Crosspost "The woman's egg, a myth?" from /r/antifeminists:

I am writing here by choosing my audience because I know that this kind of discourse would not be appropriate elsewhere and I therefore think that because of your more correct vision of society you are more inclined to go through the phases of listening and reflection than others.

​

I'm just presenting you with my thoughts based on science and linking them to the discoveries.

​

First of all, cloning has been discovered and practised on animals. The principle is simple, to recover DNA and thus an organic cell of the being that one wishes to clone and to inject it into an ovum of a genetically close animal. Thus fertilizing a horse's egg with the DNA of a zebra will be more difficult than that of another horse. Once the living being is born, it will be identical regardless of the egg used for the DNA used to replace the sperm.

It would therefore seem that in replacing sperm, DNA from a healthy organic tissue used is the only determining factor for the genetic code of the clone.

Thus the result is independent of the ovum and thus of the female's DNA and the clone will be unrelated to the "mother".

​

Secondly, it is known that sex is predictable is physical characteristics of the child based on the sperm and not the egg. This second point being natural and without human interraction shows us that the sperm seems to be a major factor and even the dominant factor for certain characteristics.

​

A third point being a new experiment that few of you have heard of because of the influence of feminism in the media.Just as the influence of the church in the past that censored scientists prove that the earth was round and that the sun did not revolve around the earth because of the contradictions it created with the holy scriptures here this discovery simply tells us that we can do without female eggs. Indeed, several experiments have been conducted on different types of animals and in order to replace the egg it is enough to take any cell of a living organism and "activate" a state that allows the "management " of sperm and multiplication. Thus one can create beings living at another time without egg and sperm. The combination of the two will only lead us to a clone and thus a living being identical to the DNA selected to fertilize the artificial egg. So if we want to have a new healthy and really new living being, it is normal to use a sperm to fertilize an artificial egg and implant it in a host.

​

So there is only one step missing to create a human without a woman, that is to say the creation of an artificial incubator.

​

Of course this would be too embarrassing for feminists and the mystification that the woman has always been surrounded by because the baby comes out of her.

​

Cloning.

Artificialization of the egg.

Fertilization without an egg or sperm.

Posted by feminismIsMisandry0 | 22 July 2020 | Link