It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why we no longer need men! Or why Parthenogenesis is cool!

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 09:59 AM

In a study reported Friday in the Journal of Fish Biology, scientists said DNA testing proved that a pup carried by a female blacktip shark in a Virginia aquarium contained no genetic material from a male.

Virgin birth has been proven in some bony fish, amphibians, reptiles and birds, and has been suspected among sharks in the wild.

"It is possible that parthenogenesis could become more common in these sharks if population densities become so low that females have trouble finding mates," said Mahmood Shivji, one of the scientists and director of the Guy Harvey Research Institute at Nova Southeastern University in Florida.

All I am saying is somebody needs to get a grant and study this! Women of the world unite! The main down side to this however is who is going to take out the trash and mow the lawn?

There is a ongoing hypothesis called "mueler's rachet" that states that i any asexual population the amount of genetic deficiencies will build up to a point that the purely asexually reproducing organisms are doomed given any length of time. But we could keep a few males around just to mix things up a bit!

This is just cool because it has been long rumored in sharks but never really proven completely true until recently.

(title edit)

[edit on 11-10-2008 by Jbird]

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 10:38 AM
Without men, you'd be living in grass huts on a subsistence diet. Marginalize men, and society crumbles. And when societies crumble, women revert to being nothing more than property.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 10:57 AM
reply to post by sir_chancealot

You're one of my favourite posters and I always enjoy your comments.

I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you here, but when you have a moment, could you expand on your above post please ?

Which society do you mean, when you say 'society would crumble' ? What sort of society ? Do you believe the society we now live in to be the optimum ? Would grass hut type societies be an improvement .. or not .. were today's western-type societies to crumble (if in fact they would) due to lack of male influence ?

Thanks : )

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:00 AM
Yes, because lord knows men aren't real people, and should be exterminated as soon as possible.

Do you have any idea how crazy this makes you sound?

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:05 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Men and women need each other; and not just for reproductive needs.

When we all work together we provide balance and stability.

Rather then try to say one or the other isn't necessary we should celebrate our differences and rejoice in the balance one provides the other.

Besides, I like men most of them are pretty darn nice.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:09 AM
reply to post by kupoliveson

You see the only problem with Your theory is that after men become useless (or start thinking that way) , they will stop umm loving You and will start fighting You. And sorry to say that but the only thing that helps You keep men in check is your sexuality and the fact that our brain produces something called "love" which prevents us (in most cases) to deliver any pain towards the one we love.

After those simple facts are taken away umm well You become highly intelligent toys to us and start becoming a property which means we start treating You like we did in the cave times , which means rapes , beating , keeping women for fun etc..

You see the sad fact is that we are much better at killing then women are , which is not a good thing but sadly its even worse for You in the case of a gender war

I am not trying to bash You or anything , just trying to point out the obvious flaws in thinking that way.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:16 AM
reply to post by kupoliveson

Well you really set yourself up here.

I think the ancient wisdom of nature and evolution says otherwise.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:16 AM
What a thread!

If I could interject here, perhaps the OP could do a little soul-searching [if she believes in such a thing] and figure out just why, oh why there's so much obvious resentment toward men. Generally, those who champion the elimination of some segment of the population have some unfortunate [and unnecessary!] inferiority complex in regards to the object of their genocide.

Fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds. Small brains.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:19 AM
reply to post by Thill

I can understand you feel threatened, hence your actually quite violent comments regarding women

However, maybe you should take a step back.

Women are perfectly placed to destroy men.

When is a man MOST vulnerable? During sex and particularly during orgasm. A woman could kill a man then without much effort at all.

And have you forgotten who actually raises males to adulthood ?
That's right .. women .. mothers.
Think about that.

You seem to be thinking in terms of male size and strength.
But men, in middle and old age, are feeble.
Who cares for all those feeble older men?
Right again. Women, in the main.

Who cooks most of the meals in a man's life?
Uh huh. Women.
Think about it.

So while I'm not agreeing at all that societies would be better without men, I do think you need to reconsider your attitude.

Or maybe you already appreciate your many vulnerabilities, and this .. along with what seems an undeniably misogynistic streak .. might be what prompted your post -- which I interpreted to contain considerable 'threat'.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:27 AM
This post has gone from fish having virgin births to why women hate men, and why women need men, and both are vice versa.

I'll address the post

Virgin birth is a good way to sustain a population when it is low, esp for sharks. Psst, they're endangered, remember the list you were taught back in grade school? It has a condor on it!

