Here is contrarian bioethics at its best. Pregnancy and childbirth are so painful, risky and socially restrictive for women that public funding should urgently be directed to the development of artificial wombs. This is the only way to achieve true equality between men and women for then neither women nor men would then be limited by having children and the burdens of reproducing the species would be shared equally.
This is the radical suggestion made by a leading British bioethicist, Anna Smajdor, of the University of East Anglia.
In other words, make sure women and men are exactly alike.
Sometimes you just want to give a person a vigorous shake.
Says Anna Smajdor:
Either we view women as baby carriers who must subjugate their other interests to the well-being of their children or we acknowledge that our social values and level of medical expertise are no longer compatible with “natural” reproduction.
We mustn't subjugate our interests for that of others. Why, that would be self-sacrificial. And loving.
And men NEVER have to sacrifice their interests for their family. They screw around and stay out all the time. *eye roll*.
I suggest that there is a strong case for prioritizing research into ectogenesis as an alternative to pregnancy. I conclude by asking the reader the following: if you did not know whether you would be a man or a woman, would you prefer to be born into Society A, in which women bear all the burdens and risks of pregnancy, or Society B, in which ectogenesis has been perfected.
I would love to escape the symptoms of pregnancy. That doesn't mean I wouldn't choose to be a mom to an unborn child. Those are two different things.
This philosophy is a recipe for forced abortion. If childbirth is unethical, then a coerced abortion is the solution.