What women want in their sperm donor: A study of more than 1000 women's sperm donor selections

Should a gamete bank verify the non-medical information provided by a donor?

Over the years, cases of fraud have been discovered where donors have been lying about their characteristics. The question raised by such cases is what the responsibility of the gamete bank is for the non-medical information provided by the donor. The problem is that extended donor profiles contain a large amount of information about different aspects of the donor's life and that not all this information can be verified or is worth verifying. Two cases are scrutinized in more detail: education and criminal record. The proposed solution is to split the donor information into a verified and a non-verified part with the non-verified part falling under the responsibility of the donor. The question of what information should be included in the verified part of the donor profile is still open.

Sperm donors versus long-term mates: a comparison of preferences of heterosexual and lesbian women

The present study aimed to explore whether lesbian women's preferences for a sperm donor or a long-term mate show a pattern similar to those of heterosexual women. Three hundred and eighty-three donor insemination patients, of whom 278 were heterosexual and 105 were lesbian, completed a questionnaire comprising a series of 35 traits and rated the importance of each trait in a sperm donor and again in a long term mate. Results showed that traits relating to socioeconomic status, genetic background and general health, physical appearance, and personality were rated by lesbian women as more important in a long-term mate than in a sperm donor. It was further found that both heterosexual and lesbian women attached higher importance to the socioeconomic status, personality and physical appearance of the long-term mate than of the sperm donor; heterosexual women attached similar importance to the genes and health of a long-term mate and a sperm donor, while lesbian women attached greater importance to the genetic background and general health of the sperm donor than those of a long-term mate. The implications and interpretations of the findings are discussed in light of Trivers' parental investment theory.

Motivational stimuli to donate sperm among non-donor students

BACKGROUND

Sperm banks face a continuously evolving gap between the increasing demand for sperm donation (SD) vs. limited available reserve. To improve donors' recruitment and increase supply, motivations towards SD should be investigated specifically among young men who have the potential to become donors. Our aim was to evaluate factors which increase and decrease predisposition to donate sperm among non-donor students, who represent a "potential pool" for possible donors' recruitment.

RESULTS

Ninety-three men fulfilled the questionnaire with mean age of 28.2 ± 4.5 years. The most powerful incentive to donate sperm was financial reward followed by a willingness to help others to build a family (3.8 and 3.4, respectively). The most dominant consideration to decline donation was the fear of anonymity loss and future regret (4 and 3.8). While participants' willingness for anonymous SD was fair (2.8), the open-identity donation was rated significantly lower (1.75, p < 0.01). Familiarity with recipients and offspring had lower scores (1.9-2.2) as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Young single men represent a suitable cohort for anonymous donation. Financial reward and willingness to help others are important positive incentives while anonymity preservation is crucial to maintain their willingness towards SD. Regulatory shifting towards open-identity SD necessitates the establishment of an alternative "potential pool" population as a reliable source to recruit donors.

Understanding the Reasons Why Men and Women Do Not Donate Gametes

The global under-supply of sperm and oocyte donors is a serious concern for assisted reproductive medicine. Research has explored self-selected populations of gamete donors and their ex-post rationalisations of why they chose to donate. However, such studies may not provide the necessary insight into why the majority of people do not donate. Utilising the unique open form responses of a large sample (n = 1035) of online survey respondents, we examine the reasons participants cite when asked: “Why haven’t you donated your sperm/eggs?.” We categorise these responses into four core themes (conditional willingness, barriers, unconsidered, and conscientious objector) and eleven lower-order themes. We find that, on average, women are more conditionally willing (8.2% difference; p = 0.008) to participate in gamete donation than men. We also find that women are more likely than men to justify their non-donation based on their reproductive history (21.3% difference; p = 0.000) or kin selection and inclusive fitness (5.7% difference; p = 0.008). However, compared to women, men are more likely to validate their non-donation based on sociocultural or social norms (6% difference; p = 0.000) or religion (1.7% difference; p = 0.030). That so many of our study participants report in-principal willingness for future participation in gamete donation speaks to the need for increased research on understanding non-donor population preferences, motivations, and behaviours.

