Wilmut’s team named the sheep cloned from a single adult cell “Dolly” because that cell had come from a mammary gland. I’m tempted, on that basis alone, to cast my vote against human cloning. I mean, if that kind of short-sightedness or immaturity is going to be running things, they’re bound to go horribly wrong.
Did they really not foresee that “Dolly” would become headline news? Or did they not even recognize how juvenile they were being? Mammaries = women = mammaries. We are not seen as people, or perhaps colleagues, certainly never as bosses. Really, need I go on? This is all so old. And yet, grown men, brilliant men, on the cutting edge of science, who become headline news, are apparently still forcing farts at the dinner table and snickering about it.
So, cloning? I don’t think so. Not until the other half of the species grows up.
(Then again, since cloning means we finally don’t need them at all, not even to maintain the species, let’s go for it.) (Could it be they never thought of that either – that cloning makes males totally redundant?)
1 comment
Since men are in control, cloning could make females redundant as well. Instead cloning non-gendered or hermaphroditic people and eliminating all others may resolve all the angst? The only problem with cloning is it does not offer genetic diversity (mixing of gene pools from sexual reproduction) which we will need to overcome the problems our male dominated society is doing to fup the world.