[kammiepooh]

Is human Parthenogenesis possible. Was the first human being a true Hermaphrodite who used parthenogenesis to reproduce? Is there any scientific evidence to confirm human parthenogenesis?

[ebaines]

Wow - I had to look that word up!

Parthenogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No- there is no scientific evidence that humans have ever had the ability to reproduce asexually. As for how the "first" human reproduced - recall that through the process of evolution speciation occurs over time, and typically over distances. So it's not a case of a "first human" being differentiated from its ancestors over-night and therefore having no compatible mates, but rather a gradual evolution from earlier forms. So it would be impossible to talk about a truly "first" human (leaving the Adam and Eve story out of the discussion as this is a science forum, so sticking to best scienctific evidence), as the "human-ness" of our distant ancestors is a matter of degree. There is no "chicken and egg" riddle here!

[asking]

Cool question.

I agree with ebaines. Parthenogenesis is well documented in some other species, including certain lizards. But humans are not known to reproduce that way.

And, yes, the "first human" was only marginally different from its hominid/ape ancestor, just as I am only marginally different from my parents. There is every reason to think the transition was a fairly gradual change from walking upright to evolving a throwing arm and a digging wrist, to evolving the ability to run long distances and finally a bigger brain. Each of these steps took tens to hundreds of thousands of years.

[Denisis]

Buddhas mother conceived her son in a state of blissful meditation under a banyan tree. Mary conceived Jesus in more or less the same way. It's been said that Leonardo Divinci, Joan of Ark, Moses, Zoroster and scores more geniuses, visionaries and healers were also born parnthenogenetically.

If many of the lower species can and do conceive this way I don't think it's so shocking to assume that humans can too. Based on this fact alone I can't imagine why scientists aren't more curious. A hundred years ago the famous biologist, Jacques Loeb did just that.
I once read and wrote a review for a book about the Ojibiwa or Cippewa people. The author spend a decade re-searching oral stories from the Ojibiwa's old traditional speakers that existed before the coming of the white man.

One story was that the wise-women looked for certain young maidens that possessed grace, intelligence and compassion. Sometimes a canditate for this parthenogenetic purpose would not appear in every generation. Nevertheless, the wise-women keep an eagle-eye open for her. When found, such a maiden was hands off for men.

When they reached the age of fertility, their first period, they were instructed to fast for several days and, if willing, were required to dance around a fire in a sacred women's lodge built away from the village. Her dancing occurred while she was ovulating and if a state of bliss or ecstasy was reached it would be possible for her to conceive and give birth to a child that would most likely be blessed with gifts of healing or leadership etc.
I believe this is what happened among The Essenes along The Dead Sea over 2,000 years ago. Jesus was the result. They planned it. Needless to say this "old way" of concieving and giving birth to highly evolved souls was a no no during a time when patriarchy was firmly established. To me, this is why King Herod had all the new born males put to death.

If I haven't scared the reader off by dipping into religious lore one might ask the biological reason for the presence of the hyman in women. I believe only one species of whale have a hyman but it is to keep sea-water out. The hyman remains a "medical mystery". Some folks think it's there merely as fodder for comedians. I thinks it's there because Nature, the great conservative, has a higher form of conception and birth in mind for women.

One might also inquire about certain types of dermoid cysts. Cysts that appear in young girls from 8 to 16, that have their hymans intact. When surgically removed and examined these cysts have been found to contain tiny undeveloped skulls and spines etc. Unbeknownst to them, one of their eggs had parthenogenetically been fertilized and then had stopped developing and, typically getting trapped in their fallopian tube, had to be removed as they had become toxic.

Anthopoid apes, our closest biological cousins, have a monthly period while in captivity and on an artificial diet. When returned to their natural habitat and diet they will bleed in the Spring and Fall like most mammals. But I used to live in an institution where everyone ate raw sprouts, fruits and vegetables and nothing else. That means, no bread, grains, meats, or dairy products. After a month or two most women would have their periods lessen in the amount of blood-loss and the overall discomfort and cramps they usually experience. One woman in particular, who I got to know as a sister, lost her period completely and enjoyed total health. I also met several women who gave up eating solid food. Of course, they had no periods as well. It's also quite common that many women athletes lose their periods too. This is old news.

