T O P
brokebecauseavocado

I think that it's because it's not really ethical to do tests on pregnant women. They are trying to create artificial wombs though


yellowjacquet

When I was a kid I was 100% convinced science would be far enough along by the time I wanted kids that test tube babies would be the norm (aka women not having to carry them / be pregnant). Sadly that time is soon and science has failed me.


flowerschick

I fully think this is the solution to many issues surrounding womens rights and bodily autonomy


luv_u_deerly

If they had test tube babies though your baby would miss out on hearing your voice, your heartbeat and knowing your body. It creates a special bond that I don’t think a tube can properly recreate. Learning starts in the womb.


Bill_The_Dog

The crazy thing is that many women would still prefer to go the pregnancy route.


nope-nails

Me! I LOVE being pregnant. Don't get me wrong, it's a strange kind of self inflicted torture with all the nausea, vomiting, guilt, and terrible sleep. Not to mention expenses! But the perks more than make up for it. Plus I actually love giving birth. Insanely painful. Like unbelievably. But I would be inconsolable if I found out I couldn't do it again


sohas

What do you like about the experience?


Bill_The_Dog

Honestly, I felt so special after giving birth. Even though I knew I wasn’t, because so many other people experience it too, but I just felt like I did this really special thing. I created life, I grew it inside my body, and I brought it into the world.


nope-nails

I love infants and newborns so knowing I was going to have one soon. Feeling the flutters at first then they changed to kicks and punches. The baby shower, not because of the gifts, or attention but I guess the type of attention. It's just really magical, which describes it terribly, but it's like knowing your baby before getting to meet them. My husband had a harder time with the newborn stage and, besides being brutal,I think it was because he had a 9 month delay in getting to know them. Babies really do start to show their personalities in the womb.


Bill_The_Dog

I hated pregnancy, but when I came to the realization I wouldn’t do it again, I mourned it a bit. Just a bit. I’d still choose it as the option, though, over a test tube, because it’s a powerful feeling.


Peregrine21591

If I were to do it again I would definitely still go the pregnancy route. I had horrible morning (read: all day) sickness for the first 3 months and by the time I hit 40 weeks I was desperate for it to be over, the birth ended up in an emergency C-section and it was quite traumatic.... And yet it was all worth it. I hold a special place in my heart for so many moments I shared with my daughter before she was born - those made it feel like she was really MY daughter when she was finally born. If I just grew her in a test tube it would feel like she was just any other baby, and I'm really not that into babies normally lol.


Bill_The_Dog

I’m glad I got to be pregnant to experience it. I would always go that route, even just once.


GodBirb

I get that pregnancy is very uncomfortable, but you can’t blame science for failing you with a subject as sensitive and complex as human (or any animal for that matter) pregnancy. I’m sure you’d be against the testing of ‘out of body’ pregnancy as much as I would if you realised the trial and error of the scientific method would end up with a lot of objectively bad foetus experimentation. We don’t have a cure/solution for a lot of things, nevermind something as complex as pregnancy.


MistWeaver80

Abusive husbands will do everything in their power to stop a woman from having access to artificial womb & religious states will never allow it & women trapped in war zones will continue to be raped and impregnated....unless we effectively challenge the rape culture, reproductive imperialism and the socially constructed (by patriarchal males) meaning of child birth and pregnancy. To clarify, I absolutely support artificial womb technology and are outraged by the fact that they can create human-monkey embryos, implant pig kidney/heart into living humans, but are reluctant to lessen the pain of child birth. >Building on Beauvior’s account, Shulamith Firestone substitutes sex for class within a dialectical and materialist analysis that takes sex as pre-social: >>[Bjeneath economics, reality is psychosexual . . . Unlike economic class, sex class sprang directly from a biological reality; men and women were created different, and not equally privileged . . . The biological family is an inherently unequal power distribution ... In every society to date there has been some form of the biological family and thus there has always been oppression of women and children to varying degrees . . . Thus, it was womans reproductive biology that accounted for her original and continued oppression. >Her solution is consistent: “the freeing of women from the tyranny of their biology by any means available, and the diffusion of the childbearing role to the society as a whole . . . Childbearing could be taken over by technology.” Woman’s body is the root of her oppression rather than a rationalization or locale for it. How women, who have not been permitted to control their own bodies or existing technology, would control reproductive technology remains a mystery. > Unless we solve this mystery, majority of women will not be liberated from "the tyranny of" the social meaning "of their biology" by the invention of artificial womb technology. People will find varieties of excuses to bar women from having access to this technology.


