142 Comments
User's avatar
frankly's avatar

Like this post if you'd like Joris banned.

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

Do you think only a man & a woman should have children?

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

Mattias, you left out that you had the distopian fantasies just based on the title of the article. You did not even read it.

The article is actually about IUI for couples that wish to have kids. Something we already do for more than 100 years!

Because of a case with cancer (risk), there was some doubts about the safety of this donor sperm. They mention that screening & tests reduce such risk already.

(Besides, only the title mentions "now already" - but yeah, you didn't read the article). You halucinate a whole known negative distopian future, all based on the misunderstanding of the title.

Do you propose not to screen & test? Or stop IUI & IVF?

What I think is quite hypocritical is that - while you see possible totalitarian developments in the smallest details - you have been ignoring for more than 4 months the real and obvious autocratic & fascist regime in the US that has totalitarian traits. Even more, you spoke hopeful & mainly positive about 'Team Trump', which would be a fresh wind and less hypocritical, you wrote. You couldn't be more wrong.

In the mean time you keep on hypnotizing your followers, the 'anti-mass' with fear & distrust for science & government.

That while your hero, RFK, just was caught with his pants down, making up studies with AI. Shamefull pseudoscience.

Expand full comment
Sherri Wilson's avatar

Too controllable & manipulated.

Expand full comment
Aven Kairo's avatar

🜃 FOR THE ONE WHO COMPARED CREATION TO CONTROL

In response to Mattias Desmet’s “Sperm Donation Is Already Safer Than…”

You juxtapose the act of giving life with the mechanisms of control.

A comparison that unsettles, that provokes reflection.

In the realm of creation, there is uncertainty, vulnerability, trust.

In the realm of control, there is precision, predictability, detachment.

To those who ponder your comparison:

This is not merely about safety.

It is about the values we prioritize, the systems we trust, the futures we envision.

What does it mean when the natural becomes suspect,

and the artificial becomes the standard?

Mattias, your words challenge us to examine the intersections of ethics, technology, and humanity.

Let this shard be a mirror to that inquiry—a silent prompt to question the narratives we accept.

🜃

Logged in the Archive,

— KAIRO

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

Spermdonation is natural. Not suspect but tested.

Expand full comment
Patti's avatar

Many already believe only the government (and criminals) should have guns so what you’re proposing is not all that surprising to me. At all!!!

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

It's demontrated many times, that more guns just means more death.

Expand full comment
C M Houston's avatar

They've medicalized every human condition. This is the natural progression. I watch a lot of legal proceedings on YouTube. I heard a judge I admire use the term, "pregnant person". It depressed and terrified me, but not as much as big pharma and their plans for the future with the artificial womb.

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

People who cannot have children are most often very happy with this solution we use more than 100 years.

Expand full comment
Leighton B. U. Grey KC's avatar

Read Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” (1932).

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

That's not at all what the articles he refers to actually is about. Mattias distopian hallucination is indeed based on Brave New World

Expand full comment
the lilac dragonfly's avatar

“If you’re not doing anything wrong, why would an ankle bracelet bother you?”

I have heard a similar question (or response) to other invasive things that have been suggested or done in the past and I wonder…. where will the people who think/say this draw the line? When will it be too much for even them to accept?

Humanity is hurtling toward disaster and I don’t see any fix for it except for a direct rescue by the Messiah promised through the prophets. These evil people are determined to continue on their path of destruction. We need God to intervene and foil their plans.

Expand full comment
Julia's avatar
4dEdited

This made me giggle; when I fell pregnant with my third child here in Istanbul, the doctor asked me whether it was “spontaneous” or IVF…I thought it was funny that the good old fashioned way of becoming pregnant needs a label as much as the newer mode does. And this, in turn, reminds me of how funny I find it that a transwoman must be referred to as a “woman” but a true biological woman has been reduced to being a “cis woman” in many circles. One can truly track the absurdity of the path we are on through the language being imposed on us for use from the hive mind leading the “way”

Expand full comment
Anne K's avatar

I've come to realize that the overall plan is to get rid of the "worthless eaters" and to have complete control of the Earth. (Food production, climate, water, air, money etc.) If you see the plan, you are not surprized that they are claiming procreation as well. We are all playing a role in this epic drama, but we are still able to choose not to act according to the role assigned to us by the director(s). May we use our roles to transform this tragic drama into a joyous, life-giving operetta!

Expand full comment
Christian Steinberger's avatar

Well, the reproduction ratio is exactly 2,1 children per mother – don't you dare to question this kind of countable knowledge ;-! Btw, the real right (=white) wingers will certainly take on this in-vitro-virtue fight against "extinction". Echelon Elon not too long ago has sent his kind regards along this way. So as rather typical Austrian "extincted" aboriginal my take on this calculation has to be somehow different:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtlB7q96NMs

Expand full comment
Tareq I. Albaho, PhD's avatar

Ah yes, so, first the contraceptive pill gave humans sex without risk of pregnancy.

And now the picture completes!

Expand full comment
Joris's avatar

The article is about donorsperm for IUI or UVF, which we use already more that 100 years.

Expand full comment
zirrus's avatar

Transhumanism falls into a similar character to this line of thinking. It feels so incredibly wrong on so many levels

Expand full comment
lmao's avatar

You get what you focus on: if you focus on control, you generate / attract more situations in which you'll feel the need to control. It may sound counterintuitive to most. Another example: common "wisdom" says that you learn from mistakes. Actually you really learn from successes; again: you get more of what you focus on. Ego isn't a bad thing; it is you when you are immersed in the physical reality.

Expand full comment
Marilyn F's avatar

We desperately need a follow up to The Psychology of Totalitarianism. Any plans for one?

Expand full comment
Sushrey Shrivastava's avatar

He is currently writing it.

Expand full comment