The other day I was reading a book and a question was posed are people a product of their genes or of their environment or as the academics put it Nature Vs Nurture and I wondered how that applied to many things including sexuality.  With science rapidly improving we are able to dip into and alter the gene pool and genetically modify everything from crops to humans.  In 2015 scientists altered the DNA of human embryos, genetically modifying them using a method called the Crisper technique.  Welcome to the Brave New World where science fiction written in 1931 is becoming a reality.

With the technology available today scientists and doctors are now be able to change a person’s physical, intellectual and possibly even mental capabilities through this engineering.  It will allow in the future the riddance of many hereditary diseases and allow man to play god.  Regardless of where your stance is ethically on this it does pose some uncomfortable questions like –

Under What circumstances could this genetic engineering take place?

Who would qualify?  Would it be only used to correct ailments and deformities or would it be optional for parents to choose the color of there to be born child’s hair or eyes?

What controls will be put in place?

Will it be used to improve intellectual abilities of the masses?

But what about SEX?

The sex of a new-born child can be genetically engineered to that of the parents, or viewing into the future, the buyers/creators choices.  So that is all well and good but how about sexuality and sexual preferences.  With sexual revolution in the late 60’s and early 70’s tolerance between sexual preferences, now being politically correct genders, was practiced by most.  It was still accepted that there was a man and a woman but the expectation that relationships be solely between a man and a woman were broadened and there were the straights (some being closeted straights) and the LGBT community was formed which stands for Lesbian Gay, Bisexual and Transsexual.

In the 90’s the LGBT acronym was expanded to LGBTQ the Q standing for Queer or Questioning.  In the year 2000 this new gender equality world there were 63 accepted variations of gender rather than that of a man and a woman.  The question of gender equality was raised and debate began as being a sex positive community what additional genders should be included and in the United States the acronym became LGBTQQIP2SAA whilst in the United Kingdom it became LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA.  This has been expanded further still and some acronyms carry 26 letters which is just absurd, sensible gender accepting people now simply use LGBTQ+.

In Australia we are currently in the middle of a plebiscite for same sex marriage.  Controversy has raged with many members of the public who thought that the vote was to allow a man to marry a man or a woman to marry a woman. Many are still not aware that there that included in this vote are over 100 genders and the vote is for the legal right for one human being to marry another human being regardless of sex, sexual preference or gender.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I will vote ‘Yes’ and I am an advocate in same sex marriage but even I struggle with a gender that is described as a ‘Feminine Male That is Attracted to a Bisexual Hermaphromale’.  In any event different strokes for different folks and certainly in principle, and in practice.

So where am I going with this?  If we can genetically engineer the sex of a child and there are now over 100 gender identities where does the future of sex lie?  Will government regulate what gender preferences there are available?  Will there be scope to tailor make and custom build your future child’s gender?  Will gender society become more fragmented in the Brave New World that can be a reality and there become gender exclusive communities, or cities or will we come back to strict definitions of a man and a woman.

There is nothing natural about genetic engineering but is it possible that nurture may overcome genetic engineering?

Scarier still the technology to clone humans already exists – however difficult it may be.  So why has a human being not been cloned officially? Who knows what has occurred off the record?  Your baby boy has just died, would you not love to have the exact human clone produced from his DNA?  It is not easy to clone primates but with enough money and resources it would be.  The reason is that commercially it is not viable to clone a human, and some would throw in the ethical argument.

Most humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes that are basically identical and found in almost every cells nucleus.  The differences between humans are caused by genes that segments of DNA that make each human being unique.  However as this DNA is passed down from mother and father to offspring there are traits will be unique to them which allows for DNA testing.  Believe it or not DNA testing will accurately test for family ancestry for at least 5 generations and if the gene pool is strong enough up to 700 years.  So we are not all from the same gene pool.

Livestock cloning is business and successful. Intrexon a bio-tech company has been cloning sheep, cattle, pigs and pets for years.  The average price to clone your recently passed canine it about US $100,000 but that is a small amount when you consider cloning a successful race horse.  Buying one that is bred can cost millions of dollars – however will the racing authorities allow you to put a cloned horse on the track?  Well perhaps not!  However in 2013 Polo star Adolfo Cambiaso rode on a cloned horse, their team winning the Argentine Polo Open.

 

So what happens when in the future if we start cloning human beings?  Imagine the same scenario as before but rather than just losing your baby boy you also lost you sweet daughter.  You were a nucleur family – husband and wife with son and daughter.  You are distressed beyond belief and in your despair look at cloning as an option but because of the cost involved you can only afford to create one.  You cannot make the choice so you choose to use DNA from both.

Forget about the moral and legal injustice that a clone is not born so therefore cannot be considered a human being.  Cross-cloning can be done between the same species?  Theoretically most experts agree that the result could only be female in sex.  But hang on a second, cloning creates an embryo.  Scientists genetically engineer an embryo to make changes, including sex.  Do you see where I am heading with this?

Let us hope that we do not enter this brave new world, but if we do what will it mean for sex, sexuality and gender options?

Save

Save

Save