There are artistic depictions of Mary standing on the Crescent Moon. It seems obvious to me that a clean, living food diet is nesessary for eliminating wasteful monthly menstruation and is the foundation for the process of parthenogenesis. It's also obvious that we humans are over-sexed. The earth has amassed way too many bodies that don't know how to get along with each other and are straining the earths resources. This is old news too.

In almost every culture on earth and in amost every major religion stories of The Virgin Birth abide. It's time we all chip in and take a close look at this simple, long-forgotten and possibly forbidden subject. Is it fact or fiction? Are all parthenogenetic children gifted? And, if so, why? Is it trully possible to prepare a woman for such a feat? Will the return of parthenogenesis be the straw to break the back of patriarchy?

I'm looking for preferably non-religious searchers and re-searchers who would like to share anything they can find out about human parthenogenesis. I've been contemplating this subject since 1969. It simply won't go away! Help! [EMAIL="[email protected]"]

[vazkor]

One problem: parthenogenesis would produce a genetical identical "clone " of the mother: only females can be born out of parthenogenesis. That is if it would be somehow be possible at all for humans

[Denisis]

We are dealing with parthenogenesis on the human level. We are supposed to be the most highly evolved life-forms on this planet. I know that once a woman makes up her mind that she is going to have a boy or a girl she almost always gets what she invisions. In the lower species giving birth to a female is the rule.

[asking]

Denisis,
This is the science section of Ask Me Help Desk so I'm responding accordingly.

It isn't "shocking" to assume that humans can reproduce through parthenogenesis. It's just wrong. You might as well assume we can fly. There is no scientific evidence for parthenogenesis occurring in humans and no known cases of parthenogenesis occurring naturally in any mammal. If other mammals do not do it, it's EXTREMELY unlikely that we do.

Just because people SAY that this person or that was born parthenogenetically does not make it true. People used to say that the sun went around the earth, but no matter how many of them there were and for how many hundreds of years they said it, they were still mistaken.

Your assertion that "humans are the most highly evolved life forms on this planet" is also in error. We are not more evolved than other animals or plants. We are smarter than other animals but not more evolved.

Women cannot decide the sex of their own children by envisioning one sex or the other. If you start spreading false rumors like that, women will be blamed (and beaten) for not having boys on demand. Please don't go around saying things that are not true.

[Denisis]

What if you met a celebate woman that fasted for two and a half years? She was six-feet two inches tall and weighed 135 lbs. Her ability to fast was verified by many in her community, as she worked in a restaurant, as well as by me, because we used to have marathon discussions about the dissappearance of her menstruation, her mysteriously leeking breasts and her ability to go almost entirely without sleep. Her sleep was more of a two or three hour meditation in which she had remarkable dreams and claimed to hear voices from spriitual beings.
She also climbed medium sized mountains in the Ashland, Oregon area without becoming exhausted or excessively fatigued. I saw her a number of times put organic grapes into a blender and then strain them through cheesecloth before drinking the juice. If there were any presence of pulp she would have to excuse herself in order to regurgitate it in the bathroom.
Knowing her has made me want to study breatharianism, menstruation and parthenogenesis. Instead of making me more flakey or spiritual I wanted to find more scientific information to back up what I was seeing before my eyes. This is why I am trying to find people who may be interested and willing to help gather information on all the subjects I have touched upon regarding the many mysteries that remain about women.

[asking]

All the calories in the grapes are in the juice, not the pulp (which is fiber/roughage). Drinking grape juice is a high sugar diet. What else did she consume? I'm just curious.

It is not surprising that her periods stopped on a strict long-term diet of some kind and at such a low weight.

Her leaking breasts were probably a sign of some kind of hormone imbalance (or a pituitary tumor). On the other hand, my breasts leaked in my 20s and I was eating normally, having normal periods, also climbing mountains, but not fasting. I subsequently had two children in the usual fashion. I did not have a tumor. :) I don't think leaking breasts is necessarily pathological, though it can be.

Are you saying you think your friend was pregnant because her periods stopped? Not sure why she is relevant to parthenogenesis, although she is interesting. Why did she stop her diet?

If you are seriously interested in parthenogenesis, then you should read about the science of it. For example, aphids are born pregnant--which is a miracle in itself and quite amazing. But, while extremely cool, in my opinion, mammals do not apparently conceive without fertilization. If any other mammal had been observed to do it, I'd be more open to the possibility in humans.

