A Technological (Partial) Solution To Gender Injustice and Global Fertility Collapse?
Why Read This
What Makes This Article Worth Your Time
Summary
What This Article Is About
Thomas Wells advocates for massive government investment—tens of billions—in artificial womb technology enabling complete external gestation from conception to birth, arguing this development would deliver enormous humanitarian benefits across three interconnected dimensions. The technology increasingly appears achievable through convergence of existing biomedical capabilities: embryos can already be created from gametes adapted from ordinary skin cells and cultured in vitro for several weeks, while incubation chambers have sustained premature babies for decades with new versions intended for infants as young as 13 weeks gestational age. Though formidable scientific challenges remain—particularly understanding and replicating the choreographed embryo-to-fetus transformation—Wells positions these as surmountable obstacles warranting urgent research prioritization given potential rewards.
The three primary benefits Wells identifies operate at individual, demographic, and societal levels: first, artificial wombs would liberate women from reproductive labor’s physiological burden—the asymmetric pregnancy obligation that represents core social injustice across human history, freeing half the population from lengthy, uncomfortable, dangerous gestation while eliminating career disruption and gendered motherhood pressures currently making reproduction unattractive to many women who consequently forgo children despite desiring them. Second, the technology would democratize parenthood access beyond the minority possessing functional reproductive apparatus, allowing single men, gay male couples, and infertile women to fulfill deeply-held desires for biological children—creating enormous direct value by enabling meaningful life projects while removing fertile women’s effective veto over reproduction since currently only they decide whether new babies exist. Third, by reducing reproduction’s costs and expanding who can participate, artificial wombs should narrow the gap between women’s ideal and intended family sizes while enabling more births from currently excluded demographics, thereby mitigating the global fertility collapse threatening dramatic social consequences as some countries face next generations half current size, creating intergenerational equity crises around pensions and elder-care when cooperation schemes confront asymmetrically-sized cohorts. Wells emphasizes fertility reversal isn’t the goal—that would create different crisis—but reducing collapse’s speed and severity to prevent political, social, and economic upheaval justifies technology development costs even for governments unconcerned with population welfare per se, making this pragmatic policy proposal addressing multiple urgent challenges through single technological solution.
Key Points
Main Takeaways
Technological Feasibility Converging
Embryos created from skin-cell-derived gametes can develop in vitro for weeks, while incubation chambers sustain 13-week premature babies—artificial wombs bridging this gap appear increasingly achievable despite choreographed embryo-fetus transformation challenges.
Liberating Women From Reproductive Burden
Pregnancy’s asymmetric physiological burden represents core historical injustice—lengthy, uncomfortable, dangerous gestation with career disruption and gendered pressures makes reproduction unattractive, forcing many women to choose between children and other life projects.
Democratizing Parenthood Access
Expanding reproduction beyond fertile women’s minority to single men, gay couples, and infertile women creates enormous value by fulfilling deeply-held desires for meaningful life projects—removing fertile women’s effective veto determining whether new babies exist.
Ideal-Intended Family Size Gap
Women’s intended children typically fall below identified ideal because all-things-considered sensibility acknowledges physiological costs and career disruption—artificial wombs making reproduction more affordable should narrow this planning gap enabling larger families.
Fertility Collapse Mitigation
Some countries face next generations half current size threatening intergenerational cooperation schemes around pensions and elder-care—artificial wombs reducing collapse speed/severity prevents asymmetrically-sized cohorts creating political, social, economic crises justifying development costs.
Pragmatic Multi-Crisis Solution
Single technology addresses gender injustice and demographic crisis simultaneously—appealing even to governments unconcerned with population welfare since preventing societal upheaval from rapid aging serves state interests regardless of humanitarian motivations.
Master Reading Comprehension
Practice with 365 curated articles and 2,400+ questions across 9 RC types.
