I had an interesting conversation with NanayaNYoru in RL, and thought that I should post it for the heck of it. Of course, there are some parts that went missing, and there were some parts that were added, memories aren’t exactly perfect. This is the best reproduction of the conversation after going through it a few times and comparing memories.
(俺達は同人なんだけど、 別人だ!)
CTheHash
In the future, when women can make babies without male intervention, men will be less significant in the bedroom.
NanayaNYoru
Isn’t that technology here already? Don’t you mean when it “becomes more widely accepted” rather than “when they can”?
CTheHash
Non non mon ami, I meant that in the literal sense, as in without the aid of a male. At the moment, even test tube babies require that there be a male to provide sperm for the fertilization of the ovum. In that regard, it’d be good news for impotent men, as that would mean that they can get their heirs without involving a third party.
NanayaNYoru
That’s true, to an extent, but there are people who’d rather do it the traditional way and have fun while having sex. There’d also be those who prefer the bonding due to the high touch functionality of the cavemen principle. Also, wouldn’t it feel a little weird that babies come shooting out of women when there’s no definite father to speak of?
CTheHash
お前の考え方は古いな〜 What defines a father? Is it by blood, or is it by acknowledgement? I meant acknowledgement very much in the sense that one raises another as their own. The concept of blood relations to define a family will be antiquated by the time such technology exists. Speaking of sex, by then (I hope,) it’d be more acceptable to talk more openly about it, and masturbation be taught in classes. Seriously, even astronauts masturbate to prevent health complications, and they’re those of us who are at the frontier of discovering the techs of the future. Also, do mind your words.
NanayaNYoru
Assuming that humans progress in the same speed that technology progresses. We’ve seen how far behind people are in catching up with the latest technology; some people even thought that the Internet should be completely regulated for “security” reasons.
CTheHash
They weren’t completely wrong in that regard though, most people are too stupid and are irresponsible with the liberty that they were given, so it’s a given that some bigger idiot thought that they should try to protect the irresponsible idiots. Problem is, they are and there are idiots who think that they’re too stupid to think, and asked other people to think for them what’s good and what’s bad. Remember what Benjamin Franklin said?
NanayaNYoru
We’re getting off topic now. Back to the matter of relations, in some cases, how then do people cope with crimes, or finding their families? I mean, don’t they use DNA to compare those cases, and the similarities can help narrow down a case’s suspect, or find their long-lost relative? I’m not saying that the tech will be bad, it’s just that even now we have so many unsolved cases[citation needed], how are we going to solve those cases where the DNA is involved when there’re so many variations in the DNA of the human race? Heck, what’d happen to the mutations and stuff?
CTheHash
Well, you do make a good point there, though I’d have to say, shouldn’t the hospital have the DNA samples of most if not all human beings? It’s not like the DNA shows any private things that people shouldn’t know about.
NanayaNYoru
It does raise privacy issues. When the hospital or anyone has access to the DNA of another person, unless it’s very well guarded (which I don’t think is possible, regardless of technological advancements), it’ll be misused. Didn’t you say something about liberty before?
CTheHash
At least let me finish answering your questions before asking more. Well, it’s not like I don’t get your concerns, it’s just that, you’re disregarding the fact that information will travel faster and faster, and that such a breach in security would be difficult to go unnoticed. We already have live broadcasts and stuff, and such an important piece of information would be monitored by several parties with the mutual interest of not having it misused; if it was breached, it will be a reflection of their failure. People will fail, even if they don’t like to, but I’m getting off the main topic for now. Regarding the mutations, wouldn’t the medical field be responsible for monitoring that? I mean, the mutations are occurring at a seemingly random manner at random places at random times. However, shouldn’t people have some idea as to why, how, and where the mutations occur, as well as their effects? Well, I’m not saying by means of supercomputer simulations, as that wouldn’t help much aside from narrowing down some possibilities while leaving out most of them. It’s the researchers who are responsible for all those things. Of course, we’re still sorting through the huge repository of information, but if enough people were given enough time, we should arrive at the desired outcome; the understanding of the human genome, and the manipulation of it for the greater good (whatever that is). Remember, “it is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but rather the one most adaptable to change”.
NanayaNYoru
“Progress is only possible through science” eh? Reminds me of Civ4.
CTheHash
About that, I remember hearing some people saying something as stupid as “philosophy is dead”.
NanayaNYoru
Pfft, seriously? How the heck do you progress through science if philosophy is dead? I mean, wouldn’t that turn science into nothing more than religion? Science was able to progress through philosophy, by asking questions upon questions, and questioning answers. If philosophy really is dead, they’d be giving unquestionable answers. We all know what happens to those who give answers instead of searching for them. Philosophy was separated only in the modern times, back in the old days, philosophy was an integral part of science. Religion is fine for emotional and mental support, but overzealousness is ugly. The same goes for science.
CTheHash
So, where are we on ‘Men, Bed, Women, and Babies’?
NanayaNYoru
We’re not done yet. Still, what of the social structure, the effects that it’ll have on people? Wouldn’t such a thing lead to gender discrimination?
CTheHash
Au contraire mon ami, with this, we’ll remove the argument “without men, women can’t make babies”, or something along that line. I figured that it’ll lead to more freedom from the classic gender roles that society assigned along the way by which it adapts to life as technology progresses. Wait, that might lead to gender supremacy instead of discrimination.
NanayaNYoru
Gender supremacy is what leads to gender discrimination. Heck, any feeling of supremacy coupled with pride would lead to discrimination. Unless men can have children without the means of a surrogate mother to give birth to the babies, they’ll have a gender role reversal of sorts. Though, assuming that they can create sperm without a male, it would be logical that they could create ovum and the uterus without a female. Or at least give it a shot, wouldn’t you think? Pfft, playing God, as some would say.
CTheHash
Didn’t you just answer your own question?
NanayaNYoru
Well, I did, after I heard what you said that is. Let’s go grab some lunch. I’m hungry.
And so went conversation. We do hope that you’ve enjoyed reading it as much as we enjoyed talking about it. If you have any thoughts or comments, we hope that you make use of the comments section. We(I)’ll try to respond to it when we can.