Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Babies with no biological mother - breakthrough for male same-sex couples, or further erasure of women?

85 replies

usernamealreadytaken · 01/10/2025 10:34

I just read what I think is a very scary article regarding the process of mitomeiosis, where skin cells can be used to create an "egg" which can be fertilised by sperm. The skin can come from a man or woman, which enables the person to have a genetic relationship to a baby, where they have no egg. I can totally see the benefits for women who have no eggs, or are infertile due to medical issues such as cancer treatment, but am I the only one who fears this is just another way for male same-sex couples to have children, and the only need for a woman in the process will be to carry the pregnancy?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/30/babies-could-be-born-without-mothers/#:~:text=Babies%20could%20be%20born%20without%20a%20biological%20mother%20after%20scientists,sex%20cell%20ready%20for%20fertilisation.

Access Restricted

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/30/babies-could-be-born-without-mothers#:~:text=Babies%20could%20be%20born%20without%20a%20biological%20mother%20after%20scientists,sex%20cell%20ready%20for%20fertilisation.

OP posts:
usernamealreadytaken · 01/10/2025 10:51

MrsSkylerWhite · 01/10/2025 10:49

No don’t think so? Pointed it out just because you may be interested in opinions there.

Do you have a link, or what to search for? Just tried and couldn't see anything. TY.

OP posts:
MrsSkylerWhite · 01/10/2025 10:49

usernamealreadytaken · 01/10/2025 10:47

Sorry, I did look and didn't see one already. Do I need to get this one deleted as a duplicate?

No don’t think so? Pointed it out just because you may be interested in opinions there.

Daleksatemyshed · 01/10/2025 10:49

I agree wholeheartedly with @MrsSkylerWhite , just because somethings possible doesn't mean we should do it

usernamealreadytaken · 01/10/2025 10:49

TempestTost · 01/10/2025 10:37

I don't see this as erasure of women any more than the ability to make a baby from two eggs was the erasure of men.

To me this comes down to what it means for the child. So I would say it does mean the erasure of mothers and fathers, which is a bad thing imo. Some may disagree.

But it is also experimenting in the most invasive possible way on children which is not at all ethical.

I did have a quick Google but can't find anything about that - I thought the sperm was essential which was why they created an egg. Not seen anything about creating a "sperm".

OP posts:
usernamealreadytaken · 01/10/2025 10:47

MrsSkylerWhite · 01/10/2025 10:35

There’s a thread about this.
Personally, my feeling is just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should.

Sorry, I did look and didn't see one already. Do I need to get this one deleted as a duplicate?

OP posts:
PumpkinSeasonOctober · 01/10/2025 10:38

It’s barbaric to mess with creating human life like this.

TempestTost · 01/10/2025 10:37

I don't see this as erasure of women any more than the ability to make a baby from two eggs was the erasure of men.

To me this comes down to what it means for the child. So I would say it does mean the erasure of mothers and fathers, which is a bad thing imo. Some may disagree.

But it is also experimenting in the most invasive possible way on children which is not at all ethical.

JamieCannister · 01/10/2025 10:36

I had to turn off the radio before it had properly started... in what way is creating human beings without a mother "progress"? Surely scientific progress would be the reverse... finding a way of giving babies whose mother died in childbirth a real, biological mother?

Jk987 · 01/10/2025 10:35

Good Lord 😩
babies need mummies!

MrsSkylerWhite · 01/10/2025 10:35

There’s a thread about this.
Personally, my feeling is just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should.

Swipe left for the next trending thread