Article Analysis
Breaking Down the Elements
Main Idea
Technology Solving Gender and Demographic Crises Simultaneously
Artificial wombs address multiple urgent challenges: eliminating pregnancy’s asymmetric burden constituting core historical injustice, enabling parenthood for excluded demographics, narrowing women’s ideal-intended family size gap, moderating fertility collapse preventing generational asymmetry crises. Strategically framed as pragmatic not utopian proposal—acknowledges development challenges, emphasizes moderating not reversing fertility decline, appeals even to welfare-indifferent governments since preventing societal upheaval serves state interests. Exemplifies philosophical argumentation combining ethical principle, demographic empirics, economic reasoning building multi-dimensional case for technological intervention superior to status quo’s forced tradeoffs between gender equality and demographic sustainability.
Purpose
Legitimizing Radical Technology Through Convergent Benefits
Moves artificial wombs from science fiction to serious policy priority by demonstrating technology simultaneously solves distinct problems across feminist, demographic, economic domains. Targets feminist readers with gender justice framing, prospective parents with reproductive desire validation, policymakers with pragmatic demographic arguments. Preempts objections through acknowledgment—concedes scientific challenges, notes fertility reversal isn’t goal, appeals to welfare-indifferent governments. Attempts building broad coalition transcending political divisions. Aims shifting Overton window positioning artificial wombs alongside climate change or pandemic preparedness rather than dismissed as dystopian fantasy.
Structure
Thesis → Feasibility → Tripartite Benefits → Crisis Integration
Opens demanding tens of billions investment establishing ambitious stakes before justifying through structured argumentation. Establishes feasibility through convergence narrative—embryo development and premature baby incubation demonstrating bridgeable gap despite choreographed transformation challenges. Tripartite structure dedicates sections to each benefit: identifying problem, explaining solution, articulating value. Fertility collapse discussion appears last after individual-level benefits preventing technocratic population management framing. Concludes with pragmatic realpolitik note emphasizing moderating not reversing decline, appealing even to welfare-indifferent governments aligning state interests with humanitarian benefits.
Tone
Philosophical Urgency, Pragmatic Optimism
Maintains measured analytical style while conveying urgency about converging crises, creating tone simultaneously serious and optimistic positioning technology as achievable imperative not utopian fantasy. Opening establishes activist stance signaling humanitarian framing. States biological realities plainly projecting confidence. Acknowledges challenges immediately followed by “humanity could and should take them on” balancing realism with can-do spirit. Consistent “all else being equal” qualifiers demonstrate intellectual humility maintaining conviction benefits outweigh costs. Final appeal to welfare-indifferent governments reveals sophisticated realpolitik awareness willing embracing morally ambiguous allies advancing humanitarian agenda, positioning author as serious policy thinker not naive idealist.
Key Terms
Vocabulary from the Article
Click each card to reveal the definition
Build your vocabulary systematically
Each article in our course includes 8-12 vocabulary words with contextual usage.
Tough Words
Challenging Vocabulary
Tap each card to flip and see the definition
Reproductive cells containing half the normal chromosome number; in humans, sperm and egg cells that fuse during fertilization to create an embryo.
“At one end of the gestation process are advances in biomedical technology that allow embryos to be created from gametes adapted from ordinary skin cells and grown for several weeks ‘in vitro’.”
Latin phrase meaning “in glass”; referring to biological processes occurring outside a living organism in artificial environments like test tubes or culture dishes.
“At one end of the gestation process are advances in biomedical technology that allow embryos to be created from gametes adapted from ordinary skin cells and grown for several weeks ‘in vitro’.”
Carefully planned and coordinated in sequence; arranged with precise timing and order, like a dance, where each element must occur at the right moment.
“Although huge scientific and technological challenges remain – especially understanding and mimicking the highly choreographed process that transforms an embryo into a foetus – humanity could and should take them on.”
Thriving and developing in a healthy or vigorous way; achieving full potential or optimal well-being in physical, mental, or developmental aspects.
“Moreover, pregnancy disrupts any other projects one is trying to pursue (such as a career), and also comes with all kinds of moral, social, and legal pressures such as to conform to gendered norms of motherhood and to refrain from consuming anything that might possibly endanger the full flourishing of the foetus.”
A set of equipment, organs, or system designed for a particular purpose; in biological contexts, refers to functional bodily structures working together.
“Only women with the right apparatus in good working order can conceive and bring a baby to term. This is a minority of the adult population.”
