Gendercide: The War on Baby Girls Has Gotten a Whole Lot Worse

[JCMach1]

Some shocking stuff in this article:

Most people know China and northern India have unnaturally large numbers of boys. But few appreciate how bad the problem is, or that it is rising. In China the imbalance between the sexes was 108 boys to 100 girls for the generation born in the late 1980s; for the generation of the early 2000s, it was 124 to 100. In some Chinese provinces the ratio is an unprecedented 130 to 100. The destruction is worst in China but has spread far beyond. Other East Asian countries, including Taiwan and Singapore, former communist states in the western Balkans and the Caucasus, and even sections of America’s population (Chinese- and Japanese-Americans, for example): all these have distorted sex ratios. Gendercide exists on almost every continent. It affects rich and poor; educated and illiterate; Hindu, Muslim, Confucian and Christian alike.

Wealth does not stop it. Taiwan and Singapore have open, rich economies. Within China and India the areas with the worst sex ratios are the richest, best-educated ones. And China’s one-child policy can only be part of the problem, given that so many other countries are affected... Baby girls are thus victims of a malign combination of ancient prejudice and modern preferences for small families. Only one country has managed to change this pattern. In the 1990s South Korea had a sex ratio almost as skewed as China’s. Now, it is heading towards normality. It has achieved this not deliberately, but because the culture changed. Female education, anti-discrimination suits and equal-rights rulings made son preference seem old-fashioned and unnecessary. The forces of modernity first exacerbated prejudice—then overwhelmed it... http://www.economist.com/node/15606229

There are going to be some major social dislocations because of this. Shared wives? Who knows!!!

[alphafemale]

1. My guess is that we'll start seeing child brides sold off to the highest bidder soon. nt

[LibertyLover]

13. In some parts of China

there is now a booming business in abducting women of marriageable age and selling them.

[magical thyme]

2. this alone would do it

"...all countries need to raise the value of girls. 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.” The world needs to do more to prevent a gendercide that will have the sky crashing down."

When women can earn as much as a man for the same work, can provide equally, can inherit equally, are equal in all economic and political aspects, then they won't be subject to gendercide.

I respectfully disagree with their statement on the one-child policy. China has serious, serious population issues. Not just feeding, but water, housing, waste, pollution, speciescide, etc. are not just threats. They are real and happening. Wealthy people should be encouraged to adopt if they want larger families, instead of the need to reproduce their genes.

The thought of all that testosterone without outlet is frightening. But without intervention, it will resolve within a generation or two simply through lack of partners with which to reproduce. Hopefully before war provides an outlet.

[Zalatix]

3. Problem with that

"Wealthy people should be encouraged to adopt if they want larger families, instead of the need to reproduce their genes."

And they're the ones with all the power to do whatever they want. I bet they even bribe Chinese officials to get away with just about anything.

[saras]

4. The traditional solution has always been war

Line those boys up in rows and have them slaughter each other.

Any reason to think we'll do better this time?

[quakerboy]

10. It is getting to be about time for a nice big one, eh?

I mean, you have Iran brewing right there handy. North Korea could also provide a nice outlet, being right across the border. There seems to be constant conflict in the middle east that could be used as justification. All China needs to do is step up to its obvious position as "world police", and there ya go.

[FarCenter]

16. Now robotics offers a better solution

[hfojvt]

5. gendercide?

So now abortion really is murder?

[grantcart]

6. There are major factual problems with this 2010 article.

While it is a fact that problems exist in some areas of India and China its assertion that wealthier areas have similar problems didn't sound right to me.

It's basic assertion is that the problem exists in the Indian/Chinese diaspora, and I find this very hard to believe.

Taking one example, Singapore I googled birth statistics and found that for 2011 the number of live births is

Male 79.3

Female 84.1



http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/keyind.html

That search took me all of 30 seconds.

While some aspects of the article may be correct the assertion that Chinese and Indians are doing this all over the world is really quite racist.

