I’ve wondered if we do make a transition to a society where extreme healthy life extension becomes feasible and a part of mainstream medicine whether we’ll see a pattern where women on average still choose to die more or less on schedule while men on average choose the longevity treatments. That could work out well for the straight alpha males and the alpha wannabes who value women for sex but not much else, because they would always have new crops of women coming to fruition for their sexual adventures while they forget the dying older ones; but the situation could distress the men who become emotionally involved with the women in their lives, value their companionship and don’t want to see these women age and die.
I’ve noticed that the relatively few women who sign up for cryonics on their own initiative generally don’t have, and apparently don’t want, children, though I know of a couple of fertility-oriented mom types. One of these motherhood-averse women told me that well before she discovered cryonics and sought out male cryonicists as companions, she had a tubal ligation in her early 20′s. (She had a scar in the right place.)
But for the most part the cryonics movement remains a male-dominated social space, and I don’t see that changing any time soon.
To add a data point, I found myself, to put it strongly, literally losing the will to live recently: I’m 20 and female and I’m kind of at the emotional maturity stage. I think my brain stopped saying “live! Stay alive!” and started saying “Make babies! Protect babies!”, because I started finding the idea of cryopreserving myself as less attractive and more repulsive, with no change in opinion for preserving my OH, and an increase in how often I thought about doing the right thing for my future kids. To the extent that I now get orders of magnitude more panicked about anything happening to my reproductive system than dying after future children reach adulthood.
I’m not sure for what proportion of women the thought process goes “The future wouldn’t want me (because I won’t be able to make babies)”, with the part in brackets powering the rationalisation-hamster.
Fortunately I learned to spot rationalisation from instinct a while back, but I’m still not sure what I can do, if anything, to correct for the shift.
Would you say you’re basically shifting into a mindset where your future babies are more important than you are? Like the proverbial friendly AI which values its own existence, not because that’s a terminal value, but because that’s an instrumental value—it can’t do good if it doesn’t still exist.
My hamster (human instinct) very definitely is. The rational me shouldn’t be: I know I’m more than my reproductive organs! The problem is, on issues like this hamster is pretty loud, and it’s not obvious on an intuitive level that “hamster terminal values” are actually “me-instrumental values” (since my life is not about placating hamster, but placating hamster helps me be happy and productive)!
I’m suspecting that most people don’t have this kind of grasp on their hamster-minds though, and female hamsters are pretty destructive on these issues.
To the extent that I now get orders of magnitude more panicked about anything happening to my reproductive system than dying after future children reach adulthood...Fortunately I learned to spot rationalisation from instinct a while back, but I’m still not sure what I can do, if anything, to correct for the shift.
Are you aware that eggs can be frozen? Given how many women hit their 40s and discover they cannot bear children, the cost-benefit analysis might be interesting to do.
“Whether you are aware of your incessantly ticking biological clock or not, the absolute last thing that any woman of steadily advancing childbearing age wants to hear when she flips on the morning news shows is: Women lose 90 percent of their eggs by age 30.
Using a mathematical model and data from 325 women, the researchers found that the average woman is born with around 300,000 eggs and steadily loses them as she ages, with just 12 percent of those eggs remaining at the age of 30, and only 3 percent left by 40.
Also, as another data point, it is possible that the recent change in your “will to parent” might reverse polarity again once you hit your late twenties and early thirties. I’ve been amazed at this change that has sort of crept up on me over the last few years—from wanting “at least three” in my early to mid twenties to finding the whole enterprise rather frightening (in terms of lifestyle changes and sacrifices needing to be made). It’s possible I’m completely atypical since there are no shortage of stories of women in their thirties becoming even more desperate for children.
For a 30-yo? No; I’m afraid I just understand the fertility curve looks something like an inverted U centered around the late teens. If I had to guess, I think the infertility rate is something like a quarter or fifth by the 40s so maybe half that or less for 30?
This is something you should really research yourself. On the plus side, if you keep notes and you write up your final cost-benefit calculation and actual decision, it’d make a good Article or Discussion post.
To add a data point, I found myself, to put it strongly, literally losing the will to live recently: I’m 20 and female and I’m kind of at the emotional maturity stage. I think my brain stopped saying “live! Stay alive!” and started saying “Make babies! Protect babies!”, because I started finding the idea of cryopreserving myself as less attractive and more repulsive, with no change in opinion for preserving my OH, and an increase in how often I thought about doing the right thing for my future kids. To the extent that I now get orders of magnitude more panicked about anything happening to my reproductive system than dying after future children reach adulthood.
As the aforementioned OH, I’m wondering if “quizzical” counts as a normal reaction to reading this.