To the extent or degree that; a conjunction indicating the limits or conditions under which something is true or applicable.
“Insofar as a society is an extended scheme for cooperation across generations, this is a major crisis.”
Reading Comprehension
Test Your Understanding
5 questions covering different RC question types
1According to Wells, artificial womb technology should aim to completely reverse the global fertility decline to restore historical population growth rates.
2What does Wells identify as the gap between women’s “ideal” and “intended” family sizes, and how would artificial wombs address it?
3Select the sentence that best captures Wells’ argument about current reproductive decision-making power and its demographic consequences.
4Evaluate these statements about Wells’ argument regarding technology and gender justice:
Wells compares artificial wombs’ potential gender liberation to historical mechanization of domestic food and textile preparation that freed women from monotonous labor.
Wells argues pregnancy’s asymmetric burden represents the core historical injustice underlying women’s social inequality across all times and places.
Wells claims women who opt out of pregnancy using contraception and rights are making purely selfish choices without considering their partners’ desires for children.
Select True or False for all three statements, then click “Check Answers”
5Based on Wells’ final appeal to governments “that don’t care about the welfare of their populations for their own sake,” what can be inferred about his rhetorical strategy?
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Wells describes pregnancy as “not only lengthy, but also an extremely uncomfortable and dangerous labour to put one’s body through,” positioning gestation as physically demanding work rather than passive biological state. The characterization as “labor” deliberately frames pregnancy through employment lens, suggesting women perform uncompensated work when gestating—work involving significant physical burden (discomfort) and genuine risk (danger) comparable to hazardous occupations. The phrase “put one’s body through” emphasizes pregnancy as active ordeal requiring endurance rather than natural effortless process. Wells connects this physiological burden to career disruption: “Moreover, pregnancy disrupts any other projects one is trying to pursue (such as a career), and also comes with all kinds of moral, social, and legal pressures such as to conform to gendered norms of motherhood.” The danger dimension references maternal mortality and morbidity risks that, while reduced in developed countries, remain substantial globally and include complications like preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, and delivery trauma. By framing pregnancy as labor—uncomfortable, dangerous work that disrupts other projects—Wells establishes foundation for arguing artificial wombs would liberate women from involuntary servitude to reproduction comparable to how domestic technology liberated them from endless food preparation and textile production.
Wells explains that “thanks to rights and contraception, it is also now generally the case that only the women who can have babies who get to decide whether there will be new babies. This is a good thing. Women’s bodies are their own. But it is also a limitation given that lots of people who can’t have babies still want to be parents.” The “effective veto” characterization recognizes that since only fertile women possess biological apparatus for gestation, they functionally control whether anyone’s reproductive desires—including their partners’ or their own—get fulfilled. Wells explicitly endorses this arrangement ethically (“This is a good thing. Women’s bodies are their own”) as necessary consequence of bodily autonomy—women shouldn’t be forced into pregnancy against their will. However, he identifies demographic limitation: current technology means many people’s deeply-held desires for biological parenthood (single men, gay couples, infertile women, women prioritizing careers) cannot be satisfied because they either lack reproductive capacity or cannot find willing gestational partners. Artificial wombs “would remove fertile women’s effective veto over the right to reproduction and hence remove the major restriction that currently keeps the supply of children below the demand.” The technology preserves women’s bodily autonomy (no one forced into pregnancy) while eliminating their monopolistic position as sole reproductive capacity providers, expanding parenthood access without violating anyone’s rights—elegant solution to ethical-demographic tension.
