Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is decision driven by the need to make money and succeed independently (like men)

Women should be paid for their time off to have children. Paid a uniform amount, in addition to what their jobs pay them.

It should be called “American Future Worker” Act.

See what canada does. And we should do it better. That will get things back on track.

Yes - wholeheartedly agree with this! Or look at Scandinavia where women are literally paid for being just mothers.

It's not working to convince Scandinavian women to be mothers. Their TFRs are under 1.5.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think men are paid a paltry sum for their DNA at sperm clinics. That is atrocious.

It makes no sense. Their DNA is devalued because of the rapid mechanism that expels it? The bias that devalues male dna?

Everything is upside down in this industry. It’s also not fair to men either to have 50 half siblings as off spring.

Repetitive, repeatable, high volume tasks are paid less in capitalism. One man can impregnate hundreds.

The creation of new ideas/things that add value to the economy are always paid more. One woman can only safely have a few babies in her lifetime. Generally, the Health risks go up with each subsequent baby.

It's actually pretty rare to have semen that can survive the freeze / thaw process. Combine that with being a man who has desirable traits as a donor, and it's even more rare. Ergo "capitalism" should pay him more.

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think men are paid a paltry sum for their DNA at sperm clinics. That is atrocious.

It makes no sense. Their DNA is devalued because of the rapid mechanism that expels it? The bias that devalues male dna?

Everything is upside down in this industry. It’s also not fair to men either to have 50 half siblings as off spring.

1990s sperm donor here. It was a lot of money to me at the time - much more than I was making as a postdoc - and for something I was going to do anyway, lmao.

Anonymous wrote:https://bioethics.hms.harvard.edu/journal/donor-technology

Open to read. Wow, they have opinions.

Absolutely an interesting read and a strong argument (imo) for properly regulating gamete banks and requiring that all donors be at least openid of not fully nonanonymous, as well as the now common practice of raising the child with an awareness of the donor conceived status (see: the greatest source of distress was learning about the fact they were donor conceived). I note that the respondents in the survey were mostly children of heterosexual couples 30+ years ago so it’s unclear if the current children of single parents by choice will have similar feelings.

That being said, if you’re the same poster stating that sperm banks are eugenics I’m not getting a further explanation of that from this paper.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never met a hetero man who wanted a baby at all. Some wanted the IDEA of kids and a perfect wife. But it was more of a concept than the actual desire to have kids. If they didn’t have a wife pulling the overnight shift, changing diapers, and washing dishes, they’d have no interest in kids.

So no, I don’t think we’ll see a booming surrogate industry.

My dh very much wanted kids. When they arrived, he did all of the overnight duties and also brought them to me to nurse. I'm sorry you don't know any goid men or have close friends who would tell you about their wonderful dhs.

Your Dh doesn’t match the biological norm of like 300,000 years of human and pre human behavior.

You'll be amazed at how many other "biological norms" of human behavior that modern men in the USA don't match!

Has he killed any men from neighboring tribes and taken their women as concubines yet?

I have a wealthy single (divorced) friend who has talked about using a surrogate but never seriously made any moves towards it. Think he's back to focusing on finding an actual partner to have a baby with.

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never met a single hetero male who has in interest in being a single dad.

This. And this includes the guys I know who are great dads within the context of their marriages or even who became single dads later due to death or divorce. They don't want the burden or labor of being the primary parent and they will not sign up for it willingly. Some men will rise to the occasion if it presents itself but even they wouldn't choose it if the alternative (marrying a woman who will be the primary parent) is available which it almost always is.

And for every guy who rises to the challenge of being a good dad there are 10 who promise they'll be a present and committed father and then are not. If it ever does become trendy for men to hire surrogates to have kids on their own we will need to have a way to deal with all the abandoned and orphaned children when those guys discover actually they don't want to be dads. In fact if I was a surrogate I would never agree to have a baby for a single dad in part because I would worry he would either abandon the child or try to force me to take the child.

I guess it would be a way to get some guy to pay for your pregnancy and donate sperm if you secretly wanted to keep the kid. But there are other better ways.

From our nation’s best bioethicists

“Additionally, when individuals are considering whether to go forward with conception through gamete donation, our data suggest that for the future well-being of all involved, anonymous donation ought to be discouraged.”

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never met a single hetero male who has in interest in being a single dad.

agree.

non issue, non topic.

Anonymous wrote:It seems like more women are going the SMBC (single mom by choice) route with sperm donors. So will more men turn to egg donors and surrogates to have kids?

No to both. Stats are the same.

This seems to be an UMC issue.

Tons of baby mommas in other communities. So those "dads" abandon multiple "moms" and "kids".

Anonymous wrote:It seems like more women are going the SMBC (single mom by choice) route with sperm donors. So will more men turn to egg donors and surrogates to have kids?

Much cheaper for a man to impregnate a woman the old fashioned way.

https://bioethics.hms.harvard.edu/journal/donor-technology

Open to read. Wow, they have opinions.

I’ve never met a single hetero male who has in interest in being a single dad.

Anonymous wrote:Just read the journals.

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/662964?journalCode=signs#:~:text=Challenges%20to%20gendered%20eugenics%20also,of%20human%20value%20and%20worth

Paywall. And the abstract only says “This article compares the social and physical traits of 1,515 sperm and egg donors to national averages for males and females to illustrate the ways in which donor selection and marketing practices perpetuate stratified norms of gender, race, and class.” without explaining *how* their assessment of these traits leads to the conclusion, never mind what the traits are.

I’m also not familiar with Signs; what is it’s peer review/editorial process?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never met a hetero man who wanted a baby at all. Some wanted the IDEA of kids and a perfect wife. But it was more of a concept than the actual desire to have kids. If they didn’t have a wife pulling the overnight shift, changing diapers, and washing dishes, they’d have no interest in kids.

So no, I don’t think we’ll see a booming surrogate industry.

My dh very much wanted kids. When they arrived, he did all of the overnight duties and also brought them to me to nurse. I'm sorry you don't know any goid men or have close friends who would tell you about their wonderful dhs.

You can recognize that most women (statistically) don’t have this kind of partner, right?