For example, farmers are often extremely careful about how they breed their animals. If over the last 1000 years, a sheep or cow had become pregnant when the ram or the bull was tied up in the next county--even once--we would have heard about it, I think.

[ebaines]

Are you saying you think your friend was pregnant because her periods stopped? Not sure why she is relevant to parthenogenesis, although she is interesting.

Right - it is not unusual for women to stop having periods - for example, this is quite common with women who are into edurance running (marathoners for example). So this is certainly not proof, or even strong evidence, of parthenogenisis.

Denisis - a basic rule of science is that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Claims of asexual reproduction in humans would indeed be "extraordinary," so to gain any serious traction you need to cite evidence such as peer-reviewed studies of this phenomenon - saying "I know a woman with leaky breasts" doesn't cut it. Nor does citing ancient mythology. Until you present a documented case, the scientific community will continue to say it's not possible.

[asking]

I would go further. Your friend is not evidence at all (not just not proof or strong evidence). It doesn't sound as though she was even pregnant. I assume you would have mentioned a delivery and baby if she were. (Which is just as well, because a baby that developed under such conditions would be quite unhealthy.)

Neither lack of periods (amenorrhea) nor leaking breasts necessarily mean pregnancy, let alone parthenogenesis.

According to the Mayo Clinic website:

Other causes of secondary amenorrhea [besides pregnancy] include:

Stress
Poor nutrition
Depression
Certain drugs
Extreme weight loss
Over-exercising
Ongoing illness
Sudden weight gain or being very overweight (obesity)
Hormonal imbalance due to polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS)
Thyroid gland disorders
Tumors on the ovaries or brain (rare)

[asking]

So can a person survive on grape juice for 2.5 years? Or did she drink other things? Whey? Yeast?

[Denisis]

Let's give my unusual friend a name. It is Laurie (for real) and she is alive and well and living a normal life. Yet, she tells me, though she eats solid food every day, she maintains her earlier "fasting weight" of 135 lbs. If you Google breatharian(s) you will get to explore this rare condition and make up your own mind.
Lori mostly lived on distilled water. She visited me in 1978, here on the East Coast, in the middle of her long fast. She stayed with my divorced sister-in-law and my little nephew in a third floor apartment building that my grandfather built. I was back living with my parents on the first floor and trying to recover from the loss of my four and a half year old, blue-eyed boy who drowned in a river in California in 1976.
Before her arrival I purchased two gallons of distilled water and a pound of grapes. By the end of her 7-day visit she only drank one gallon of water and the grapes were only half gone. Can anyone live on almost nothing? Yes, yes and yes. Once again, I saw it, and my sister-in-law, with our own eyes.
Was she anorexic? Did she suffer from depression, anxiety, fatigue, hallucinations? Did she go around preaching that everyone should choose her lifestyle? Did she have a "Holier Than Thou" attitude? Was she a religious fanatic? Were the spirit voices she sometimes heard in her evening meditations real or imaginary? To the best of my un-scientifically trained brain and the intuitive perceptions of my poetic, artistic eye in the center of my heart and soul, the answers to these questions are no, no and no.
Once I got over my dislexia in the 7th grade I became an avid reader. Psychology, physics, transendentalism, Vedanta, Zen, fiction, art, philosophy, anthropology, archelogy, biographies, history, music, poetry, meta-physics and you name it. And I haven't stopped.
Still, despite my busy intellect, I remain overwhelmed by the story of Laurie. I bit off more than I could chew when I had access to the vast libraries at Hippocrates Health Institute, that espoused a living food diet, as "Life Comes Only From Life", way back in 1969 in Boston, Massachusetts. This is where I began to learn that 80% of the genes were passed down from mother to child. That a child in its first few month of life in the womb was a female, (natures preference?) and, if it were going to be a male, that the ovaries would descend and become testicals and the clitoris would elongate etc.
Much later I found out about how us males, of which I'm a member, have an excess of Y chromosomes, or broken, biologically degenerate X chromosomes. That man is secondary to woman-----an afterthought of nature. And, somehow, right away, it was all okay for me to accept. My precious, precarious male ego did not crumble. My manhood was not threatoned or diminshed. I still loved myself, my wonderful, fiddle-playin, hard-working father and my comic, fisherman brother. Guys are fun, cool, and full of piss and vinigar. Trouble-makers.
So it's good to find people like you, who are science-based, to have this discourse with. Because, truly, I am sometimes overwhelmed by it all.
I'm a left-handed, right-brained oriented person. To really get a grasp about where I am coming from please go to YouTube and look up a 20-minute video of a lecture from a prominate brain-scientist, Jill Bolte Taylor. Type in: My Stroke of Insight. If this doesn't convince you of anything significant, then our future conversations may be in jeopordy. Why? Because if you scepticize (I don't think this is an actual word, but it was fun to invent) this lecture to death then you may not be able to let me walk you through the remaining experiences that my dear friend Laurie went through.
Good luck and please stay in touch. Thanks. ---Den