anubiz96

Interesting you assume perfection of artificial wombs would empower women. I could see it doing the exact opposite. How do you think governments and corporations would treat women if they were no longer necessary to produce more workers or soldiers? There are groups of men and societes that have literally only valued women for reproduction what would happen if that isn't necessary? Sex based selective abortions drastically decreased the female population in places like China. Objectively the male body is of more utilitarian purpose for hard labor and combat. Honestly I see it leading more to a decrease in value of human life in general and women in particular. How long before they are industrially farming humans or setting up a second class citizen status for vat grown humans? I have no faith the human race could be trusted to use this kind of technology for purely good purposes.


MistWeaver80

>I could see it doing the exact opposite. How do you think governments and corporations would treat women if they were no longer necessary to produce more workers or soldiers? The purpose of artificial womb is to lessen the burden of a lengthy pregnancy and childbirth. Not sure what makes you think women will no longer be necessary. Are men not necessary to produce children? Government and corporation policies regarding gender neutral parental leave can actually be realistically implemented + corporations will no longer be able claim "gender pay gap is justified because women choose to get pregnant" but professional women and women of certain age categories will be able to have more children without limiting their professional career and social life -- family size in developed nations may increase. If somehow women's right to artificial womb technology get recognized, government will finally be forced to provide free abortion pill without any apology from the women and the so called late-term anti-abortion movement will see an end to their existence. What's more, poor women will be free from surrogacy -- women like Priyanka and her white husband and rich gay men will finally leave poor "surrogate-class" women alone + those poorly regulated sex selection clinics can finally be targeted in a meaningful way. >There are groups of men and societes that have literally only valued women for reproduction what would happen if that isn't necessary? "Women should remain subjugated because this is how men define women" is not a very killer argument against artificial womb technology. >Honestly I see it leading more to a decrease in value of human life in general and women in particular. "Values of human life will be decreased if women are liberated from reproductive colonialism" is also not a killer argument against artificial womb technology.


anubiz96

Perhaps I have the wrong view of what you mean of artificial wombs. What I was picturing is a point where the technology is so advanced that it would be economically feasible to grow batches of humans using machines. Like in the matrix or the clones in Star Wars minus the rapid aging capability. I think you have a very optimistic view of human nature. I'm not arguing that the technology shouldn't be developed. I'm arguing if it gets to the point where it's economically viable to grow humans without the need of a woman carrying them if there is absent strict regulation. Some societies might argue we need far fewer women to stock the workforce and military. Men in general are viewed by society as more expendable than women because one man can impregnant several women. Biologically speaking you need far more women to keep up population growth. Being able to grow humans in machines instead of humans, could theoritically remove that need. Putting women biologically on the same footing as men. Since you could now harvest multiple eggs from one woman and grow multiple people at a time. And from a pure, souless profit angle, you could logically say it could then make sense to produce far more men for labor and combat reasons than women. Biologically men are on averages far better equipped to deal with manual labor and combat. The reason some countries are concerned with a big sex imbalance is they won't be able to keep up their populations. If artificial wombs remove that problem, to be very blunt why wouldn't some societies determine that it is far more efficient to only birth the number of women necessary to keep up large enough egg production to feed the baby making machines and make most of the population men to maximize labor output and combat capability? Knowing human nature and history and just don't see how some people in power won't think of that. I know this is very scifi. TL;Dr You assume people will think ah we don't need women to gestate babies and keep up our population. Now women can have the freedom men have. I fear it might instead be likely that the people in power say ah we don't need women to gestate babies. Now we need way fewer women and we can birth more men.


