Article info
PDFCommentary
Sexism and human enhancement
- Correspondence to Dr Robert Sparrow, School of Philosophical, Historical, and International Studies, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia; Robert.Sparrow{at}monash.edu
Citation
Sexism and human enhancement
Publication history
- Received April 3, 2012
- Accepted May 2, 2013
- First published August 23, 2013.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Article Versions
- Previous version (27 April 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- Sexual dimorphism and human enhancement
- Technological moral enhancement or traditional moral progress? Why not both?
- ‘My child will never initiate Ultimate Harm’: an argument against moral enhancement
- Fear of a female planet: how John Harris came to endorse eugenic social engineering
- Why is it possible to enhance moral status and why doing so is wrong?
- Why we can't really say what post-persons are
- The perils of failing to enhance: a response to Persson and Savulescu
- Sex selection for social purposes in Israel: quest for the “perfect child” of a particular gender or centuries old prejudice against women?
- Harris, harmed states, and sexed bodies
- Reproductive technologies, risk, enhancement and the value of genetic relatedness