[asking]

Denisis,
Very sorry to hear about the loss of your son. That must have been so hard. I hope the loss has gotten easier to bear over the years.

As far as the biology of your interests, I can tell you what is known. But some of the things you have learned over the years are not quite right or actually not true. So as you want me to be open minded, I would want you to be open to hearing what science has to say about some of these things.

It is quite possible for someone to live on just water for long periods--perhaps several weeks, depending on how much fat they have, and probably other factors. (Without water, people die of dehydration quite quickly, a few days.) But I am nearly certain that no one could survive with their health intact on JUST water for 2.5 years. So I assume that Laurie drank something with some amount of calories. Fruit drinks would help, but she would have developed some nutritional deficiencies without certain vitamins and minerals that would not be found in grape juice.

Intermittant fasting or extreme calorie restriction (30% fewer calories than "normal") are another matter and these actually LENGTHEN lifespan in other mammals. There is every reason to think that would work in humans as well and there are people who live on calorie restricted diets. If you have not read about calorie restriction diets, I think you would find them interesting.

If there's any possibility that Laurie varied her fasts a little, that would seem possible to me. Fasting amenorrhea is normal. It's the body's way to conserving energy. In essence, if there's not enough food, the body decides that reproduction can wait until there's an increase in calories.

Okay. Some of your other comments.
You said you learned that a child inherits 80% of genes from the mother.
This is factually incorrect. ON AVERAGE, we inherit half of our nuclear DNA from out mother and half from our father. But in reality, that can vary from child to child. So one child might get more genes from the father, another more than half from the mother. That's why some kids seem to take after different sides of the family.

Also, notice I said "nuclear" DNA. Those are the genes in the nucleus of the every cell in the body. Also in each cell are "mitochondria," tiny organelles responsible for transforming the energy in sugar into ATP molecules that can be used to help you run, think, read, or make new skin cells. ATP is like the body's spending money, the cash you carry around for everyday expenses.

It turns out the mitochondria have their own DNA*. And ALL your mitochondrial DNA (genes) come from your mother. That's because the egg cell has the mitochondria and the sperm bring nothing really except nuclear DNA.

The genes in the mitochondria all came from your mother but there are not that many of them compared to the number in the nucleus. So 80% is too high. It's still pretty close to 50:50. I'd have to look up exactly how much DNA is in the mitochondria to give you an average number.

*The REASON mitochondria have their own DNA is that billions of years ago, they were separate organisms--some kind of bacterium--and they came to live inside of other cells in a cooperative association. That cooperative association has lasted 2-3 billion years and continues today in all the cells of plants, animals and fungi (mushrooms, yeasts, and molds).

You said that a fetus is female for the few months of development.


A lot of people say this, but it is also not really true. A developing human is an embryo from right after fertilization (one cell) until the end of 8 weeks, when all the organs form in outline, and we then call it a fetus (at 9 weeks). Before that, the genitals of all embryos look pretty much the same and biologists call it the "indifferent stage." They are neither female nor male.

At around week 9, the genitals start to differentiate -- start to appear different. As you probably know, the clitoris and the penis are derived from the same embryonic tissue. Likewise the scrotal sac and the outer labia are derived from the same tissue and have similar nerves. (This is sometimes useful to know.) By the end of 10 weeks, the two sexes' genitals are different enough for an expert to tell them apart, but they are not fully developed by any means. So although they are the same up to then, they are not female in the usual sense.

You say that the Y chromosome is a degenerating X chromosome.

I have read this too, but I would not take it too much to heart. For now, men are a very necessary part of human reproduction!