Thank you for the link! Note that the .pdf version of the article (which is also referenced in dbaupp’s link) has a record of the “hostile-wife” cases over a span of 8 years.
whether we’ll see a pattern where women on average still choose to die more or less on schedule while men on average choose the longevity treatments
Mainstream society thinks it’s normal for everyone to want to stay young for as long as possible. Women spend billions on preserving youth and beauty—no aversion to “extreme healthy life extension” there.
I guess you missed the controversy this article generated a couple years back:
http://www.evidencebasedcryonics.org/is-that-what-love-is-the-hostile-wife-phenomenon-in-cryonics/
I’ve wondered if we do make a transition to a society where extreme healthy life extension becomes feasible and a part of mainstream medicine whether we’ll see a pattern where women on average still choose to die more or less on schedule while men on average choose the longevity treatments. That could work out well for the straight alpha males and the alpha wannabes who value women for sex but not much else, because they would always have new crops of women coming to fruition for their sexual adventures while they forget the dying older ones; but the situation could distress the men who become emotionally involved with the women in their lives, value their companionship and don’t want to see these women age and die.
I’ve noticed that the relatively few women who sign up for cryonics on their own initiative generally don’t have, and apparently don’t want, children, though I know of a couple of fertility-oriented mom types. One of these motherhood-averse women told me that well before she discovered cryonics and sought out male cryonicists as companions, she had a tubal ligation in her early 20′s. (She had a scar in the right place.)
But for the most part the cryonics movement remains a male-dominated social space, and I don’t see that changing any time soon.
To add a data point, I found myself, to put it strongly, literally losing the will to live recently: I’m 20 and female and I’m kind of at the emotional maturity stage. I think my brain stopped saying “live! Stay alive!” and started saying “Make babies! Protect babies!”, because I started finding the idea of cryopreserving myself as less attractive and more repulsive, with no change in opinion for preserving my OH, and an increase in how often I thought about doing the right thing for my future kids. To the extent that I now get orders of magnitude more panicked about anything happening to my reproductive system than dying after future children reach adulthood.
I’m not sure for what proportion of women the thought process goes “The future wouldn’t want me (because I won’t be able to make babies)”, with the part in brackets powering the rationalisation-hamster.
Fortunately I learned to spot rationalisation from instinct a while back, but I’m still not sure what I can do, if anything, to correct for the shift.
Would you say you’re basically shifting into a mindset where your future babies are more important than you are? Like the proverbial friendly AI which values its own existence, not because that’s a terminal value, but because that’s an instrumental value—it can’t do good if it doesn’t still exist.
My hamster (human instinct) very definitely is. The rational me shouldn’t be: I know I’m more than my reproductive organs! The problem is, on issues like this hamster is pretty loud, and it’s not obvious on an intuitive level that “hamster terminal values” are actually “me-instrumental values” (since my life is not about placating hamster, but placating hamster helps me be happy and productive)!
I’m suspecting that most people don’t have this kind of grasp on their hamster-minds though, and female hamsters are pretty destructive on these issues.
Are you aware that eggs can be frozen? Given how many women hit their 40s and discover they cannot bear children, the cost-benefit analysis might be interesting to do.
Thanks for the advice. Do you have an idea of the probabilities for a 30-yo? I’m highly unlikely to wait any longer due to said fertility concerns.
There was this article from a couple of years ago: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/22/AR2010022203639.html
Also, as another data point, it is possible that the recent change in your “will to parent” might reverse polarity again once you hit your late twenties and early thirties. I’ve been amazed at this change that has sort of crept up on me over the last few years—from wanting “at least three” in my early to mid twenties to finding the whole enterprise rather frightening (in terms of lifestyle changes and sacrifices needing to be made). It’s possible I’m completely atypical since there are no shortage of stories of women in their thirties becoming even more desperate for children.
Is losing eggs an issue if there isn’t a quality decrease? I mean, I only need one at a time...
Thanks for the info though :)
For a 30-yo? No; I’m afraid I just understand the fertility curve looks something like an inverted U centered around the late teens. If I had to guess, I think the infertility rate is something like a quarter or fifth by the 40s so maybe half that or less for 30?
This is something you should really research yourself. On the plus side, if you keep notes and you write up your final cost-benefit calculation and actual decision, it’d make a good Article or Discussion post.
As the aforementioned OH, I’m wondering if “quizzical” counts as a normal reaction to reading this.
I have definitely told you about this.
Yes. (It was intended as humour, but apparently that wasn’t clear)
Thank you for the link! Note that the .pdf version of the article (which is also referenced in dbaupp’s link) has a record of the “hostile-wife” cases over a span of 8 years.
Mainstream society thinks it’s normal for everyone to want to stay young for as long as possible. Women spend billions on preserving youth and beauty—no aversion to “extreme healthy life extension” there.
Somewhat off topic, but still interesting (to me):
Why do you mention the scar? Should we have a high prior that women in this situation would lie about having had a tubal ligation?