What exactly is allowed in the Federation and what exactly disqualifies membership?

[Detached Nacelle]

Under the rules of the 24th century, almost certainly not. However, when the Federation was formed in 2161, the rules might have been less strict. I do like to think, however, that they would have been pressured to grant Cogenitors equal rights later on.

After the less than stellar first contact they probably wouldnt want much to do with this nacent alliance forming on Earth.

 

[Oddish]

After the less than stellar first contact they probably wouldnt want much to do with this nacent alliance forming on Earth.

That's possible too. Once the Federation really started to gain momentum, the Vissians would likely be interested. However, by that time, they might have imposed some restrictions.

I would be surprised if Vissians had not joined the Federation by the 24th century, though. Cogenitors would still live different lives than others, simply because they needed to travel from couple to couple to aid in conception. But they could still be acknowledged as legally equal.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

That's possible too. Once the Federation really started to gain momentum, the Vissians would likely be interested. However, by that time, they might have imposed some restrictions.

I would be surprised if Vissians had not joined the Federation by the 24th century, though. Cogenitors would still live different lives than others, simply because they needed to travel from couple to couple to aid in conception. But they could still be acknowledged as legally equal.

150-200 years or so is certainly enough time for social reform and to gice Cogenitors the option to decline being assigned to a couple instead of being essentially sex slaves.

 

[Oddish]

150-200 years or so is certainly enough time for social reform and to gice Cogenitors the option to decline being assigned to a couple instead of being essentially sex slaves.

They would still need to move from couple to couple, because they were essential for reproduction (unless their contribution could be artificially replicated, which would probably be a relief for all three sexes). But that doesn't mean they can't have names, learn to read, have ice cream when everyone else gets it, and take the occasional time off to climb a mountain.

 

[CoveTom]

New members must demonstrate just the right amount of pretentiousness before they're let in.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

They would still need to move from couple to couple, because they were essential for reproduction (unless their contribution could be artificially replicated, which would probably be a relief for all three sexes). But that doesn't mean they can't have names, learn to read, have ice cream when everyone else gets it, and take the occasional time off to climb a mountain.

Arguably in a bigendered species both parties are essential for reproduction, but they are allowed to choose not to.

In the event of a disparity between genders or in a reduced population should consent be taken away in the name of species continuation?

Gene therapy so they can reproduce with just males and females would be preferable but would take a long time for their culture to adapt to. As would the very concept of treating Cogenitors as people.

It seems a very inefficient evolutionary trait to be unable to reproduce without the assistance of a gender that makes up only 3% of the population and do parents just abandon their children to some farm if they're born Cogenitor?