LIFESCIENCE: re: lifescience gender 1

[PROFRICHAR@aol.com]

---------------------------------------------------------
ARS ELECTRONICA FESTIVAL 99
LIFESCIENCE
Linz, Austria, September 04 - 09
http://www.aec.at/lifescience
---------------------------------------------------------

 Dear Luba Lacinova
 
 >yes that is true you have a choice here.
 >but the traditional doctors always warn if something happens you are not 
 save 
 >enough at home and they give women an uncomfortable feeling of not having 
an 
 >allround security.
 
 You may not be safe in a hospital, either. 

that is it. but technological complexes suggest they are safer because of the 
accumulation of technical stuff. 

 But there are two points: first, there is no perfect security in the 
 nonperfect world. 

one point towards the lifescience is that they want to make the human being 
and his environment perfect without any diseases  but in an technically not 
human structured way. they want to cut out the suffering and everything will 
be perfect and smooth.
they will overcome one disease and throught the backdoor there will come a 
totally new problem that has something to do with the new technology.

By 
 requiering complete security we would need ti live in completely artificial 
 environment. Would it be still worth of living?

no that is the world an industrial complex wants to sell us.

 Second, pregnancy and birth are natural processes, they are not disseases. 

but they are often seen as diseases, a pregnant woman is often treated like 
she is ill.

 If they are common now and pregnancy and birth are now 
 "disseases", why did this happen? Why no one asks such a question?

 i do not know. i think this is a very important question that you raise. 
perhaps it is like that: if people may have this wonderful artificial world 
where everything is clean and has nothing to do with a filthy body they do 
not want to have this bodily thing pregnancy and birth any longer. 
i read that it is quite chic to have a birth the cesarian way in the USA

creating life in a petri dish is a clean and technical thing

 
 Quite often, new technology brings problems (or perhaps bettter to say 
 questions) which lie in field of ethics. They can not be answered by better 
 technology, but by clever use of (informational) technology they could be 
 pushed out of the attention of most people. Perhaps, artists should 
 participate in counteracting this attention shift?

yes that was exactly the part of the artist i thought of, to raise question, 
push a topic into the attention of people even if it is quite provocative
 
 There are a few NGOs

sorry luba, what is NGO?

 who are trying keep the public attention on this 
 questions. They are only partially capable of bringing answers - to find 
out, 
 e.g., why the sperm count is decreasing, needs enormous financial and 
 scientific resources. Such resources are available to transnational 
 pharmaceutical and biotechnological companies and to ask such questions is 
 not their interest.


 I personally would like to see effort of artists 
 community on the side of NGOs rahter than on the side of transnationals.

yes raise the questions that is clear but would it be necessary for the 
artists to be an export for lifesciences

 
Regards,
birgit richard 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to the English language version of LIFESCIENCE
To unsubscribe the English language version send mail to
lifescience-en-request@aec.at (message text 'unsubscribe')
Send contributions to lifescience@aec.at
--------------------------------------------------------------------------