As common wisdom goes, children are created through an act by one male and one female human, and subsequently carry about 50% of each partner's core DNA and 100% of the female partner's mitochondrial DNA.
As a result, neither egocentrical males nor lesbians can bear children by themselves, even though artificial insemination and foster mothers may make it easy to live in the illusion that it's a possibility. (Or were you implying that the backward model of gender roles that is expressed in "carry my child" would be sure to drive any sane woman away unless the OP is a lesbian woman, because lesbian women can get away with chauvinistic opinions without raising any red flags?)
On the other hand, yes, his or her wife may be perfectly able to carry his or her existing child around if he or she is a single parent with a sore back.
And while you may consider yourself witty, I feel I must point out that in the context in which I was using it, "to carry" a child refers to the state of being pregnant with it. Citation: #6 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/carry Yet again, something the wombless may have trouble with.
Lesbians can certainly bear children by themselves, just as any woman could. By that point, it does not matter (for the biological notion of conception) if that woman is lesbian, heterosexual, asexual, or anything else.
As opposed to that, the mindset of getting a partner for the sole purpose of having a family, while certainly more often found with those with non-womb reproductive organs, can probably be found with both males and females and in either case is sure to be appalling to the partner (or to other people at large).
While I strongly agree with your basic point, I'm not sure I like the way you make that point.
In my understanding, both the OP and yourself implicitly talk about the whole parenting affair and not just getting pregnant with a child, at which point the social faculty of being a good parent becomes more relevant compared to biological disposition.