Anyway, the problem w/ it is that the pups will have more/bigger chance of congenital defects and all that, also, it virtually lessens the diversity in their genes from one shark to another, and then incest will come to play and all that.

SO women, if you want to get rid of men, think about that for a sec. Also, what if you virgin birthed a man? Besides, if all the men would disappear, the world would go to ruin. Because we all know lots of women are opinionated, and cant really get along w/ each other, and absolutly NONE of them are realistic or think in rational terms....never get married guys

edited for grammatical error....

and yes, i know, i do sound like a typical man, just speaking from experience of the women i've met in my life....not trying to bash any women or anything like that. just speaking my honest opinion
[edit on 10/01/2008 by DirtyHarry]

[edit on 10/01/2008 by DirtyHarry]

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:28 AM
I am a woman, and a slight feminist. That means that I know that I can live and support myself without a man. But, I am not one that thinks the world would be a better place without men.

I like men. I especially like my man. Men make life interesting. And, I like an interesting life.

And, generalizations are never a good thing. Women can make a life and support themselves without men. Men can make a life and support themselves without women. But, it is a lot better if the right woman meets the right man and they make a life together.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:33 AM
Well, I have my sons to think about here as well!

The world has too much of one kind of aggressive energy running the various shows right now, but what it needs is a blending of the two energies, so we have civilized caring equal societies. We need to work harder to make that happen, but I have a certain fondness for the male species. They look so dam good in jeans!

[edit on 10-10-2008 by mystiq]

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:33 AM
reply to post by Dock6

Um lol I think you misunderstood my post , I do not feel threatened by womans and I believe they are as much needed in our society as men .

But you did fail to see my point of view , like I said in todays society everything is like you stated but You see I was referring to the future scenario when men start being useless .

Sex ? what sex , when we start threating women like toys there wont be any loving sex around .

Cooking , um I beg to differ , i can cook as much as any woman or even much better , so does alot of my male friends (heh my own GF would burn water in the kitchen if I left her alone

Carring for older or for children , of course because most of the time (not always) men are at work earning money while women stay at home taking care of the old and the young . But if we had to we could do the same (lots and lots of single fathers that do take care of their young pretty well

So you see of course in todays society women are as you say they are but I was talking about the hypothetical scenario of a gender war , in which case you do have to admit that men do have more predispositions towards war than women do .

PS: Women are as much feebile as men in their old days.

So please do not tell me I hate women , on the contraty I love women

PS2: Think over that for a second ... What gives women the power over men in nowadays ? Its their sexuality and their ways to mistify men and subtle ways of manipulation to get what they want

We are simple creatures and thats what women use to umm have power over us
, but sadly we are simple creatures which can be deadly because sometimes we do not think to much before acting

So just to clarify , I do not hate women , and anybdy who says that has no idea who I am or how I think , I was just pointing the obvious flaws in the theory. peace

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:36 AM
Well, I disagree that what happens in sharks has any real bearing on humans. After all, there is lots of asexual reproduction going on out there.

Besides, with all the frozen sperm in the world, you really dont need that as an excuse to get rid of all the existing men if that was your goal.

I also disagree with Sir_Chancealot that we would be living in grass huts without men. (Although with the way some women act around men I can see why he might assume that) There is no reason women would not be capable of sustaining the trappings of society without males. There are quite a few women building, and working in power plants, etc. Also, there is always the possibility that without men around to pick up the slack the ditzier and more helpless of the women would have to step up to the plate and woman up, rather than simply use their sexuality to exploit males for what they want. I have seen lots of women that seemed to be pretty average in their ability to lift things, hold conversation, etc., that suddenly develop limp wrists and minds when a "big strong male" comes along.

The question for me is, why would getting rid of men be on the table at all?

Men are not all bad. They are no worse by nature than women. There are as many crappy women in the world as crappy men, if there is a problem with some individuals of either gender it is socialization in my opinion, not something inherent to a specific gender. (Though an argument could be made that human nature itself is flawed.)

There are religions and cultures that have elevated men so far above women that there is a real and serious problem, like parts of the middle east, but that isnt a male problem, it is a religion problem. Oddly enough, there are usually just as many women supporting these religions as men.

Was this thread tongue in cheek? Or were you serious about the possibility of doing away with them? I personally would not want them gone, and I cannot imagine anyone seriously proposing that.

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:36 AM
Well, I believe that the scientific article cited by the OP is of great interest. However, I may be mistaken but the opinion and deliverance of the OP may violate some kind of forum rules/international law in what appears to indirectly advocate genocide.