Given that it doesn't advise who the author is and all of its assumptions are based on unsourced 'facts', some of which are 100% wrong and easily disproved the OP may wish to put a disclaimer into the article or delete it all together.

[quakerboy]

9. You misquote your link

The numbers you gave appear to be "life expectancy at birth" for males and females.

There were 39,630 live births in Singapore in 2011. Their data does not seem to have any info on how many of those births were male or female children, so there is no way from it to get a ratio.

That said, CIA factbook say 107 male births per 100(to convert it to compare with the articles claims)
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2018.html
Nationmaster says closer to 108 per 100
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_sex_rat_at_bir-people-sex-ratio-at-birth

Either way, not quite the articles claimed disparity of 120, 130, etc.

China seems to be at about 113/100. For comparison the US and the UK at 105/100, which seems to be about the norm, though African countries seem to drop lower.

It is still an issue. For china, that extra 8 boys/100 could translate to an extra 50 million males, if the trend continues for all future generations. That's a lot of guys who may want to find mates and be unable, along with all the social stigmas attached. That said, wouldn't it be great if we could somehow translate this into a greater respect for women in those societies? Rare items are usually considered more valuable. The trick would be to have it become respect/power for women, rather than just a new reason to control them.



Although, if you dig into their links, there is one that seems to indicate that in 2011, there are 972 male singapooreans to every 1000 females

[grantcart]

11. you are correct that I quoted the statistics incorrectly

a couple more clicks brings the actual stats

http://www.ica.gov.sg/data/resources/docs/Media%20Releases/SDB/SDB_December%202011.pdf

go to Table 5

Interestingly it shows a pattern for preferential male birth.

However in the last months recorded the trend seems to be reversing, especially among Indian couples.

I would still make the point that any article that alleges that the bias continues into the diaspora regardless of education and class would require a very thorough statistical basis which the original article doesn't seem to have.

[Quantess]

7. There are too many human babies being born, in general.

[FrodosPet]

8. What's the solution?

Obvious is education, same sex marriage, free access to contraception and abortion, tax PENALTIES (and not rewards) for having children, and social shunning of parents are a start.

People should understand that bringing more resource consumers into the world does nothing but feed their egos and desire to control other human beings. They need to be called out and shamed for their recklessness and lack of consideration for others.

[bhikkhu]

15. Education for girls is the most effective

as it creates a society with roles for women other than "child-bearer".

[laundry_queen]

17. I disagree.

I don't think being punitive or shaming will work (nor do I think it's obvious). It does nothing but foster a contrarian streak in people and makes it difficult for children to feel valued as a part of society if they are shunned. Like it or not, children need to be raised to feel like they are a part of society and that they have the power to make it better. Shunning them does not accomplish that. And yes, if you shun the parents, the kids will 'get' it.

All that is needed is education and equality and free access to birth control and the birth rate drops to below replacement. I also don't think 'same sex marriage' as you said is a solution to lowering the birth rate - same sex couples should have the same rights as heterosexual couples to bring children into the world if they want. Same sex couples aren't some sort of 'child-free' refuge - they have families too. Not sure what that comment meant.

I do think education around the finiteness of our planet, and the consumption rates of various resources would also help. I think people are largely ignorant about how much (many?) resources a 1st world country uses, vs a 3rd world country. We need to make it cool to live a simple/frugal life. Excess should no longer be what we aspire to. Easier said than done - someone get the message to Hollywood...

[Texasgal]

12. And there as still people that don't

believe that sexism somehow dosen't exist.

Sad. Sad story.

[bhikkhu]

14. ...and Misguided Panic would be the most likely response to that

or the most historically common response, in western societies. (Read Connelly's "Fatal Misconception", for one good run-down).

People make choices, and then societies change due the the choices they have made. Reactions and judgments occur after the fact, but you don't ever really get to go back in time and prevent people from making choices, even if you imagine that would have been possible or a good idea.