As you know, not all organisms have two sexes and it's not all that clear why sex is important enough to go to the trouble. To be blunt, a lot of energy and effort goes into sexual reproduction, not just in humans, of course, but in millions of species, in a process that has gone on for millions of years. Surprisingly, biologists aren't all that certain why. If you take a biology class, they will tell you it's to increase genetic variation. That's true, but it seems insufficient to account for the huge amount energy that goes into it. Plus why do organisms that reproduce through parthenogenesis do so well without it? The answer is not yet obvious. Another reason given is that two sets of chromosomes (one from the mother and one from the father) helps the DNA to repair damaged genes. Still, my sense is that biologists feel that there is something they are missing here.

I do agree that guys are fun, cool, and full of piss and vinegar and the world would be a duller place without them. I have even said this to women friends and they give me a funny look. I am not sure why; I totally agree with you.

"Scepticize" is a fine word in my opinion. But that's what I do. I ask a lot of questions. But if it's any comfort I am equally skeptical of a lot of things that scientists say. Have not yet checked out the YouTube video, but will.

Edit: Just watched it. Very cool video.

Cheers,
Asking

[Denisis]

Hi again. Thanks for your warm comment regarding my son. Though it's long ago the loss never goes away as the loss of a parent, spouse or friend usually, in time, does fade into the background. A child's loss is forever unhealed and that's as is should be and I've had to learn to live with it. It's okay.
I really thank you for straightening out some of the so-called science facts I've picked up over the years. Seeing an up to date version of these facts helps me to unravel this blessing/curse of a story that I'm stuck with for better or worst. I'm a self-willed intermediary for my dear friend Laurie. Ironically she doesn't feel that parthenogenesis is as important as I feel it is. This, to me, is ideal as, if a woman was as passionate about this subject as I am, it would probably create more reasons to hate and/or to fear women.
I've been away for almost two days and there's still much ground to cover and the answers you've given lead to more questions which, as a scientist, comes with the job. Did you Google breatharians yet? There's a man, who fasts for long periods that is working with NASA. I forget his name, but they are wondering if it is possible to train future astronauts to be like him. Imagine how much easier it would be if astronauts didn't have to eat and eliminate too much.
I can assure you, as I stayed closely in touch with Laurie throughout her fast that she mostly subsided on distilled water and didn't at all take any vitamin suppliments or drink regular significant quantities of fruit or vegetable juices. Her long fast breaks the bubble of existing knowledge. But this is just the beginning of her story. I'll get back to you with more a.s.a.p.
I just realized that I don't know your first name or even your nick-name. How shall I address you?
One of my artistic web-sites is: Custom painted wall murals... and please realize that I'm not trying to sell you anything or to try and get you to think or believe in anything in particular. I simply want you to know, besides being a happily married man for the last 7 years, that I am a struggling artist and musician and am otherwise healthy and normal.
I am quite sincere in trying to deal with the many mysteries my friend Laurie experienced and, though with you I feel I've got a tiger by the tail, and it's a bit tough to get the facts of Laurie's story challenged, I am curious and grateful regarding your concise input.
Thanks again, Den.

[Denisis]

I can't say I know when I don't but if the ovaries are inside the body before they descend into testicals then, to me, it is a female. If it looks and walks like a duck then it's a duck. Here's a quote from Darwin's Origin Of Species. "There is a parallel resemblence in the sexes, which shows and proves their conformity in essential parts to some remote ansestor who preceded them, before the division of the sexes." This embraces the subject somewhat but also leads to other questions and possibilities. The following is something else altogether. "The idea that Charles Darwin himself believed (The Descent of Man) that the final climb to human civilization called upon a principle of moral conduct far above the "selfish gene" concept so prevalent in today's popular accounts come as a surprise. But the fact that he argued at length and with passion for the recognition of this principle, along with anticipating scientific concepts from far beyond his time, and further that this work has been utterly disregarded by the official keepers of evolutionary theory, boggles the mind." This is a quote from David Loye's Darwins Lost Theory of Love, which is based on his Darwin's unsung The Descent of Man. Apparently Darwin spent a longer period on this second book of his but, more or less, he was considered a flake or a scientist that went soft in the head. I'm trying to point out, from this second quote of Darwins, an example of how physics (physical reality) and meta-physics (spiritual reality) are contiually crossing paths these days. It's getting so that one can't separate the thoughts of a Yogi from India from the thoughts of a mathematician at Harvard University. Another reason for you to watch that YouTube lecture called "My Stroke of Insight". Peace, Den.