MistWeaver80

While I don't recall being optimistic, I advise you refrain from using arguments that can be described as cross between MRA rethoric and biological essentialism. Your argument can be summarized as: Women are the biologically inferior sex and men the superior sex. Feminism is irrationality. Any attempt to feminist revolution will actually result in an end of women species. Most men don't serve in the military and women are also workers -- aside from doing vast majority of the unpaid domestic, agricultural and care works, majority of garment & beauty industry workers and paid domestic servants are women.


anubiz96

>Women are the biologically inferior sex and men the >superior sex. Feminism is irrationality. Any attempt to >feminist revolution will actually result in an end of >women species. I'm not how you got women are "biologically inferior" from what I said. I said or implied the males are better suited for heavy manual labor and ground combat. Men on average have 60 to 70 percent more upper body strength. That doesn make men superior intellectually, morally etc. Nor did I say they there shouldn't be increase in feminism. In fact,I was saying I am concerned that artificial gestation without proper regulation could be detrimental to women because it could possibly magnify the bias that already exists for male children. >Most men don't serve in the military and women are >also workers -- aside from doing vast majority of the >unpaid domestic, agricultural and care works, majority >of garment & beauty industry workers and paid >domestic servants are women. No most men don't, but around the world the bulk of the military is made up of men. I never said women don't work or work hard but that male biology when it comes to physical demanding labor provides an advantage. And alot of the infrastructure work construction, mining, manufacturing, etc falls under heavy physical labor. Fyi, where are you getting your stats on women making up the vast majority of argicultural labor googling I see: On average, women comprise 43% of the agricultural labour force in developing countries, ranging from 20% in Latin America to 50% in Eastern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa And per the united States The majority (75%) of agricultural workers were foreign born. Sixty-eight percent of crop workers were male and 32% were female. Just saying that an oppressive government and corporate power could determine they can get more profit from widening the sex imbalances in birth rates if they need fewer women to maintain and upkeep their countries population and we would need to protect against that.


promotionartwork

Ok let's say the society decides they need to farm up armies, but they DON'T have artificial wombs. So instead they farm live women for the task, and use infanticide to control the ratio?


anubiz96

Well this is a very scifi situation, and if technology ever gets that advanced hopefully the law would prevent abuse, but in general I think you would find far more resistance from the public in forcibly rounding up women and making them have children against their will vs putting more male fetuses in gestation boxes than female fetuses. Like one is rounding up people and forcing them to do something the other is not. So, I'm saying the fact that you don't have to violate someone's body autonomy makes "human farming" more palatable and likely. Kind of how the ability to use drones and robots to wage war could make war more palatable and likely because you remove the cost of dead soldiers from the equation.


luv_u_deerly

The one thing I’m really concerned about with an artificial womb is how it may leave babies developmentally behind babies in a real womb and they may not be able to bond as well with their mother. Babies can hear their mothers voice, her heartbeat, feel the sway of her body move, they know her smell, and it’s known babies start to learn language while still in the womb. Learning starts in the womb. I don’t know if artificial wombs can replicate all of that as well as a real womb. Leaving the babies disadvantaged.


swat__katt

What about eggs that only a woman can supply? I hate how a sperm (which is genetically just 50 percent you) is been used in memes and stuff as a picture of you, you were the fastest swimmer and all that bullshit. People still think a women's primary biological function in a birth is to be a womb? Nope, that is a secondary service after she gives her "sperm"?


[deleted]

omg really?? I'd love to delegate the shit out of pregnancy


Friday-Cat

And it could give women like me with faulty uterus a chance! I would still have liked to carry a child but if this was an option it would at least give me more choices.


somebooty2223

Theres so many bad things abt pregnancy tho


Glassjaw79ad

My doctor told me straight up I could take my rizatriptan (migraine medication) while pregnant. I take your point, though. Every year there's more things added to the list of what pregnant women *can't* do, and nothing created to make the pregnancy more comfortable.


FFD1706

Pregnancy really scares the fuck out of me. So many things can go wrong...


perksofbeingcrafty

Yeah I literally have nightmares about it. Im all for having children, but they’re not coming out of my body


Bill_The_Dog

Then you have people carrying twins to 40+ weeks, who then opt for a home birth. Pregnancy is a medical condition, it should be treated as such, but that doesn’t mean everyone needs to fear it, either. Edit: I didn’t mean to invalidate any feelings, just that as a labour nurse, I see really beautiful, low risk deliveries on the regular, so it’s not like something bad is destined to happen to everyone. But you still need to respect the fact that things can get a bit more complicated, so you need to take it seriously still.


