The benefits of ectogenesis for women ground many contemporary authors’ arguments on the moral desirability of this practice. In this talk, I present and assess two sets of arguments advanced in favour of ectogenesis: arguments stressing ectogenesis’ equality-promoting potential and arguments stressing its freedom-promoting potential. I argue that, while successfully grounding a positive case for ectogenesis, these arguments have limitations in terms of their reach and scope. In addition, contra certain contemporary defences of ectogenesis, I contend that such practice might not represent a desirable means to end gender‐based oppression. This is the case as ectogenesis embodies a kind of strategies to pursue liberating projects that can be ascribed to what Iris Marion Young defines as ‘the ideal of assimilation’, one that, in my view, should be resisted. After providing examples of these limitations and problematic claims, I present my proposal concerning the role of ectogenesis in promoting women’s equality and freedom. This proposal builds on Silvia Federici’s, Mariarosa Dalla Costa’s and Selma James’ readings of the international feminist campaign ‘Wages for Housework’. It maintains that the political perspective and provocation that ectogenesis can advance should be considered and defended.