Artificial wombs will lead the path forward back to patriarchal family structure by taking control away from women, who are increasingly brainwashed by Feminism.
Wait, what? This probably wins the award for most insane post ever. Even if the technology works perfectly (which it won't), even if it isn't used for all sorts of crazy eugenics nonsense (which it will be), how will destroying families all together help improve family structures?
Oh, and the primary users of these artificial wombs? Probably 40-50 year old Karens who, upon realizing their actual wombs dried up (or who got them wrecked by having a pile of abortions) go to sperm bank (or pay some 20 year old simp for some of his sperm) and then use the artificial wombs to have the kid(s) their biological clocks are demanding they have. I'm sure a whole generation of kids raised that way will only help society!
Even if the technology works perfectly (which it won't)
That is a fair criticism, and we will have to see what happens when artificial wombs hit the market. It will likely only be the rich to have this tech at first, so the people selling this tech will want the tech to be adequate enough for buyers to pay top dollar. And there should be improvements in the tech by the time the tech is affordable for the general public.
even if it isn't used for all sorts of crazy eugenics nonsense (which it will be)
Eugenics is good.
how will destroying families all together help improve family structures?
No one said anything about destorying families. While I don't think it should be common for single guys to start families by themselves, the mere option being there will improve the sexual & romantic market place significantly in men's favor. When you take away women's natural advantages, they have to offer more in relationship, men can afford to be more picky.
Artificial wombs is only one part. The other part will be artificial eggs and realistic sex robots. When single men have options other than women for having children and even the act of sex itself, women will have to step up their game in a relationship to compete. This is basic sexual economics.
improve the sexual & romantic market place significantly in men's favor
Modern sexual and romantic market has little to do with family prospects.
When you take away women's natural advantages, they have to offer more in relationship, men can afford to be more picky
Men want to fuck hot women. Women want to fuck handsome, high status, high income men. Artificial wombs change none of that.
The other part will be artificial eggs and realistic sex robots.
Women having to compete with widespread pornography hasn't improved anything. The proliferation of porn tracks with relations between men and women becoming more fucked up, not less. Why would robots be any better?
When single men have options other than women for having children and even the act of sex itself, women will have to step up their game in a relationship to compete.
Again, we have history to draw on. Women eschewing motherhood and having to compete with porn haven't improved anything.
You also ignored the previous commenter's point about artificial wombs removing the biological clock issue for women. That is one of men's biggest edges in finding wives.
Women having to compete with widespread pornography
Women have never had to compete with porn. Masterbation has never been competition to sex.
Men want to fuck hot women.
Men want to fuck women who are pretty enough, and men have higher sex drives than women. This is why even complete pigs of women get more attention on dating websites than average looking men.
Women want to fuck handsome, high status, high income men.
Women want to be wow'd more than they want to be fucked. Women have low sex drives. Money is one way of wow-ing women, and just as man's ideal woman is hot but he will settle for pretty enough, women tend to settle for guys with steady income that will spend money on them. Another way of wow-ing is having a good talk game, I have seen some ugly dudes pull women because their talk game was amazing, they didn't have alot money either (they also weren't tall, which women do like) and again, women will settle for a guy that just talks good enough.
Anyways, this is less about changing women's overall sexual habbits and more about changing women's overall relationship habbits. I would agrue it changes both but the former will be less than the latter, which will be most noticable.
You also ignored the previous commenter's point about artificial wombs removing the biological clock issue for women. That is one of men's biggest edges in finding wives.
If this gives men an edge, that edge is pretty dull but that is neither here or there.
Anyways women already have access to surrogates now but those surrogates are of course other women. So artificial wombs will give men some control in this area.
If this gives men an edge, that edge is pretty dull but that is neither here or there.
The edge is dull because, as I said before, the romance/sex market doesn't revolve around family formation. Pfiser or whoever growing a baby in a lab isn't going to help that.
Anyways women already have access to surrogates now but those surrogates are of course other women.
Surrogates are crazy expensive. It's not something you order at a McDonald's drive thru. What power do you think they give women?
You think restricting access to childbirth based on political affiliation (IE, "I'm sorry, you're registered as a Republican, therefore you can't use the wombs) is a good thing? Or restrictions based on DIE reasons (I'm sorry, all we can offer you is black kids today, we've had too many whites so far this year) is a good thing? And that would be easy to do today. Long-term, if people can figure out some form of basic engineering, I can easily imagine the government wanting to ensure that most kids are engineered to be nice, dull and easily compliant to ensure they are good little worker drones.
