Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Type “Georgia homophobia” into Google and countless results will appear that, through academic research and recent facts, denounce homophobia in this Eastern European country. One gets the impression that it is an overwhelming problem in Georgia, for which the “philanthropy” of Open Society proposes solutions. On the other hand, if we type “Georgia surrogacy”, a number of informative results appear that describe the country’s legislation, which is receptive to “surrogacy” (i.e., surrogate motherhood). There are no inflammatory denunciations, as in the case of homophobia. In fact, there are no denunciations, at least on the first page.

And, in fact, I searched for “Georgia surrogacy” because I wanted to find the news I had come across a while ago, namely: that the police had freed victims of human trafficking who were being held as captives, having had their eggs stolen. Stuff of horror and science fiction movies. According to Newsweek, a Thai woman who had been trafficked to Georgia managed to escape, returned to Thailand and reported the scheme of a Chinese gang there. A Thai NGO, the Pavena Foundation, contacted the Georgian authorities, who released three Thai women. However, the NGO estimates that there are another hundred Thai women in Georgia. Their captivity is described as a human egg farm.

Newsweek cites an article in the Bangkok Post as its source. There we have more details of the scam: the Thai women saw an ad on Facebook promising jobs in Georgia. The “job” would be surrogacy, an activity supposedly legal in Georgia. They would carry babies for couples with fertility problems. To make it more credible, a Thai woman guided the girls on the trip. The escaped victim traveled with ten colleagues and, upon arriving in Georgia, found four large houses with at least one hundred Thai women. There were no couples wanting to have children. Instead, their eggs were collected for sale.

Fordism applied to babies

Feminist Julie Bindel recently wrote an excellent article about the global fertility industry. There are countries that are coveted for sperm, countries that are coveted for eggs, and countries coveted for surrogate mothers. The preferences are self-explanatory: Danish sperm, eggs from Spain or Mexico, surrogate mothers from Georgia, Nigeria, Thailand, Colombia, Czech Republic, and Cyprus. The least laborious resource that allows for freer choice is sperm. Thus, we see that the preferred phenotype of the clientele is Nordic.

As for the eggs, there needs to be technology and women willing to undergo an invasive procedure with consequences that are still little known. For this reason, there needs to be poor women. Another limitation is the laws regarding the remuneration of “donors”. Obviously, it would be easier to exploit Africans than Europeans, but the clientele does not want mulatto children. Spain and Mexico have laws that favor the sale of eggs, even if in theory they are donations. Therefore, sometimes eggs from other countries with stricter laws are sent there. On the other hand, in the USA it is possible to sell eggs legally, but it is more expensive. So the preference is a combination of legal possibility and economic capacity.

As for “carriers”, who do not leave genetic marks on babies, they can even be from Nigeria. In this case, what matters is the possibility of registering the child as the child of the paying client, and not of the pregnant woman. In the USA, according to Compact Magazine, the norm has been to consider the father and mother according to the contract, and not according to genetics. In other words, in this market, the one who pays is the father or mother, even if they have purchased both gametes and have no genetic relationship with the child. The USA, on Julie Bindel’s map, is the preferred country to arrange such relationships that are of a legal and commercial nature.

So, in the end of the day, we have a Fordism applied to babies: one woman gives the egg, another gives the uterus and, with luck, some woman will raise the child. I say “with luck” because, as Julie Bindel showed on another occasion, there was a legal mess in England that considered the need for a mother to be homophobic. The case was as follows: without using an agency, a gay couple paid a poor woman in England to be inseminated and to carry their child. The egg was hers and so was the belly (so there is less chance of miscarriage and health problems). The woman gave up the child, but wanted visitation rights because children need a mother. The gays considered this to be homophobic. They went to court to take measures to prevent her from getting close to the child, but they lost. It doesn’t mean that children deserve mothers; it means just that it is better to hire an agency.

Gay rights against women and children

You don’t have to be conservative or religious to see that this has everything to go wrong. If the organ market were suddenly normalized, it is not hard to imagine that many vulnerable people would disappear, being kidnapped and slaughtered so that their “items” could be sold. The egg and uterus market does not require slaughter, but otherwise it is not very different: female body parts gain high market value, so it is not surprising if pregnant Thai women in Georgia are still being forcibly gestating white children. Furthermore, given the low market value of the Thai egg, we can only imagine what the clientele will do with the product (the half-Thai child) after discovering that the Chinese sold them a pig in a poke. Or perhaps this would not even be a problem, since the buyer does whatever he wants with the product, that is, the child. He can buy it to sexually abuse it, to extract organs from it, to perform satanic rituals. In the case of adoption, there is a bureaucracy that investigates the candidates. There are no such safeguards in the case of part-buying, and at least one pedophile has been arrested in the United States before he could abuse the baby his husband had bought.

The fact that this crime in Georgia generated so little publicity and did not undermine the surrogacy market shows that in today’s West, men’s whims take precedence over motherhood and childhood. An accurate portrayal of Western elites is a gay Saturn devouring its children.