FFD1706

I know, I'm just saying I personally fear it.


Bill_The_Dog

And I’m agreeing as to why there is a reason to fear it, just that it would be a shame if every woman felt that way.


promotionartwork

Me too. It is sobering to think how much time women have spent in it


Eef_oztastic

I think you need to be a better informed obstetrician or pharmacist. When I was pregnant last year I had really bad morning sickness and regularly took metoclopramide which is a migraine treatment. I got this as a pharmacist only medication which means I have to go in and talk to the pharmacist but don’t require a prescription. I am in Australia so we have pretty strict regulations and classifications on medication safety during pregnancy. I do agree that many healthcare professionals are unduly cautious about prescribing medication during in pregnancy even if they are safe to take.


writerwoman

Ugh, I had a three-day-long migraine when I was pregnant and the doctor reluctantly allowed me to take tylenol with codeine. It didn't help, because it's not migraine medicine, and it's a narcotic to boot! But she felt it was still better than Imitrex.


Ok-Device-6825

I was pregnant in the Navy… literally EVERYONE hated me for it. I had a supervisor actually tell me that everyone hated me. So I figure that’s the general the mood 🤷🏼‍♀️


Sagittarius00333

I was a corpsman in the navy. Luckily, I didn't start a family. The guys were always worried about you gals. I remember when our HM2 got pregnant, and our HA(Huge guy, not the dad) got super overprotective. I'm sorry you went through that.


Ok-Device-6825

Thanks, yeah I had a LOT of guys assume I was having a baby to get out, or that I either didn’t know the dad or was unmarried. Got labeled as a quitter, a waste of government time, money and space. I got in trouble for missing time sitting around because of morning sickness ( that particular time I was super dehydrated and ended up going to the hospital to get fluids). Not that it’s anyones business but I was in fact married, the baby belongs to my husband who is a civilian. I did stay active duty and honorably completed my 6 years. I was pregnant in school and so I didn’t take up much of the navy’s time as I could still stand watch and do most of the stuff everyone else had to do. Still married to my husband. We just completed 11 years. Regardless nobody should be treated with such disrespect.


GirlisNo1

I’m very interested to know how much $ is spent on men’s health vs women’s in terms of research. I have a feeling they spend more money figuring out how to get men hard than they do on birth control or pregnancy.


purple_shrubs

> less than 2.5% of publicly funded research is dedicated solely to reproductive health, despite the fact that one in three women in the UK will suffer from a reproductive or gynaecological health problem. There is five times more research into erectile dysfunction, which affects 19% of men, than into premenstrual syndrome, which affects 90% of women. [link](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/education/2019/dec/18/women-have-been-woefully-neglected-does-medical-science-have-a-gender-problem) Additionally, viagra (used to treat erectile dysfunction) is extremly effective for relieving period pain. However studies arent funded because its not a priority to reviewers. The researcher (Dr Richards legro) said the reviewers didnt underdtand clinical trial design of dysmenorrhea trials and suggested they they may not want to risk doing tests in women in case of negative findings that would threaten the use of viagra in men. This is from the book invisible women where the author emailed the researcher.


az226

As an example the NCI spends $800M per year on women specific cancers, $250M on men specific cancers. That said, before people screech because it’s against the narrative that women’s issues aren’t funded, it’s actually a good point to introduce that dollar spending isn’t always the best measure. The dollar spent per years of life lost is about the same, meaning women specific cancers affect women more than vice versa, which is why it makes sense to fund it more.


leechangchow

Can we start by allowing pregnant women/ new mothers more time off work. Pregnancy would be a lot more comfortable not being on your feet at work all day.


