For many years many men were harvested for their sperm, and this harvest of sperm went towards increasing the financial gain of the IVF industry. There were IVF companies actually listed on the stock market.

But not once did any feminist complain about the harvesting of men’s sperm for financial gain. So why are feminists now so vocal about the harvesting of women’s eggs for financial gain.

For goodness sake, please explain how it is difficult to harvest sperm? Does harvesting sperm involve the man taking hormones that cause the testicles to swell to the size of a grapefruit? Does it make the man sick for days or weeks? Does it involve invasive surgery?

If men are somehow suffering from donating their sperm (which I doubt very much!) then this is a mens issue, for men to address. Women already take on so much of mens work in domestic situations for example, without taking on mens health and social issues as well.

But by all means, if you can make a case for how devastating sperm donation is for men, I'm sure there will be women who will be only too happy to support your position.

Great article. Good to see this issue actually being raised in a serious manner, and the liberal arguments of 'choice' being analysed.

To HRS: Sperm donation is nothing like harvesting eggs. As Dr Klein has explained, egg donation involves taking a cocktail of various potentially quite dangerous hormones over a period of time, and then an invasive procedure. If sperm donation required men to take hormones and then have say a catheter put up their penis to extract the sperm, i doubt very many would have so generously donated (but if this was the case, and society expected men to sacrifice their health anyway, then I would certainly have a problem with it). Likewise, if egg donation simply required masturbation and then collecting the 'juices' from outside the body, then organisations such as Hands Off Our Ovaries wouldn't have a problem with it. As Dr Klein has clearly explained, it is the fact that egg harvesting is *dangerous to the health of women* that is the issue.

Scientists will not butcher women to get their eggs. If you truly believe that they intend to harm women then you are delusional. Safety is their foremost concern.

Women cut themselves apart with cosmetic surgery and they tamper with their hormones ALL THE TIME. That is their choice and we let them make this choice.

Women can do whatever they want with their bodies. You have no right to tell other women what they can and can't do.

This article represents everything that is wrong with political allegiances. Get over it. If you think about what they are choosing in society now or that you can control what they do, you should rethink your place in a Democracy.

This is terrible, just terrible...

Elka,
If you don’t have an interest in male health, then you don’t have an interest in 50% of the population.

If women are indignant about being treated as a commodity, then there are also many men who are also indignant about being treated as a commodity.

There are IVF companies that offer a reduction in the cost of a woman’s IVF treatment if the woman donates eggs at the same time. Both men and women are being harvested and treated as a comodity, and I think that there are many men who are now quite indignant about the way they are being treated by IVF companies, and also by feminists.

Because men have donated sperm there is one famous feminist (Germaine Greer) who has said that men are now “surplus to requirements”, and another famous feminist (Maureen Dowd) who has said that men “have no more value than ice-cream”. Neither feminist was opposed by any feminist organisation anywhere in the world, so why should men have much regard for feminists.

If you research it, you will begin to see that it may not be necessary in the future to have an egg or have sperm to create a human life form. With future developments in genetic engineering, a human life could be created from a single cell from any part of the body. That technology does not need to involve eggs or sperm. All that is necessary is a single cell and the right chromosomes, so I would think that the companies behind genetic engineering have to be very closely monitored and controlled.

HRS,

It is not that I am disinterested in mens health, i have a husband and two sons. But you were suggesting that because feminists raise a womens health issue, they must therefore raise mens health issues in the same way, at the same time. If feminists don't do this well then, they "don't care" about men according to you. Men have a voice too, that is why I would think it fair for men to speak up about their own health issues, women can't do absolutely everything for you. Certainly if men did speak up about some issue that was degrading to them or exploitative, women would then have the opportunity to speak out in support, I certainly would.

However I'm yet to see men being supportive of women in this regard.

You mentioned feminists who have said stupid things. I can only speak for myself, I don't support dehumanising attitudes towards men and would refute any woman who did this. The author of this article is Renate Klein, has she said such things? Unless you can say this for sure, then it is unfair to claim that she holds the same view as Greer or Dowd just as it would be unfair for me to claim that you think the same as men who beat their wives for example. Its called stereotyping and it distracts from the issue doesn't it?

"If you research it, you will begin to see that it may not be necessary in the future to have an egg or have sperm to create a human life form."

Well that sounds scary. Its time to stop screwing around with human life before we completely lose our humanity.

There are a number of ethical issues with this debate, womens health is just one, unfortunately it continues to be swept under the carpet by people using "choice" to justify absolutely everything. Clearly, not all choices are acceptable in society otherwise our laws would be meaningless.