AT>In article <01bc22aa$e513dc40$a8b4aec7 at default>, "Rad"
AT><gconrad at sprynet.com> wrote:
AT> :Here's how it might work:
AT> :A special breed of pig is created with a nine month gestation period and
AT> :wide vaginal opening.
AT>Wow. Even with the limited capacity of ASCII text, I can almost hear you
AT>panting at the notion.
AT> :This pig would also be supplied with human
AT> :mitochondrial DNA (if needed). Eggs from these pigs would be removed and
AT> :de-nucleated. A single sperm each from two prime Aryan males is injected
AT> :into each egg.
AT>Why two "Aryan" males? This seems to be a clear and unequivocal statement
AT>that "Aryan" women are superfluous, and that a method of reproduction that
AT>substitutes sows for women is desirable. Sit back on the couch and tell me
AT>about all of these unresolved issues you have with your mother.
AT>More to the point, the experiment in Scotland implanted the DNA from one
AT>individual into a de-nucleated (if that's the right term) egg. No method to
AT>combine two sperm into one individual exists, and I doubt that such a thing
AT>has been contemplated; the old-fashioned method of combining sperm and egg
AT>(or the newfangled method of doing same in a test tube) to produce
AT>heterogeneous offspring seems to work pretty well, unless you have some
AT>deep-seeded need to remove women from the reproductive process.
AT>Your dismissal of women rejects even their role as mothers, and strikes me
AT>as pathological. It seems to me that there's a lot going on in your head
AT>that you refuse to admit to yourself.
AT> :The eggs are then implanted in the pig. Nine months later,
AT> :the pig gives birth to a dozen or so healthy Aryans.
AT>Having proven himself to be swine metaphorically, this one "Aryan" would
AT>like to sire the offspring of swine literally. I don't have the intuition
AT>nor the training to even begin to contemplate this notion more deeply. I'll
AT>just suggest that the author seek long-term, preferrably inpatient,
AT> :Of course, these sperm must be sorted to increase the number of X sperm v
AT> :Y sperm, or males will outnumber females by 2:1 as shown:
AT> :XX Female
AT> :XY Male
AT> :YX Male
AT> :YY Nonviable
AT>You are assuming that a YY embryo would be non-viable. There are no data
AT>with YY embryos, a patently impossible notion by conventional means, to
AT>suggest this conclusion. YY could well produce viable but sterile
AT>individuals, as is the case with XYY or XXY mutations already observed.
AT> :Or perhaps the individual sperm can be precisely sorted from the beginnin
AT> :giving the desired male/female ratio and avoiding the YYs altogether.
AT>Or perhaps we could screen DNA with a finer-toothed comb, to weed out
AT>obvious cases of mental deficiency. I understand why you do not dwell on
AT>this thought. And why screen out the YYs? You could breed a race of
AT>supermen, completely devoid of any genetic traces of femaleness. That seems
AT>to be your point.
AT> :An interesting aspect of this procedure, for all you feminists out there,
AT> :is that it requires no human females at all.
AT>That is not just a single aspect, it is the sole defining characteristic of
AT>this approach. There is no reason to attempt to create a human being from
AT>two sperm unless you deliberately set out to eliminate women from the
AT>process of procreation. It appears that you would prefer to have your
AT>children birthed by sows than by women, and that you see your ideal
AT>reproductive partner as another man. You need help.
AT> :Though they would certainly be employed in the raising of these new Aryan
AT>Why? Since you have dismissed the role of women in the birthing of
AT>children, why concede that they have a role in child-rearing? A
AT>genetically-engineered dog (think of Romulus and Remus, since the Roman
AT>mythos apparently has a particular appeal for you) could suckle your little
AT>genetic monstrosities, and you could abort (or kill post-partum) any
AT>children who failed to display the proper dangly bits. With enough science,
AT>you could create an entire species without females.
AT>Since you have relegated procreation to the meeting of two sperm, I can
AT>only assume that the men in your little Utopia would lead lives of
AT>homosexuality or chastity. Which is it? Or would you keep women around (and
AT>sterilize them, I assume, since you've forwarded the two-sperm method of
AT>reproduction) as sexual playthings?
AT>I always suspected that Nazis were closet leather-boys (those ever-so-butch
AT>SS uniforms would be the hit of any gay bar on leather night), but I have
AT>never seen a more pervasive or purer misogyny, or a more convoluted effort
AT>to dream of a society in which women are irrelevant.
AT> :Pure education in math, science and objective history would be stressed
AT> :as well as proper English. We might even resurrect the Aryan religion.
AT> :Hail Zeus!
AT>If you want to "resurrect" the "Aryan religion" (concocted by swarthy
AT>little Mediterranean people), how would you explain to your little
AT>Neo-Spartans all of the myths surrounding women and goddesses? You clearly
AT>have no role for women beyond wet-nurses, so how would you explain to your
AT>future stormtroopers that Hera (Juno) has a mind of her own in the myths?
AT>Or will you leave out the bits about women being capable of thought?
AT> "We were once so close to heaven, Peter came out and gave us medals
AT> declaring us the nicest of the damned." --They Might Be Giants
AT>Andy Walton * atticus at mindspring.com * http://www.mindspring.com/~atticus
Dis-regarding the politics and eugenitics, the part about using 2 sperm
is workable, at least with mice. It seems that the nucleus of a gamate
cell isn't all that determined about which sex it is. And if you remove
the original nucleus from an ova and replace it with that from a sperm
the result behaves like any other ova.
Presumably, the pig ova is required so the pig will be able to carry it.
I think the pig would have to have some genetic modifications first,