Thank you.
Sterilising, yes, I get that bit, but gay and lesbian people are not likely to naturally reproduce, and no-one is arguing homosexuality is hereditary (and therefore needs sterilising to stop being passed on)
So I am not seeing it as classic eugenics. Homosexuality cannot be bred out of people as there is no gay gene, and gay people do not naturally reproduce. As it stands, gay couples can use assistive reproductive technologies or surrogate women to become parents. I understand the homophobic aspect of the trans agenda, but I don’t see gayness being bred out, as oppose to suppressed.
Whereas classic eugenics was seen as stopping reproduction of perceived ‘undesirables’, the trans agenda relies on reproduction being done by artificial means (so too does reproduction with gay couples). So, modern eugenics is something different.
So, for TIM, artificially created ‘women’ (taking hormones, having surgery) can, following their future planning logic, have artificially created babies.
Then you have the embryos being subject to screening and selected.
It is eugenics, but it is working in a different way, I think, than breeding out the gay population. I don’t really understand the logic of what I am suggesting, but the genetic engineering is working in a different way to classic eugenics. Biological females are being sterilised, reproduction is becoming artificial. Who or what is being bred out? Nature and natural ‘defects’?