The War on Baby Girls - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 03-11-2010, 01:07 AM
Veggie Regular
 
otomik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: columbus, ohio
Posts: 4,248
http://www.economist.com/opinion/dis...ry_id=15606229

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Economist View Post

IMAGINE you are one half of a young couple expecting your first child in a fast-growing, poor country. You are part of the new middle class; your income is rising; you want a small family. But traditional mores hold sway around you, most important in the preference for sons over daughters. Perhaps hard physical labour is still needed for the family to make its living. Perhaps only sons may inherit land. Perhaps a daughter is deemed to join another family on marriage and you want someone to care for you when you are old. Perhaps she needs a dowry.



Now imagine that you have had an ultrasound scan; it costs $12, but you can afford that. The scan says the unborn child is a girl. You yourself would prefer a boy; the rest of your family clamours for one. You would never dream of killing a baby daughter, as they do out in the villages. But an abortion seems different. What do you do?



For millions of couples, the answer is: abort the daughter, try for a son. In China and northern India more than 120 boys are being born for every 100 girls. Nature dictates that slightly more males are born than females to offset boys’ greater susceptibility to infant disease. But nothing on this scale.

100 million girls gone.

* This post may contain pork, beef and fingers of undocumented workers. This post was manufactured in a facility that processes peanuts.
otomik is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 03-11-2010, 03:19 AM
Kiz
Veggie Regular
 
Kiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,132
Less girls mean less humans, and that can only be a good thing. 1 man and 100 women can have 100 babies, but 1 woman and 100 men can only have 1 baby. And they are not "gone" if they never existed.

Love the post? Why not buy the T-shirt!
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=categorie&cat=8
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=94
Kiz is offline  
#3 Old 03-11-2010, 04:05 AM
Veggie Regular
 
sosoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by otomik View Post

100 million girls gone.

You are greatly underestimating the number of girls we could have - say 1 a year from every fertile woman... thats more like 8.7 gazillion girls gone.



But yeah, a serious issue, but very easy to see the underlying cause - sexism. Like the article said:

Quote:
They should encourage female education; abolish laws and customs that prevent daughters inheriting property; make examples of hospitals and clinics with impossible sex ratios; get women engaged in public life—using everything from television newsreaders to women traffic police. Mao Zedong said “women hold up half the sky.”

sosoy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 03-11-2010, 07:46 AM
Veggie Regular
 
otomik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: columbus, ohio
Posts: 4,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

Less girls mean less humans, and that can only be a good thing. 1 man and 100 women can have 100 babies, but 1 woman and 100 men can only have 1 baby. And they are not "gone" if they never existed.

good issue this week really.



http://www.economist.com/culture/dis...=hptextfeature

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Economist View Post

The trick is to strangle the baby with the umbilical cord as it emerges, and call it stillborn.

I suppose that child "never existed" as a legal entity.

* This post may contain pork, beef and fingers of undocumented workers. This post was manufactured in a facility that processes peanuts.
otomik is offline  
#5 Old 03-11-2010, 07:58 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Kibbleforlola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,483
I agree, they can never be gone if they never existed.

Who needs sleep when we've got love?
Who needs keys when we've got clubs?
Who needs please when we've got guns?
Who needs peace when we've gone above?
Kibbleforlola is offline  
#6 Old 03-11-2010, 08:06 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Luxxi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 696
Females already outnumber males by a big jump as it is!



So even though aborting this many children isn't the greatest thing.. I don't feel anyone can really say the entire world's population is at risk over it..

Click here to visit my webpage! http://astrotidbits.blogspot.com/
Luxxi is offline  
#7 Old 03-11-2010, 08:17 AM
Veggie Regular
 
otomik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: columbus, ohio
Posts: 4,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luxxi View Post

Females already outnumber males by a big jump as it is!

false.

* This post may contain pork, beef and fingers of undocumented workers. This post was manufactured in a facility that processes peanuts.
otomik is offline  
#8 Old 03-11-2010, 08:23 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Kibbleforlola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by otomik View Post

false.



Uh, true. Females outnumber males by 5.3 million in the U.S. Maybe not a big jump, but enough to count.

Who needs sleep when we've got love?
Who needs keys when we've got clubs?
Who needs please when we've got guns?
Who needs peace when we've gone above?
Kibbleforlola is offline  
#9 Old 03-11-2010, 08:28 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Perhaps aborting female foetuses is marginally better than the traditional infanticide of baby girls before ultrasounds were available?



India has trial schemes to deal with this issue, attempting to address the underlying cultural reasons why girls aren't as desirable as children than males:



Modern India has tried several ways to tackle the issue. One initiative in the state of Tamil Nadu was taken to attack the underlying economic problems.