When single men have options other than women for having children and even the act of sex itself, women will have to step up their game in a relationship to compete. This is basic sexual economics.
You really think that's accurate? Really? In any type of basic economics, you have to offer the other party something they want. If there's realistic sex robots and artificial wombs, what else do you have to offer? Sperm? There's already sperm banks and spermjacking one simp should provide enough for a whole bunch of kids - and that's before artificial sperm comes around. Money? Uncle Sam will steal and/or print to take care of that, even if it's needed. What else do you have to offer?
Wait, what? This probably wins the award for most insane post ever. Even if the technology works perfectly (which it won't), even if it isn't used for all sorts of crazy eugenics nonsense (which it will be), how will destroying families all together help improve family structures?
Oh, and the primary users of these artificial wombs? Probably 40-50 year old Karens who, upon realizing their actual wombs dried up (or who got them wrecked by having a pile of abortions) go to sperm bank (or pay some 20 year old simp for some of his sperm) and then use the artificial wombs to have the kid(s) their biological clocks are demanding they have. I'm sure a whole generation of kids raised that way will only help society!
That is a fair criticism, and we will have to see what happens when artificial wombs hit the market. It will likely only be the rich to have this tech at first, so the people selling this tech will want the tech to be adequate enough for buyers to pay top dollar. And there should be improvements in the tech by the time the tech is affordable for the general public.
Eugenics is good.
No one said anything about destorying families. While I don't think it should be common for single guys to start families by themselves, the mere option being there will improve the sexual & romantic market place significantly in men's favor. When you take away women's natural advantages, they have to offer more in relationship, men can afford to be more picky.
Artificial wombs is only one part. The other part will be artificial eggs and realistic sex robots. When single men have options other than women for having children and even the act of sex itself, women will have to step up their game in a relationship to compete. This is basic sexual economics.
Modern sexual and romantic market has little to do with family prospects.
Men want to fuck hot women. Women want to fuck handsome, high status, high income men. Artificial wombs change none of that.
Women having to compete with widespread pornography hasn't improved anything. The proliferation of porn tracks with relations between men and women becoming more fucked up, not less. Why would robots be any better?
Again, we have history to draw on. Women eschewing motherhood and having to compete with porn haven't improved anything.
You also ignored the previous commenter's point about artificial wombs removing the biological clock issue for women. That is one of men's biggest edges in finding wives.
Women have never had to compete with porn. Masterbation has never been competition to sex.
Men want to fuck women who are pretty enough, and men have higher sex drives than women. This is why even complete pigs of women get more attention on dating websites than average looking men.
Women want to be wow'd more than they want to be fucked. Women have low sex drives. Money is one way of wow-ing women, and just as man's ideal woman is hot but he will settle for pretty enough, women tend to settle for guys with steady income that will spend money on them. Another way of wow-ing is having a good talk game, I have seen some ugly dudes pull women because their talk game was amazing, they didn't have alot money either (they also weren't tall, which women do like) and again, women will settle for a guy that just talks good enough.
Anyways, this is less about changing women's overall sexual habbits and more about changing women's overall relationship habbits. I would agrue it changes both but the former will be less than the latter, which will be most noticable.
If this gives men an edge, that edge is pretty dull but that is neither here or there.
Anyways women already have access to surrogates now but those surrogates are of course other women. So artificial wombs will give men some control in this area.
Sex robots are masturbation with extra steps.
The edge is dull because, as I said before, the romance/sex market doesn't revolve around family formation. Pfiser or whoever growing a baby in a lab isn't going to help that.
Surrogates are crazy expensive. It's not something you order at a McDonald's drive thru. What power do you think they give women?
You think restricting access to childbirth based on political affiliation (IE, "I'm sorry, you're registered as a Republican, therefore you can't use the wombs) is a good thing? Or restrictions based on DIE reasons (I'm sorry, all we can offer you is black kids today, we've had too many whites so far this year) is a good thing? And that would be easy to do today. Long-term, if people can figure out some form of basic engineering, I can easily imagine the government wanting to ensure that most kids are engineered to be nice, dull and easily compliant to ensure they are good little worker drones.
You really think that's accurate? Really? In any type of basic economics, you have to offer the other party something they want. If there's realistic sex robots and artificial wombs, what else do you have to offer? Sperm? There's already sperm banks and spermjacking one simp should provide enough for a whole bunch of kids - and that's before artificial sperm comes around. Money? Uncle Sam will steal and/or print to take care of that, even if it's needed. What else do you have to offer?