This is already the case, plenty of trans men have kids.

This market is about something much more insane, read the description.

Title implies assigned male at birth

I think this is likely going to be possible by then, although not necessarily a common practice. Human biology is not infinitely complex, and there are quite a few ways this problem could be approached. All this contingent on significant progress in various fields (including biotech) of course.

This is in 30 years.

We still can't have in-vivo fertilisation for neither genetic females who lack adequate ovarian development nor for genetic males who automatically develop as females due to androgen resistance

How does this resolve if the technology and methods exist but are illegal everywhere or grey market in a few places which are not integrated enough with established healthcare to faithfully speak to the criteria?

I think that should still count, as long as it's not prohibitively expensive to someone willing to take the legal risk.

How does this resolve for a surgically-implanted cybernetic womb? hard to describe what I mean here, but like a "more robot like" one vs one that was grown and is made mostly of cells.

@NicholasKross That counts.

I'm completely stunned by this market being at almost 80%. Could someone please sketch out a path for me of how on earth you expect a safe cheap procedure to replicate:

1. Ovaries that produces eggs

2. Zygote implantation

3. A womb that can sustain a 9 month gestation

4. A vaginal tract flexible enough to dilate to 10cm

These include entire organs that don't exist.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here, this market should be down below 10%...

@jonsimon A lot of questions on Manifold are basically "bets on a transhumanist future". If tech moved really fast and also humanity didn't go extinct (or regress super hard against trans people) by 2055, this would be plausible. (E.g. using not-yet-perfected-or-even-extant technologies like organ growing, cybernetic implants, etc.)

I'm not sure you need 1, 2 or 4 unless you're requiring a higher standard of 'normally' than I would on first pass.

I get the feeling that if we were able to develop an ostensibly 'artificial' womb, that is implanted into a human and could be used for the majority of a 9 month pregnancy, even if the fetus was formed using artificial techniques and delivered surgically, you'd be looking at a YES resolution.

Something along the lines of https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4608829/ but gooder and internal...

(I agree this feels high, but also 30 years is a long time in technology).

Theoretically, would a brain-swap (physically taking two consenting adults and swapping their brains, somehow) count? (If we assume it as "relatively safe", which is quite absurd by 2055)

There are whole organ systems missing... this is so astronomically far from being feasible...