This has resulted in a gender war of posts, that will probably go on for many more pages, serving only to build angst against each other.

kupoliveson, I feel you should re-evaluate your opinion and edit your original post to focus exclusivley on the scientific aspect of the study and not on your prejudice desires to marginalize/cleanse a segment of the global population. It has only resulted in causing turmoil between people.

(now posting in regards to the actual topic and not the op's instigation) I beleive the icnreased rate of asexual reproduction in a typically sexually reproducing organism, in this case the shark, is a last dicth evolutionary effort of the species to survive and self perpetuate. Assuming that it's environment can rebound to sustain greater numbers and its predation become significantly reduced, this may prove to be temporarily successful.

However, at this point in time, due to human exploitation of the seas, over fishing of many shark species, and habitat destruction as a result of the overfishing (loss of food) and pollution (putrification of its living space), I believe that increased incidents of this happening are simply an end of the line indicator for the species. I do not see this species as being able to recover if it has been forced to retreat to this biological function to continue perpetuating its species. Sad.

[edit on 10/10/2008 by DYepes]

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:36 AM
In addition, the energies I'm talking about that are so out of balanced in this brutal dog eat dog world, are not completely confined to each sex. There are many variations and individuals out there too!

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 11:44 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 07:24 PM
reply to post by sir_chancealot

At least in the native american culture it was the woman of the population that farmed and made thier homes! While the men folk left for long lengths of time to hunt. I will allow you the fact the woman are physically the weaker sex but mentally we are more than capable and we now have GREAT equalizers namely guns and other weapons which even if society ended tomorrow would still be in abundant supply! It is going to take more than physical prowess to men to over power woman even in the face of the breakdown society!

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 07:37 PM
I am frequently amazed that most men aren't killed in their sleep. I understand the irony and subtle humor of the OP, I think. My darlin' wouldn't kill me in my sleep, as we both share tasks that contribute toward the whole that we are. Her strengths compliment my weaknesses, and vice-versa. That's a partnership, and we have love as a bonus.

I can't help thinking -- and have thought for a long time -- that the world might be a better place if women were in power. I think emphasis would be placed more on real needs, and real issues. Certainly there are female monsters the same as there are male, but I think their numbers are less, much less.

Now, I'm likely to take some heat for the following statement, and that's fine. Just know it is my belief. I think that women, in general, are more aware and more supportive of nurture notions. I think we're not so far from the Savannah that we humans pretend to be, and I think that compassion and ...... planning, goals, analysis of patterns.... are more inherent, overall, in the female of the species. I think men tend more toward competition and agression and are more hormonally governed than most of us would care to admit.

There. Flame away. Prove my point

posted on Oct, 10 2008 @ 07:49 PM
reply to post by DYepes

First the whole thing was kind of a joke, BTW! I am in NO way advocating the genocide of any race, creed or sex! Kind of typed things really quick as I was and now am STILL am at work... I spent some time with Dr. Margulis during my undergraduate studies so I am very familliar with the question of "why sex"?

Second if people can get away with posting debates on men being more intelligent than women then I do not see what is wrong with it! Biologically it is completely possible for human woman to reproduce with only small numbers of men! That is the basis of popualtion control from an animal stand point, take the deer population lets say... the reason you have more doe permits given out is because in many parts of this country deer are over populated and despite that everyone sees all deer as "bambie" in large crowded populations they become nasty disease ridden vermin! In order to keep the deer population in check you kill off as many females as possible cause if you killed off a bunch of the males it would not even make a dent in population #'s.

The only thing stopping women from doing this is acurate non-invasive methods of sexing fetuses... By non-invasive I mean through sperm sorting not IVF. There are methods out there but they leave a lot to be desired as far as accuracy goes. Of course there is a whole other ethical arguement to why they would not be a good thing, one of the biggest is that many cultures including our own would tend to select men which history has shown to be a HUGE mistake, because you have too many men things get ulgy QUICK!

Although China's one child policy is really going to deter population growth again because of the LACK of females!

Finally the cause of this is NOT I believe because of pollution or exctinction but is most likely is predomintally unreconized and would not have been noticed if the shark was not the only female of the species within the tank. Most likely it happens occasionally out in the wild but no one reliezes it! Although there are some animals capable of switching back and forth from sexual to asexual reproduction depending on living conditions but asexual reproduction in these animals is used during times of plenty and sexual during times of stress.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in