Where parents had one or two daughters but no son, and either of the parents was willing to be sterilised, the government offered the parents money to help look after the children. This money was to be paid annually throughout the daughter's education, followed by a lump sum on her twentieth birthday, either for use as a dowry or to fund further education.
MrFalafel is offline  
#10 Old 03-11-2010, 08:31 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Luxxi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFalafel View Post

Perhaps aborting female foetuses is marginally better than the traditional infanticide of baby girls before ultrasounds were available?



Agreed. And better than selling and/or harming them too.. (as would most likely happen in such a family who didn't want them to begin with)

Click here to visit my webpage! http://astrotidbits.blogspot.com/
Luxxi is offline  
#11 Old 03-11-2010, 10:19 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Alicia Avocado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,469
Quote:
Perhaps aborting female foetuses is marginally better than the traditional infanticide of baby girls before ultrasounds were available?



Good point.
Alicia Avocado is offline  
#12 Old 03-11-2010, 10:44 AM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
This seems to be one of your favorite anti-abortion rights arguments, Otomik.



If a child, no matter what sex, race. eye color, etc., is not wanted, it's better that child not be born.



If you have an issue with cultural/social/individual attitudes that are bigoted, then put your efforts to changing those attitudes, instead of arguing that children should be born to parents who don't want them and who will treat them miserably.



Look at the life expectancy statistics for females versus males in those societies in which sex selective abortions are taking place on a wide scale, and you'll see that many of the girls who weren't aborted are being killed more slowly through abuse and neglect - the statistics are pretty staggering. I've posted the studies before, so I'm not going to bother finding them for you again.
mlp is offline  
#13 Old 03-11-2010, 12:00 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlp View Post

If a child, no matter what sex, race. eye color, etc., is not wanted, it's better that child not be born.



If you have an issue with cultural/social/individual attitudes that are bigoted, then put your efforts to changing those attitudes, instead of arguing that children should be born to parents who don't want them and who will treat them miserably.



Look at the life expectancy statistics for females versus males in those societies in which sex selective abortions are taking place on a wide scale, and you'll see that many of the girls who weren't aborted are being killed more slowly through abuse and neglect - the statistics are pretty staggering. I've posted the studies before, so I'm not going to bother finding them for you again.



Yes. If the people who are to care for me are so desperate to get rid of me before I even get here, than I'd rather not be born. Human infants require a lot of care and nurturing in order to thrive, and often to even survive.



If the pendulum swings too far in the direction of choosing males, girls will eventually become very desirable. Or the society may self-destruct because of the violence caused by an overabundance of young males without the civilizing influence of females.

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
#14 Old 03-11-2010, 12:13 PM
Veggie Regular
 
otomik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: columbus, ohio
Posts: 4,248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

in the U.S.

that's adorable. read the article that begins the thread. not everything is about the US. sex ratios of the entire planet are about 107 males to 100 females.

* This post may contain pork, beef and fingers of undocumented workers. This post was manufactured in a facility that processes peanuts.
otomik is offline  
#15 Old 03-11-2010, 12:27 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Kibbleforlola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by otomik View Post

that's adorable.



That's condecending.



Quote:
read the article that begins the thread. not everything is about the US. sex ratios of the entire planet are about 107 males to 100 females.



I did read the article. I was using the U.S. as an example, because the numbers are easy to find. Perhaps I should have prefaced that with a 'for example'. Would that have made you feel better? Also, you fail to provide a source (again). So I did your work for you (you're welcome). Here you go. And, it's 102 males for every 100 females. Not that big of a difference.

Who needs sleep when we've got love?
Who needs keys when we've got clubs?
Who needs please when we've got guns?
Who needs peace when we've gone above?
Kibbleforlola is offline  
#16 Old 03-11-2010, 12:28 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Fromper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 7,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

Or the society may self-destruct because of the violence caused by an overabundance of young males without the civilizing influence of females.



I've read articles about this problem in the past (didn't read the article linked in this thread) which talk about this. They're predicting a large rise in crime in China once the generation that has 6 boys for every 5 girls reaches their teen years. The competition in dating, and the fact that many boys won't be able to get girlfriends and later wives, will lead to much frustration and crime among some of the male population.



--Fromper

Fromper is offline  
#17 Old 03-11-2010, 12:31 PM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
OMGZZZZ!!!! Fewer boys are being born!!!! http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/newsc...o/sexratio.htm
mlp is offline  
#18 Old 03-11-2010, 12:38 PM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbleforlola View Post

I did read the article. I was using the U.S. as an example, because the numbers are easy to find. Perhaps I should have prefaced that with a 'for example'. Would that have made you feel better? Also, you fail to provide a source (again). So I did your work for you (you're welcome). Here you go. And, it's 102 males for every 100 females. Not that big of a difference.



