not the article in question.) How much
of a hassle will this be if getting a uterus transplant & in-vitro are
necessary? How long will the whole process take? Will it take longer than using
a surrogate or adopting instead? What approval will people need to get in order
to proceed with the actual process of getting a transplanted uterus &
in-vitro fertilization? Will many doctors approve of this & be willing to
try this with a patient? How much will it cost? Will insurance really cover it?
SHOULD insurance cover it? What happens after the child is born? You can’t just
leave a uterus inside a man/transgender woman and keep that person on
anti-rejection hormones for his/her whole life, and if you take them off of
those hormones, the body may reject & absorb the foreign uterus, which
could cause infections & maybe even death. The question above about whether
or not this technology could harm babies comes to mind here as well. What risks
would these people be taking, as it relates to their health & the health of
their babies? I know it’s too soon to be asking these questions, since as the
article says, this isn’t even something that has been researched yet; it’s just
something people have been wondering about, since we now know we can give cis-gendered
women who lack uteri implanted uteri. But even that research is still
relatively new.
Perhaps the most beautiful view on this is that this could bring
so much happiness to so many LGBTQ+ people who have always wanted to have their
own children that have grown inside their own bodies, so they can experience
the magic of carrying a baby for 9 months & bringing it into this world. It’s
beautiful that a person who has always wanted this, but never imagined it would
ever happen, might be able to do this one day. Everyone does, afterall, have
their own rights to do what they want with their lives, bodies, & money,
even if other people disapprove of those choices.
As with any scientific break-through, whether or not it is
morally ok to do this is completely up to your own opinion. It’s another conundrum
where, for many people, it comes down to religion vs. science. And maybe for
some people, it doesn’t even have anything to do with religion, but personal
morals. Everyone is going to give their 2 cents on technology this incredible
& powerful. Do we have an obligation to God/the universe to stick with what
we view to be “natural?” Do we have an obligation to the planet to try our
hardest to keep the world population under control? Do we have an obligation to
our fellow human beings to keep them & their potential future children safe
from such technology that could harm them? Do we have an obligation to humanity
to fix our homeless/parentless problem for the kids that are already here
before we create even more? Or do we have an obligation to the LGBTQ+ community
to give them the option to carry their children & birth them like
cis-gendered women can, since we have potentially found this technology that
may allow us to do so? Where does the biggest, most important obligation lie?
I am pretty sure this is just art and not meant to spark any kind of scientific idea that someday men/transgender women will be able to reproduce. I think it's just meant to be interesting, but this is certainly a great picture for this blog entry.
In the seahorse world, the males give birth.