Wells builds feasibility argument through convergence narrative identifying existing capabilities at gestation’s endpoints that artificial wombs would bridge: “At one end of the gestation process are advances in biomedical technology that allow embryos to be created from gametes adapted from ordinary skin cells and grown for several weeks ‘in vitro’. At the other end, special incubation chambers have been used for decades to keep premature babies alive and developing. New versions are intended for babies as young as 13 weeks.” This two-pronged approach demonstrates technology isn’t pure speculation—embryos can already develop outside bodies for initial weeks, while increasingly premature babies survive with artificial life support. The gap between these endpoints (roughly weeks 4-13 of pregnancy) represents remaining challenge: “huge scientific and technological challenges remain – especially understanding and mimicking the highly choreographed process that transforms an embryo into a foetus.” The phrase “highly choreographed” emphasizes intricate developmental timing requiring precise biochemical signaling that current technology cannot replicate. Wells positions this as surmountable obstacle (“humanity could and should take them on”) rather than impossible barrier, justifying his call for massive investment by showing goalpost visibility even if path remains unclear. The “increasingly possible” framing combats both naive optimism (pretending technology already exists) and defeated pessimism (declaring impossible), positioning artificial wombs as ambitious but achievable moonshot-style project warranting serious research prioritization.
Readlite provides curated articles with comprehensive analysis including summaries, key points, vocabulary building, and practice questions across 9 different RC question types. Our Ultimate Reading Course offers 365 articles with 2,400+ questions to systematically improve your reading comprehension skills.
This article is rated Advanced level, reflecting its sophisticated philosophical argumentation requiring readers to track multi-dimensional ethical, demographic, and economic reasoning simultaneously while evaluating normative claims about technology’s role in addressing social problems. Wells integrates feminist theory (reproductive labor as injustice), demographic analysis (fertility collapse consequences), economic reasoning (cost-benefit calculations), and bioethics (bodily autonomy, meaningful life components) into cohesive policy proposal—demanding readers synthesize across traditionally separate domains. Advanced readers must distinguish between descriptive claims (what artificial wombs would do), normative arguments (why these outcomes would be good), and pragmatic appeals (why even welfare-indifferent governments should invest), recognizing how Wells tailors arguments to diverse stakeholders. The piece requires comfort with philosophical concepts like “all else being equal” qualifiers, understanding that numbered benefit structures represent analytical convenience rather than exhaustive catalogues, and recognizing rhetorical moves like the “effective veto” framing that acknowledges ethical principles while identifying their limitations. The Economist chart integration assumes demographic literacy interpreting fertility rate projections. This difficulty level suits readers with interdisciplinary interests capable of evaluating how technological solutions to social problems involve not just feasibility questions but complex value judgments about gender justice, reproductive rights, intergenerational equity, and state authority—preparing for graduate-level discourse where policy proposals require simultaneous engagement with empirical evidence, ethical principles, and political pragmatism.
Wells exemplifies technological solutionism—belief that technology can solve social problems often requiring political or cultural change—by positioning artificial wombs as addressing gender injustice rooted in biological asymmetry rather than merely social construction. This distinguishes his proposal from critiques arguing sexism stems from patriarchal norms changeable through activism without technological intervention. Wells implicitly acknowledges this by comparing artificial wombs to domestic labor mechanization: while women’s confinement to household work involved both biological constraints (pregnancy, nursing) and social expectations (gendered division of labor), technology enabling food preservation, textile manufacturing, and infant formula genuinely expanded women’s options by reducing physical labor requirements regardless of cultural attitudes. Similarly, while much gender inequality reflects discriminatory social practices amenable to reform, pregnancy’s physiological burden represents biological constraint that cultural change alone cannot eliminate—making technological solution non-optional for complete gender parity. However, Wells’ framing also reveals technological solutionism’s limitations: artificial wombs wouldn’t address all reproductive injustices (abortion restrictions, maternal healthcare disparities, workplace discrimination), might create new problems (commodification concerns, access inequalities, novel forms of reproductive coercion), and could distract from simpler interventions (parental leave, affordable childcare, destigmatizing career interruptions). The pragmatic appeal even to welfare-indifferent governments suggests Wells recognizes technology’s political neutrality—tools can serve various ideological agendas depending on governance contexts, meaning artificial wombs under authoritarian regimes might enable reproductive control rather than liberation, highlighting how technological solutions to social problems require careful political implementation lest they reproduce or amplify existing injustices through new mechanisms.
The Ultimate Reading Course covers 9 RC question types: Multiple Choice, True/False, Multi-Statement T/F, Text Highlight, Fill in the Blanks, Matching, Sequencing, Error Spotting, and Short Answer. This comprehensive coverage prepares you for any reading comprehension format you might encounter.
