When it comes to eggs, intelligence isn't worth beans

By Amy Lin

From the newsprint pages of campus publications to the webpages of the information superhighway, ads for egg donors have germinated everywhere. Citing stipulations of high SAT scores, robust GPAs, and other such desirable marks of intelligence, couples have offered to pay donors as much as $50,000 for the service. Now the fashion industry has stepped in to offer models as egg donors. Beauty, apparently, is much more costly than intelligence —assuming that the rather absurd belief that standardized test scores reflect intelligence is correct—since some of the eggs of these models fetch an exorbitant $150,000. That's four years of tuition at Yale, and enough left over for a new BMW to boot.

Appearance is also very important in the college paper ads. Some of the physical qualifications requests include "slender blonde, blue eyes, 5'6" or taller." Although they don't require beauty outright, such subjective judgments could be covertly made in an interview with the candidate that conveniently bypasses the need to awkwardly spell such qualifications out in the ad.

However, the ads for the models' eggs that are found on the internet have no such interest in promoting the intelligence of the egg bearers. Even if coupled with good looks, Ivy League brilliance is no match for professional beauty. Clearly, parents (rich ones, at least, since no one else can afford these eggs) are more concerned about their children having high cheekbones and slender physiques than high IQs.

But is that really what these ads are reflecting? By commanding a higher price, the eggs of the models do not necessarily signify that American society assigns a greater value to physical beauty. As materialistic as our society is, not everything is given its equal weight in dollars. Money doesn't speak for the masses; the desires of the wealthy few do not necessarily signal the values of the many.

Aside from worrying about the power of money, there is also the issue of what criteria should be employed in the search for an egg donor. Without any physiological problems, the couple seeking a donor would presumably have a child of their own. So what's the difference between selecting for a desirable egg donor and selecting for a desirable partner? From a Darwinian perspective, the qualities valued in a mate are the same ones hoped for in the offspring. So regardless of where the genes come from, whether a loving spouse or a money-hungry egg donor, certain qualities are sure to be sought.

From this angle, the ads for or from a potential egg donor are just glorified personal ads. To be fair, we shouldn't treat them any differently than those hundreds of ads seeking a "SWM" that precede an unpleasantly detailed profile of Jane Schmoe. Similarly, from the other side, the models' egg ads are the equivalent of advertising an "attractive, confident female professional seeking worthy companion." As with real dating, offers for egg donors are only looking for one match. So while criticism of the standards for intelligence or beauty are valid, dating itself is in some ways a series of subtle tests that use equally flimsy standards. Although hundreds of sharper, stunning candidates might be unfairly overlooked, the criteria of an elite education, blond hair, or a certain height often works in uncovering one suitable donor. Besides, the survival of the fittest has never been very fair.

Of course, the comparison between dating and egg donation has its limitations. A potential spouse's ability to relate and act as a companion is as important as his or her genetic potential. Nevertheless, whether for a partner or a child, whether through dating or via the egg donor selection process, there still remains a means of deciding which characteristics are the most important and desirable. If anything, it is the similarities and not the differences between these two fields that should have us worried. The world of dating and courtship has existed for millennia and employs a subtle and complex system that balances such qualities as confidence, good looks, manners, maturity, and—more recently—a secure job. In the newfangled field of egg donation, a crude and perhaps more American idea has penetrated this intercourse: cold, hard cash.

Amy Lin is a junior in Morse.

Back to Opinion...