Sunday, August 26, 2012

Boys Will Be Boys, So Get Rid of Them!

Under a headline: Men, Who Needs Them? a professor of biology and criminal justice at Boise State University posits that men are no longer necessary to the survival of the species.
If a woman wants to have a baby without a man, she just needs to secure sperm (fresh or frozen) from a donor (living or dead). The only technology the self-impregnating woman needs is a straw or turkey baster, and the basic technique hasn’t changed much since Talmudic scholars debated the religious implications of insemination without sex in the fifth century. If all the men on earth died tonight, the species could continue on frozen sperm. If the women disappear, it’s extinction.
Ultimately the question is, does “mankind” really need men? With human cloning technology just around the corner and enough frozen sperm in the world to already populate many generations, perhaps we should perform a cost-benefit analysis.
I suppose that's true. Even more true, is that men are the only minority group whose extinction can be kidded about in the pages of the NYT. It is hardly likely the paper of record would run a column asking the burning question, Blacks, Who Needs Them? Or Jews, Who Needs Them? 

The author points out...
... women live longer, are healthier and are far less likely to commit a violent offense. If men were cars, who would buy the model that doesn’t last as long, is given to lethal incidents and ends up impounded more often?
Of course, nobody in their right mind would buy a man. Fortunately, since we officially got rid of slavery, men are no longer considered property. But it is fun to dehumanize them for the sake of making a point. What that point is, I have no idea.

UPDATE: Great minds think alike... skip down to the second item

6 Comments:

Blogger MediaMike said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 26, 2012 at 1:45 PM 
Blogger MediaMike said...

Sorry gang, my PSU comment went on here instead of the correct article, so I had to delete.

As far as this goes, I guess the Prof in question is going to have to raid Pee Wee Herman's or Larry Craig's freezer to get at the really good supplies of "genetic material."

August 26, 2012 at 1:49 PM 
Blogger Senator Blutarsky said...

I guess the “political and cultural progressivism” cited by Arthur Brisbane only frowns upon selected bigotries.

Let’s rewrite the money quote for race rather than gender:

“White people live longer, are healthier and are far less likely to commit a violent offense. If blacks were cars, who would buy the model that doesn’t last as long, is given to lethal incidents and ends up impounded more often?”

Who thinks such a formulation would enjoy scarce op-ed space in the Times?

http://senatorjohnblutarsky.blogspot.com/2012/08/bigotry-at-new-york-times.html

August 26, 2012 at 6:21 PM 
Blogger jake said...

I guess when you advocate gay marriage, Title IX, banning the NFL, and government as your paternal influence, it's a natural step to eliminate men altogether.
But that's the problem for the rest of you guys. I kill bugs, carry the beer in, and referee the in-laws, so I'm safe.

August 26, 2012 at 6:38 PM 
Blogger jake said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 26, 2012 at 6:38 PM 
Blogger CharlieSix said...

But if we get rid of all men how will there be sperm banks to perpetuate the all-female society? Or will the all-female society spew forth males on selective occasions so they can enslave them for their sperm? Other than to continue the female of the species the male of the species is worthless. So let's let it go extinct and let them have what they have wrought. Which is, while they don't know it yet, extinction for themselves.

August 26, 2012 at 9:02 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home