A questionnaire-survey of public perception of the desirability, risks, and benefits associated with current and potential applications of genetic engineering techniques to manipulate the outcome of human reproduction was conducted on 111 male and 135 female respondents. The proportion (63%) of male respondents who hold a positive impression that genetic engineering is a socially beneficial field of scientific research was significantly higher than the corresponding proportion (46%) of female respondents (p = 0.008). Similarly, in comparing somatic (non-reproductive cells) and germ-line (reproductive cells) gene therapy, most males (58%) foresaw no detrimental impacts of somatic cell gene therapy, but most females (60%, including 49% who opted for case-by-case evaluation) disapprove of even this form of therapy (p = 0.04). Most people remain fearful of germ-line therapy, but significantly more men (23%) than women (16%) support the development of genetic engineering for manipulating human germ-line cells (p = 0.04). There are no significant differences between male and female respondents with respect to genetic manipulation to correct inborn errors of metabolism or fetal deformity. The results of this study support the view that women tend to be more cautious than men with respect to acceptance of novel genetically-based procedures aimed at altering pregnancy outcome and offspring phenotype. Gender-based educational programs regarding the human genome project and human genetic engineering may be warranted to promote concordant decision-making in family planning and counseling.