To wonder if boys should be vasectomised at birth?

[Dutch1e]

If a vasectomy was painless, 100% reversible and could only be reversed when the boy had reached adulthood and had some counselling sessions to help him understand the implications of his decision, would it be a good idea to make vasectomies normal for baby boys?

Just musing on the threads about child services, child abuse and thinking about accidental pregnancies

Sounds too much like eugenics . This topic although hypothetical, scares the shit out of me.

YetAnother call me idealistic,but if we're thinking about perfect worlds,wouldn't education,support etc to prevent those kinds of situations be better than a blanket policy sterilisation? I mean if money is being spent anyways and all that...

this thought experiment may not be nearly as fantastic as some people imagine
And that's why people get so het up. We're not so far from A Brave New World capabilities and this would be a step in the right direction

Ok OP, are you personally willing to sacrifice your sons' fertility, so your "evil plans" come to fruition?

NO....I didn't think so.

Anyway, another scenario... for OP to consider:- your "evil plan" happens...would poor people be targeted first with offers of cash & other luxuries (only to be told that the ops never happened when the boys' are 18 & there is no paperwork to be found)?.

Where the hell do you live? On the fucking mythical "A ARK"

You're a very dangerous wazzock!.

There are American charities which offer adult female drug addicts cash to go on LARC - which I personally think is fair enough - or to be sterilised, which is probably not.

What the actual fuck?

Doesn't anyone remember the sub-plot in Demolition Man? Sex with helmets and no touching, and reproduction in labs?

Brave New World

Sexmission

---------
Forgot to add this bit to my last post:-

OP Why not just put males in to "male chastity devices" cheaper in the long run...yes?

Steam, I think you under estimate the fear of some parents when it comes to their DC having a child with undesirables. When it is little Cressida, they would force an abortion, when it is little Tarqin, they would tie his tubes at birth.

I must be dreaming or something, that's like asking if we should give all girls a permanent form of contraception from the time of her period, like the implant. When they pass a test they can have it removed to consider conceiving.

Have you been eating special cookies?

Dione I understand what you're say, but what the "OP" is advocating isn't the answer.

This belongs in the feminism thread........ They are out of control and crazy over there.

Well it is a kind of answer. At the minute moment, naice families can and do force their teenage daughters to have abortions. What they can't do is force their teenage son's girlfriends to do the same. If they are able to tie his tubes at birth, well then they have just as much control over his ability to procreate as they do their daughters.

It has fuck all to do with abuse or health or the rights of women. It's a fucked up proposal designed to put reproductive rights into the hands of "those who know best".

Have you been reading The Passion of New Eve, OP?

I ❤️ me some Angela Carter.

It's interesting that people have got so incredibly would up at the idea of any limit on male fertility.

Maybe it's the fact that it's highly unethical to undermine bodily autonomy and force invasive operations on children at an age when they are unable to consent or refuse. Just a thought!

Any government that tried to bring this in, overtly or covertly, democratic or totalitarian, would be lucky just to be out of power and not wholly assassinated.

People do not like having their fertility messed around with, or unnecessary medical procedures, especially on small children. Because the fact is that there is no medical procedure that is entirely without risk.

Eugenics is a disgusting form of arrogant supremacy, whatever shape it takes or wherever it emanates from.

"Maybe it's the fact that it's highly unethical to undermine bodily autonomy and force invasive operations on children at an age when they are unable to consent or refuse. Just a thought!"

Absolutely. Which is why I suggested changing the method to something totally non invasive, safe, reversible and painless, so we could talk about the principle, not the process.

"Eugenics is a disgusting form of arrogant supremacy, whatever shape it takes or wherever it emanates from."

Is it eugenics if the person concerned has complete control over the process of reversal?

I thought with a vasectomy the longer you have had it the lower chance of the reversal being successful. For example 10 years of a having a vasectomy the success rate would be lower than somebody who has only had the vasectomy a year
Or am I conpletley wrong

Bloomsbury has always been a breeding ground for stopping the lower orders breeding like rabbits eh Bertie.

It is disingenuous to divorce the principle and the process in this instance. The totally painless, safe, reversible, non invasive process you mention does not exist.

Arrogating such powers is just another way of designating some as sub-human whilst others are superhuman. It is to treat people as livestock. It is fundamentally disrespectful.

"Or am I conpletley wrong blush"

No, you're completely right. Which is why this isn't real.

Method doesn't exist Bertrand so much of what you say is moot.

And anyway, I would say that assuming even temporary control of another person's fertility is eugenics- the decision is taken out of their hands, even if it can be handed back.

Is it theft if you intend to give it back? Yes, if you didn't have the owner's consent in advance.

"It is disingenuous to divorce the principle and the process in this instance. The totally painless, safe, reversible, non invasive process you mention does not exist."

No of course it doesn't. How is it disingenuous to suggest terms for a completely hypothetical thought experiment? There is, obviously, no possible argument for this using current medical technology. So if we want to talk about it in terms of ethics, politics or philosophy we have to invent a method of doing it which doesn't make the argument fall at the first hurdle.

Personally I think installing a switch at birth would be ok, like the design that was mooted a while ago, but it would have to be a switch that the individual could operate themselves without outside assistance and it would have to be installed equally in men and women.

All the usual caveats about safety and effectiveness being outside of present tech, of course.

Having indulged the thought experiment, I have to say how utterly unsurprised I am by the rapidity with which the Feminist Chat regulars embraced the idea of cutting up young boys.

Just savouring the word 'vasectomised', which is new to me.