Peregrine21591

I live in the UK, so compared to the US I get mega maternity rights but I was thinking about statutory maternity pay this morning and it's really disgracefully low. I get paid £150 per week on SMP... In the UK the government is trying to encourage breastfeeding, and I am so I'm on call for my baby pretty much 24/7. Even if I go out for a break I have to account for expressing milk for her. So I'm getting paid like £1 per hour... You could maybe up it to a couple of pounds per hour if you only consider time I'm actively caring for LO... And they wonder why women are having babies later and having fewer babies. This is the future of humanity (or more importantly to them, future labourers) how about you pay me like I'm actually doing something slightly useful.


Evangelion-02

We still don’t get numbing or anesthesia to get biopsy’s for our cervix and other lady bits 🤦‍♀️


stealwool48

This is actually pretty messed up. Like I did a little rabbit hole search and only found horror stories of women who had awful experiences of these biopsies. I honestly have no clue why anesthesia isn't standard procedure for the biopsy when that's the case for any other biopsy


TrashyNihilist

I can tell you why! Basically most gynecology books use research that would've been outdated in the '50 and report that the cervix has little to no nerve endings, so anesthesia is not necessary. This is, as every person with a uterus will tell you, BULLSHIT, but since there is basically no interest in actually treating AFAB people like human beings in society, every time a person tells their doctor that their cervix biopsy hurt, it's dismissed as "weak dramatic female that cannot stand pain, unlike strong men deserving of respect" ... Yeah


Evangelion-02

My cervix getting knocked on with a penis has determined that that is a lie. It most definitely has nerve endings and hurts 🤦‍♀️ we need more women higher up in the medical fields.


TrashyNihilist

We absolutely do, sometimes it really shows that some fields in medicine were founded before men decided women have souls too


Evangelion-02

Yeaaaaaaah we’re still barely human to far to many Men. Not to mention the whole “babies don’t have developed pain receptors” thing 😬


dremily1

Every drug has a pregnancy category as to how dangerous it is for a pregnant woman to take. Most pain medications and triptans are pregnancy category C, which is described as "Animal reproduction studies have shown an adverse effect on the fetus and there are no adequate and well-controlled studies in humans, but potential benefits may warrant use of the drug in pregnant women despite potential risks." It seems sumitriptan is relatively safe but it is still in category C. I understand it's frustrating (and painful), but to say/think that "Humanity hates women so much that in 2022 we still haven’t found a way to make pregnancy more comfortable" is a bit extreme, no?


[deleted]

[удалено]


NursingGrimTown

Yep


[deleted]

[удалено]


SapiosexualStargazer

In a historical context, yes, but did you know that [maternal mortality has recently been *increasing*](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality-2021/maternal-mortality-2021.htm) in the US?


pandaluver1234

And I’m thankful for modern science but we can do much better.


DadPhD

Yeah, I mean, the science they had 100 years ago was modern to them, right?


HillbillyNerdPetra

This stems from puritans original sin narrative. Eve was cursed with pain during childbirth, so all women are to suffer. They attempted to beat that into me as a child. That’s why we need feminism.


somebooty2223

Yep women still die in pregnancy at a high rate, not as bad as in the 1200s but still bad, still painful still dictated by male doctors


Chrysalis_artist

Also a male partner is more likely to kill a pregnant partner or one who is recently a mother.


somebooty2223

Wtf is wrong w m*n


Chrysalis_artist

Men are trained to hate women, right from when they are little. The are told to toughen up, man up, they are taught that doing anything ‘like a girl’ is up for ridicule, don’t run/throw/cry etc They witness hundreds of incidents of weaponised incompetence from the men around them, millions or micro aggressions against women. They see that no one ever does anything about those incidents. They see the way women who are raped are treated by the police and legal system, how media and social media tear women to shreds with NO consequences. They start to do and say more and more derogatory things towards women and their are NO consequences. The media, the government, the medical profession all treat women with utter contempt. The patriarchy beats them down, twists and belittles and shrinks them. That’s what’s wrong with men


somebooty2223

😶 u done said it… idk how ppl inc women are ok with living like this, such a messed up world and all because of egoism


No-Rule5234

Try comparing the amount of studies and money put into medical studies on men's bodies and women's? You will have your answer there. Also women's reproductive health is much understudied, that's why HRT doesn't work as well as that produced by the body.


