Is the human of the future asexual or are we already…

Judging by the madness that is going on in the world in terms of sexuality, humanity is trying to be tolerant of individual self-identification, and the opposite sexual orientation is perceived as something individual, not abnormal. And it should be noted that the statement that it is “abnormal” for an adult man to want to look and be like a woman and vice versa does not correspond to modern ideas about gender identity and sexual orientation.

Today, men can be more feminine, but they still remain men, even if they undergo surgery or take medication. The same goes for women who are more masculine, but still remain women, no matter how hard they try to change their nature. Our society is constantly changing, and gender roles are changing too. Some people may be non-binary or gender non-conforming, but that doesn't mean we can't have children. There are various ways, including artificial insemination and surrogacy, that allow us to have children without participating in the process of sexual reproduction.

Will children be necessary in the future if it's no longer necessary to die, for example?

Futurists predict that in thirty years it may no longer be necessary to die, although living forever may not be possible either. Already, life expectancy has increased by approximately thirty years. I wouldn't be able to write these lines if modern technologies hadn't saved me from a heart attack, adding fifteen years to my life.

But the question arises: will children be needed in the future? If we stop dying, a new approach to childbirth and upbringing will be necessary. Currently, in most families, only one child is born, as people understand that raising children requires a lot of responsibility, time, and money. Today, we live to consume life, not to give new life. Who would refuse a good career and high income to live as a civilised, independent person? However, this approach contradicts the process of childbirth and child-rearing as intended by nature. In the future, we will surely have to find something else to do for civilisation besides reproduction. And these changes are already noticeable.

I wonder if there are more advanced civilizations and how they deal with this. As cosmologists say, if there are intelligent beings in the universe other than us, then they are probably in the second stage of development - when a civilisation is not tied to a planet and lives in space. Why we haven't heard anything about them yet is an ambiguous question. We don't have such technologies, and logic suggests that if such civilizations exist, they cannot influence our development process. We must transition to the second stage ourselves or perish, and they will definitely have an impact if we learn about them. If we do survive and cross this barrier from hostile and aggressive beings to those with whom it makes no sense to conflict, then most likely the second stage awaits us.

Why is conflict the norm for humans today? I think it's inherent in nature - the strongest survive. This race for survival is ingrained in us from the very beginning, as only one sperm out of a million reaches the finish line. If you look closely, this race continues until a person's death.

I won't talk about children grown in tubes, because there are already precedents and such children are growing up. In Germany, for example, they are already preparing a project for capsule gestation. So why am I saying this? A woman in the full sense of the word may not be necessary anymore, her eggs may be needed. The same goes for men. Young people may object now, but as you get older, you realize that sex with a woman always has consequences that you want to avoid over time to live comfortably and without worries. Roughly speaking, if there is a need and the head is preoccupied with women's skirts, there is always a simple way to distract oneself from it. Everyone does it, more or less, and we shouldn't be prudes. So, in the grand scheme of things, we as men and women may not need each other in a sexual sense. We are already genderless, so why not play with gender diversity?

Therefore, it becomes clear that there is nothing left for men and women to do. There is no need to hunt mammoths. There is no need to maintain the hearth or gestate and raise children since there are specialised organisations and services for that.

When someone says to me, "But you're a man," it's always an attempt at manipulation rather than a compliment. In such situations, I want to respond, "Yes, I'm a man, but for you, I'm just a human being, not a man or a woman, just a person". My gender only matters to my sexual partner, and it shouldn't concern anyone else in society. I'm just a human being!

What is happening now with the imbalance regarding gender minorities and calls for respect for their identity is likely a transitional period to a new type of human being - the human of the future. This could be a person without gender limitations, free from conflicts, greed, and envy, but capable of creating and building.