Philosophy Now Forum

Is the title of a film made in 2010, in Germany. The plot briefly is about a couple whose affair is cut short by the death of the man, by accident. The dead man's father agrees to give the woman his son's cell material, but urges her to think through her decision carefully before proceeding to clone him. It is successful. Imagine having your lover/son in your belly for nine months, giving birth to a new lover, rearing him as your son and then becoming pregnant by him, in the form of your cloned dead lover.

As fantastic as it seems, it could happen.

The film was quite amazing, albeit one had to keep reminding oneself that it wasnt her son who was having sex with her, yet it was.

I thought there must be an ethical issue here.......

.



I'm not sure I'm following the plot exactly, but by cell material you mean...







...............................................................................................................................








.

"Rebecca (the GF) wants to use new scientific advancements to have Tommy(the deceasedf) cloned and thereby bring him back to life. She offers to be impregnated with an embryo fertilized by Tommy".


You are unlikely to see a movie about incest made as sensitively and tastefully as "Womb.''
March 30, 2012
V.A. Musetto
New York Post

.




OK...I see it now.


The ethical dilemma is when the new Tommy becomes the lover of his mother and actually, his former wife.





Could you give me an idea of the age gap that would exist between Tommy #2 and his former wife/mother/now lover when they are legally able to have sex again?








.............................................................................................................................





.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



I'm not sure I'm following the plot exactly, but by cell material you mean... ...

Why not just say "sperm" and what point the wanking scene? Your subconscious is just amazing! You should post on a psychoanalytic forum they'd just love you.

Anyhoo, no, the cell material would not be his sperm as your sperm is not your DNA but your two parents. So any cell but those would be fine to clone someone.

The age gap would depend upon where you live, so thirteen years for some and sixteen or eighteen for many.

.



Admittedly, it was a difficult decision to display the grittier side of what you Brits call wanking.

Ultimately I chose the high road of artistic expression and a sharp moral statement in choosing this particular GIF.




Reflect, to a time where you were younger and your mother walked-in on you rubbing one off.


Now imagine that not only your mother but your girlfriend AND your wife walk in to see you skinnin the milk snake.

I give the kid in the GIF credit for making & holding eye contact. Much like I suspect you would have done.




.............................................................................................




Thank you for recognizing and responding to the GIF itself.




.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:Admittedly, it was a difficult decision to display the grittier side of what you Brits call wanking.

What grittier side?

Ultimately I chose the high road of artistic expression and a sharp moral statement in choosing this particular GIF.

Did you?

What was the moral?

For it to be your artistic expression you'd have had to have made the gif, otherwise its just plagiarism. This is pretty much whats wrong with the web, as Ted Nelson pointed-out, it allows no version management, no rights management and you can't easily follow links to their origins.

Reflect, to a time where you were younger and your mother walked-in on you rubbing one off.[/b]

Never happened as in my family we knocked before entering anothers room.

Now imagine that not only your mother but your girlfriend AND your wife walk in to see you skinnin the milk snake.

Neither of the last two would bother me, especially since I wouldn't have a girlfriend and a wife. Why would I wish to imagine my mother watching me wank!?

I give the kid in the GIF credit for making & holding eye contact. Much like I suspect you would have done.

Personally I should take a closer look at the look in his eyes and reflect upon what your subconscious is telling you. Although I guess his reaction could be in response to her rudeness in not knocking first.

Thank you for recognizing and responding to the GIF itself.

For the billionth time please keep your platitudes to yourself when you respond to me as I think them only for yourself and effect.

The woman's intense passion can't keep her lover/son from growing up.

The film, in the end, is less about losing a man than about letting go of a child.

Is this what incest really is? Unable to let go.

The ethical issue, if any, is that the woman treats the male as an object able to be repeated through cloning with the assumption that the clone is one and the same being who had died. It would be like treating twins as the same person rather than as separate individuals.

I havent seen the film so can only go off your info about it.

reasonvemotion wrote:Is the title of a film made in 2010, in Germany. The plot briefly is about a couple whose affair is cut short by the death of the man, by accident. The dead man's father agrees to give the woman his son's cell material, but urges her to think through her decision carefully before proceeding to clone him. It is successful. Imagine having your lover/son in your belly for nine months, giving birth to a new lover, rearing him as your son and then becoming pregnant by him, in the form of your cloned dead lover.

As fantastic as it seems, it could happen.

The film was quite amazing, albeit one had to keep reminding oneself that it wasnt her son who was having sex with her, yet it was.

I thought there must be an ethical issue here.......

reasonvemotion wrote:The woman's intense passion can't keep her lover/son from growing up.

The film, in the end, is less about losing a man than about letting go of a child.

Is this what incest really is? Unable to let go.

Yes, well that would be the logical ethical reduction.

The actor Jeremy Irons was quoted as saying he does not have "strong feelings" about whether gay marriage should be legalized, but he has an argument against it, according to an interview with Huffington Post.

“Could a father not marry his son?” he asked and argued that as it stands, incest only exists to protect society from inbreeding, and “men don’t breed.”