Thanks for this thoughtful response, Kent. I’d love to believe we live (or will live) in a post-gender roles-world. That’s something I and many feminists of my generation thought and wrote and argued about in the 1970’s. Some theorists back then (Shulamith Firestone, for example) argued that it was necessary for reproduction to be separated from women’s bodies in order for true liberation to become reality. She advocated for “test tube” babies and other forms of reproductive technology that were barely imagined at that time.

In an ideal world — yours or Firestone’s — children are parented well, regardless of parental gender or method of conception.

Linking biology to identity is dangerous; that’s been weaponized against women and other oppressed groups. But I can’t help wondering why there are so many examples of men who were happy to spread their genes around without any further interest in the children they help create. Think of all the men who impregnated women they “owned” as slaves, and how those men then sold their own children into further slavery.

The egregious behavior of the NYT-profiled medical doctors doesn’t sink to that level of paternal violence, but it does reflect similar disinterest. Does that mean things are getting better? I hope you’re right!