Hormonal contraceptives as disruptors of competitive behavior: Theoretical framing and review

Emerging evidence suggests that hormonal contraceptives (HCs) impact psychological outcomes through alterations in neurophysiology. In this review, we first introduce a theoretical framework for HCs as disruptors of steroid hormone modulation of socially competitive attitudes and behaviors. Then, we comprehensively examine prior research comparing HC users and non-users in outcomes related to competition for reproductive, social, and financial resources. Synthesis of 46 studies (n = 16,290) led to several key conclusions: HC users do not show the same menstrual cycle-related fluctuations in self-perceived attractiveness and some intrasexual competition seen in naturally-cycling women and, further, may show relatively reduced status- or achievement-oriented competitive motivation. However, there a lack of consistent or compelling evidence that HC users and non-users differ in competitive behavior or attitudes for mates or financial resources. These conclusions are tentative given the notable methodological limitations of the studies reviewed. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Sex differences in sexual attraction for aesthetics, resources and personality across age

Because sexual attraction is a key driver of human mate choice and reproduction, we descriptively assess relative sex differences in the level of attraction individuals expect in the aesthetic, resource, and personality characteristics of potential mates. As a novelty we explore how male and female sexual attractiveness preference changes across age, using a dataset comprising online survey data for over 7,000 respondents across a broad age distribution of individuals between 18 and 65 years. In general, we find that both males and females show similar distribution patterns in their preference responses, with statistically significant sex differences within most of the traits. On average, females rate age, education, intelligence, income, trust, and emotional connection around 9 to 14 points higher than males on our 0-100 scale range. Our relative importance analysis shows greater male priority for attractiveness and physical build, compared to females, relative to all other traits. Using multiple regression analysis, we find a consistent statistical sex difference (males relative to females) that decreases linearly with age for aesthetics, while the opposite is true for resources and personality, with females exhibiting a stronger relative preference, particularly in the younger aged cohort. Exploring non-linearity in sex difference with contour plots for intelligence and attractiveness across age (mediated by age) indicates that sex differences in attractiveness preferences are driven by the male cohort (particularly age 30 to 40) for those who care about the importance of age, while intelligence is driven by females caring relatively more about intelligence for those who see age as very important (age cohort 40 to 55). Overall, many of our results indicate distinct variations within sex at key life stages, which is consistent with theories of selection pressure. Moreover, results also align with theories of parental investment, the gender similarities hypothesis, and mutual mate choice-which speaks to the fact that the broader discipline of evolutionary mate choice research in humans still contains considerable scope for further inquiry towards a unified theory, particularly when exploring sex-difference across age.

The ethical case for non-directed postmortem sperm donation

In this article we outline and defend the concept of voluntary non-directed postmortem sperm donation. This approach offers a potential means of increasing the quantity and heterogeneity of donor sperm. This is pertinent given the present context of a donor sperm shortage in the UK. Beyond making the case that it is technically feasible for dead men to donate their sperm for use in reproduction, we argue that this is ethically permissible. The inability to access donor sperm and the suffering this causes, we argue, justifies allowing access to sperm donated after death. Moreover, it is known that individuals and couples have desires for certain sperm donor characteristics which may not be fulfilled when numbers of sperm donors are low. Enacting these preferences contributes significantly to the well-being of intended parents, so we argue that this provides a pro tanto reason for respecting them. Finally, we explore the benefits and possible disadvantages of such a system for the various parties affected.

Choosing genes without jeans: do evolutionary psychological mechanisms have an impact on thinking distortions in sperm donor preferences among heterosexual sperm recipients?

The objective of the project was to compare the importance of traits desired in a life partner to traits desired in a sperm donor. A survey was distributed via internet support groups to women undergoing donor insemination and the questionnaire consisted of 35 traits of a desired life partner and of a desired sperm donor. The respondents comprised 278 unmarried childless heterosexual women over 38 years old undergoing donor insemination treatments. The 35 traits of a desired life partner and a desired sperm donor were grouped by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) into four factors: (i) personality; (ii) physical appearance; (iii) genes and health; and (iv) socio-economic status. Paired-sample t-tests showed that patients attached significantly greater importance to social status, personality, and physical appearance in a desired life partner than to those traits in a desired sperm donor. No differences were found regarding the genetic quality of the desired life partner versus the sperm donor. These findings contribute to the understanding of fertility patients' preferences in sperm donors.

Man, Woman, "Other": Factors Associated with Nonbinary Gender Identification

Using a unique dataset of 7479 respondents to the online Australian Sex Survey (July-September 2016), we explored factors relevant for individuals who self-identify as one of the many possible nonbinary gender options (i.e., not man or woman). Our results identified significant sex differences in such factors; in particular, a positive association between female height, higher educational levels, and greater same-sex attraction (female-female) versus a negative effect of lower income levels and more offspring. With respect to sex similarities, older males and females, heterosexuals, those with lower educational levels, and those living outside capital cities were all more likely to identify as the historically dichotomous gender options. These factors associated with nonbinary gender identification were also more multifaceted for females than for males, although our interaction terms demonstrated that younger females (relative to younger males) and nonheterosexuals (relative to heterosexuals) were more likely to identify as nonbinary. These effects were reversed, however, in the older cohort. Because gender can have such significant lifetime impacts for both the individual and society as a whole, our findings strongly suggest the need for further research into factors that impact gender diversity.