Actually, it's a reduction in the percentage of boys born, when compared with what has happened historically. There's a biological reason for a higher percentage of male births - you have to start out with more boys, because mortality rates are higher for males than females.



Worldwide, the pendulum is actually swinging in the opposite direction from what Otomik says.
mlp is offline  
#19 Old 03-11-2010, 12:40 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Alicia Avocado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,469
Quote:
There's a biological reason for a higher percentage of male births - you have to start out with more boys, because mortality rates are higher for males than females.



I think most deaths by young males start with the phrase:



"Hey! watch this!!!!"
Alicia Avocado is offline  
#20 Old 03-11-2010, 12:48 PM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicia Avocado View Post

I think most deaths by young males start with the phrase:



"Hey! watch this!!!!"





mlp is offline  
#21 Old 03-11-2010, 12:58 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Fromper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 7,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicia Avocado View Post

I think most deaths by young males start with the phrase:



"Hey! watch this!!!!"



... and end with a Darwin Award nomination.



--Fromper

Fromper is offline  
#22 Old 03-11-2010, 01:04 PM
Kiz
Veggie Regular
 
Kiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by otomik View Post

Quote:

\t\t\t\t\t Originally Posted by The Economist \t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t\t

\t\t\t\tThe trick is to strangle the baby with the umbilical cord as it emerges, and call it stillborn.



http://www.economist.com/culture/dis...=hptextfeature

I suppose that child "never existed" as a legal entity.



Yep. Still think aborting them is much better this, or the life mlp has described. If it's aborted as a fetus it was never a "child" to begin with.

Love the post? Why not buy the T-shirt!
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=categorie&cat=8
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=94
Kiz is offline  
#23 Old 03-11-2010, 01:20 PM
mlp
Banned
 
mlp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,995
This is why more males than females are born - the little buggers just die off faster than their female counterparts:



Sex ratio

at birth: 1.07 male(s)/female

under 15 years: 1.06 male(s)/female

15-64 years: 1.02 male(s)/female

65 years and over: 0.78 male(s)/female

total population: 1.01 male(s)/female (2009 est.)




http://www.indexmundi.com/world/demo...s_profile.html
mlp is offline  
#24 Old 03-11-2010, 01:40 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Mollfie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 393
They didn't exist in the first place, so they aren't really gone.
Mollfie is offline  
#25 Old 03-11-2010, 01:43 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Marie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alicia Avocado View Post

I think most deaths by young males start with the phrase:



"Hey! watch this!!!!"



Marie is offline  
#26 Old 03-11-2010, 02:10 PM
Veggie Regular
 
yally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,922
I'm baffled by this viewpoint that they never existed, my gut reaction to it is 'naararrarararrgh'.



But past that, at what point can you tell the sex of a fetus? Because maybe it's a lot earlier than I'm imagining, but to me it seems, once you can tell the sex of something, it exists as an animal, born or not.



I'm not going to argue about the rights and wrongs of aborting these girls, because I don't know what to think, it's too sad. It's certainly better than murdering/abusing them when they're born but I don't know, I really don't.
yally is offline  
#27 Old 03-11-2010, 02:15 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Sevenseas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 25,067
Female entities, whatever name we use to refer to them, certainly existed and are gone, even if by abortion.

"and I stand

upon a mountain

made of weak and useless men"

Sevenseas is offline  
#28 Old 03-11-2010, 08:52 PM
Veggie Regular
 
SomebodyElse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In a California Ghost Town
Posts: 7,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by yally View Post

I'm baffled by this viewpoint that they never existed, my gut reaction to it is 'naararrarararrgh'.

Yeah, it's kinda hard to understand why they need to be aborted if they don't exist. And if a fetus is well enough developed that you can distinguish her gender, I think that's as good a point as any to consider her a person with as much interest in having a life as mussels and clams have, at the very least.

www.thesaucyvegan.com
SomebodyElse is offline  
#29 Old 03-11-2010, 09:00 PM
Veggie Regular
 
KirstenKat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,189
I think it is ridiculous to abort a baby based on it's gender. Especially if it's developed enough to see the gender. A few years ago I saw a thing that let's you choose the gender before conception. I still think it's silly to be picky about the gender you have but it's better than millions of dead babies.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will then know peace" - Jimi Hendrix
KirstenKat is offline  
#30 Old 03-11-2010, 09:47 PM
Red
Veggie Regular
 
Red's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 4,765
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomebodyElse View Post

Yeah, it's kinda hard to understand why they need to be aborted if they don't exist. And if a fetus is well enough developed that you can distinguish her gender, I think that's as good a point as any to consider her a person with as much interest in having a life as mussels and clams have, at the very least.



Now you're just going to confuse people. Just 'cause she was female doesn't mean she actually existed.
Red is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off