.

.

.

.

.

High-price sperm solicitation not particularly troubling

A thirty-four year old woman in Burlingame is hoping to give birth to a healthy, intelligent and attractive child sometime within the next two years.

This gives her something in common with nearly all other hopeful mothers in the world. What separates her from the pack, however — and makes her controversial to some — is the method by which she is hoping to have the child, via artificial insemination with sperm from a Stanford male.

In fact, she is willing to pay $15,000 for the sperm of a tall, handsome and personable Stanford student with blond hair and blue eyes.

The offer has sparked debate among students and community members over its implications and the bar it might set for future sperm donations. Certainly, important ethical and moral issues come into play with this or any other reproductive matter. However, those not opposed to sperm donation in general should think twice before calling this woman’s offer unethical. Also, those who are not troubled by the use of appearance-based preferences for dating and marriage partners should not be troubled by the specificity of the woman’s request.

Yes, the $15,000 sum is exorbitant. But sperm donors are already handsomely compensated — at the cryobank on this campus, for instance, anonymous donors can expect to earn $150 a week over a six-month period. By agreeing to pay a much greater sum, the woman is hoping to generate attention and a large pool of potential donors. This will also give her more personal choice in the matter, as she will get to meet candidates before deciding whose sperm to receive.

The price tag is eye-opening and may seem like it might cause a student to change his principles. However, if the monetary reward makes someone consider sperm donation, that would not necessarily be an ethical compromise. The donor may come to believe, as many people already do, that sperm donation is a noble act, as it gives women otherwise unable to bear children an opportunity to do so.


Additionally, the vastly different relative weight that $15,000 carries for individual students should be considered by those wishing to pass judgement on the donors.

The second argument that many of the woman’s critics have raised is that her request is superficial or even racist. By limiting the field to handsome, tall, blond-haired and blue-eyed candidates, she is excluding many otherwise worthy males from contention.

However, many people consciously or subconsciously make appearance-based decisions when determining whom to date, marry and procreate with. To some women, this means dating males who are six feet or taller. To others, it may mean only dating men with broad shoulders or dark hair. These are simply questions of preference, and women who date men with these phenotypes are maximizing the chances that their children will share the characteristics.

This particular woman has limited the candidate field to Caucasian males, but that alone says nothing about her attitudes towards members of other ethnic groups. In his book “The Disuniting of America,” historian Arthur Schlesinger reports that over 85 percent of marriages in America today are between members of the same race. This in and of itself does not mean that over 85 percent of Americans are racist — it simply means that most of them, for whatever reason, marry within their own race and thus guarantee that their children will be racially similar to themselves.

Admittedly, a future world in which the best genes for offspring went to the highest bidder is a scary thought. However, this case is anomalous, and still more than 99 percent of pregnancies result from traditional male-female coupling. This woman’s offer does nothing to change that reality.

Those who oppose sperm donation, artificial insemination or appearance-based mate preferences would be consistent to challenge the Burlingame woman’s offer. However, it would be inconsistent and hypocritical for those who condone or partake in these practices to cast negative judgement upon this woman or the Stanford donor candidates.

Fucking hell... 15000 grands!! I know most of you guys aren't exactly what I would disribe as "a tall, handsome and personable Stanford student with blond hair and blue eyes" so you might have to settle for a bit lower, but still!


daily.stanford.edu . . .

You two are both jackasses.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

You two are both jackasses.

Hahaha, not at all! Masturbation is natural and important process for all primates. The Bonobo seems to have found the perfect equilibrium in their "society" we should take that as an exemple, sexual frustration is probably one of the biggest problem maker in our civilisation! So even if I'm not a real fan of naked babes on a pc screen, I rather have the real thing and enjoy obviously, I'm all for it... keep up the good work!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.