[asking]

Hi Den,
I did watch Stroke of Insight, as I mentioned yesterday. She is a fabulous speaker.

The selfish gene is just a way of thinking about things and the idea made a point that needed to be made in the 1970s. No one should literally think that genes operate individually to propagate themselves. Instead, selection operates at the level of whole organisms, which are a product of a conversation between the environment and the genes. Each of us is a lifelong conversation.

Darwin was one of the first people to fully recognize that essentialism is wrong, that populations are made up of groups of unique individuals. There is not "perfect" rabbit or human, man or woman. There is no type that we all deviate from. Each of us is as perfect as any other. This applies both to individuals and to species. We are not "more evolved" than our pets or even the bacteria in our guts.

[Denisis]

Hi, I like the idea that we are a product of the environment and the genes and that we're not more evolved than our pets. I am humbled.

Here's a bunch of various quotes I gathered over the years.

"Great truths are too important to be new." ----W.S. Maugham
"Life begins as female. Life is feminine. In woman is the creative center. That everything proceeds from the egg, the vital focus, is the verdict of biology". ---Francis Lester Ward
"The male is not necessary for reproduction. A simple physio-chemical agent in the female is enough to bring it about." --Jacques Loeb
Looking up dermoid cysts in Chambers Medical Dictionary, under Medio-logical Records, one finds; "dermoid cystic growths; embryonic growths or tumor-like formations found in women (and sometimes men) which are of congenital origin, containing evidence of being dejecta membra, or the remains of pregnant growths, in the embryonic fetal period of gestation, somewhat akin to the primary state of being with child." Some of these dermoid cysts, sometimes mistaken by surgeons for tumors, but really are embryos, are similar in all respects to the products of female gestation, containing bones, hair, teeth, flesh, glands, portions of the scalp, face, eyes, ribs,-----in short, all the organs of the human body----what else could they be but virgin embryos in the process of development?
"In the Mother Cell begins all living things. The Creative Principle is feminine. The highest divine mystery is Brahamana, the feminine of Brahma." (according to Hindu mythology.)
"Eve was of a primal race----self perpetuating. She brought forth Abel, and Cain,....the solitary homicide." (From a Celtic poem.)
"Women are the race itself.....the strong primary sex, and man the biological afterthought." ---Francis Lester Ward
"The trouble with women is men; the trouble with men is men." (Anonymous Chinese quote.)

[katieokell]

Parthenogenesis is indeed a fascinating topic. There was even an episode of 'House' that dealt with parsenogenesis, although it turned out that Dr House was being a jerk (big surprise there)

There are no documented cases of parthenogenesis, however modern scientists have allowed us to create humans from the fusion of two eggs, compared to the fusion of an egg and a sperm (what naturally happens in humans). This was done in-vitro (ie, in a test tube), with lots of hormones and cytokines involved, so rest assured that it could not happen naturally between two eggs hanging out in a woman's ovaries. However, one could hypothetically consider the fusion of two eggs together from the same individual parthenogenesis, even if it happens in a test tube.
However, you have to think about a few things. Firstly, if humans were able to self-inseminate, we would be host to a huge amount of problems. One of the reasons that incest is deemed illegal is because of biological reasons - humans need genetic variance in their adaptive immune system, amongst many other things, in order to survive. A restricted gene sequence in your adaptive immune system would prevent you from being able to respond to the hundreds of thousands of pathogens that you are exposed to in your lifetime. If parthenogenesis were possible, the resultant offspring would be riddled with all sorts of genetic defects.

[Denisis]

Hello Katie, I'm grateful for your interest and imput. Please go to my blog, which I just posted a short while ago: Parthenogenesis, Virgin Birth, The Story of Laurie You'll be entertained at the very least, all though entertaining people is not my intention. I've no agenda, no book to sell, no axe to grind. I simply need to share what I know, what I've been contemplating for 40 years or so.
If you've the time you should also go to: Gnostic Media and search for an audio interview with Marguerite Rigogliosio and/or her book: The Cult of Divine Birth in Ancient Greece. She is an incredible scholar and will make you think twice about parthenogenesis.
She has become an email buddy of mine within the last two weeks and is very excited about my blog.
Please get back to me after your adventures to these sites. It's my hope to attract trained scientists to this controversial subject matter. Sincerely, Denisis.