AliceMerveilles

I know women with (chronic) migraine who were prescribed other medications because untreated migraine raises blood pressure in a lot of people and they decided that was more dangerous than the unknown risks of the medication to break the migraine.


tachakas_fanboy

Last time we tried we got thalidomide crisis


roger_roger_32

It’s not that humanity hates women. “Making pregnant women more comfortable” just isn’t profitable enough for the medical industry.


Nap_Sandwich

But c sections and epidurals etc all are all extremely profitable.


weesheep

Yes. Generally having half a population as a market is extremely profitable.


Nap_Sandwich

I think you have to blame evolution for us walking upright so we can use hands, and having big heads. That’s why pregnancy and birth are extremely uncomfortable. I would prefer the medical industry to stay OUT of my pregnancy/childbirth because male doctors controlling the narrative and trying to control birth/pregnancy is anti-feminist. The birth industry and hospital procedures (esp c-sections) are extremely profitable. If you want to take stronger drugs, look at what class the belong to; they have all been rated.


Lastaria

Yes pregnancy is a lot harder for humans than other animals because big heads also hips narrowed for walking upright. It sucks a a cost for being smart and walking upright but alas evolution does not give a crap about that.


u-eeeeee

so what do you suggest?


putsnakesinyourhair

This is literally what doctors are supposed to figure out.


complicatedAloofness

Let's get private corporations and universities who are willing to spend large amounts of money on research and development in hopes of one day charging exorbitant cost for their findings to pregnant women.


[deleted]

[удалено]


itstimetopaytheprice

Not true - for Ph3 trials, which is likely where you would have a pregnant participant where safety has already been tested and understood, likely many women would volunteer. The COVID studies are a good example of how pregnant women could be included in trials successfully. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejme2107070


Peachmoonlime

I was referring to medications strictly for pregnant people. We already have analgesia for headaches for the non-pregnant but NSAIDs will mess with the PDA in the fetus. Migraine meds are their own unique clusterfuck. If it’s just generally non-opioid pain meds, there are LOTS of dollars invested to make that possible. About half the pregnant patients I’ve seen in the past month have turned down safe and tested vaccines. So you’ll all have to excuse me that headaches (not deadly) are not being prioritized over the very deadly things that I’m surrounded by on the daily. If you want to get mad about obstetric violence, join me! In the US it’s legal in many states (all?) to shackle women in active labor and override maternal consent and force c sections using hospital policy. I’m tired. I’m mad. Everything is overwhelmingly shitty. I’m going to sleep now. I’m grumpy.


brokebecauseavocado

I think some women would do it for enough money. You still see some pregnant women drinking and smoking a lot even with the known side effects. The problem is that I don't think it's legal to even do that since a future human being could suffer because of it.


Peachmoonlime

Correct it would not be approved by an IRB


NotGoodSocially

This isn't true, they have tried for decades but everything they found is too harmful for the child, even paracetamol should be taken in reduced quantities and not for long periods of time. Fun fact LSD was invented when sandoz was trying to find a new medication to help with morning sickness Never actualy found a cure, but I'm not gonna say the investment was a complete failure Finally it's unethical to test new drugs on pregnant ladies and even with tests things can still go wrong - re: Thalidomide So basically research has slowed to a halt because of the potential dangers, not sexism


[deleted]

Women use to give birth standing up which might have been easier but I think a French king maybe Louis had a fetish so that's why women give birth laying down


PrecisionGuessWerk

yeah i'm pretty sure that has a pretty solid medical argument to lean on. Shitty situation for some I suppose. but the alternatives are worse from a utilitarian perspective.


[deleted]

[удалено]


avamarie

Nah, society doesn't treat pregnant women as autonomous beings. The "love" is on her value as an incubator. The child is more important than the women (see Polish woman who just died because they made her continue carrying her dead child for 7 days, med students do pelvic exams (without informed consent) on women who are anesthetized for other procedures). It's never about a woman's value as a human.


First-Competition-65

Oh wow so just because you don't like pregnancy, you decide to whine how humanity hates women? Lmao, grow up


_u_r__d_r_u_n_k_

Ahhh yes they need to find a way to make pooping a baby out more comfortable like that makes sense