Choices

[woodwardiocom]

I'm trying to figure out how to reconcile my reaction to 160 million aborted female fetuses in Asia with a pro-choice position.

Thoughts?

Edit: On reflection, I note that B. and I conceived the Roo via IVF, and if the doctor had said to us, "We've got two equally good 8-cell lumps here, one male, one female, which do you want?" we would not have flipped a coin. So it seems I'm willing to make that same sort of decision. That's a bit unsettling.

Comments

[archangelbeth]

It's better than 160 million girls killed after birth, or neglected or abused? Or their mothers injured or dying if they have sex-identification, but not abortion, so they resort to unsafe or deadly methods. Or their husbands do, such as stomach-punching. Or the mothers being pressured to have child after child to get a son (which risks health and life, even with modern medtech).

I think the obsession with sons is more to blame. There can be nothing but a choice of evils when one gender is valued so much over the other.

[badseed1980.livejournal.com]

This is pretty much exactly what i was thinking.

it's not necessarily an either/or...

[shut-it-already.livejournal.com]

(in re: your initial question)

I randomly stumbled on a link to this article from '09 yesterday: http://www.thestar.com/Insight/article/645832

Your second paragraph pretty much nails it, imo.

[hahathor.livejournal.com]

in smaller booming cities in the East, between Shanghai and Beijing, the sex ratio is really high. In some places, it’s two boys for every girl.

And now I've got this totally inappropriate earworm:

Going to Shaoxing gonna have some fun
Going to Shaoxing cuz it's two to one
Two boys for every girl

[hahathor.livejournal.com]

I am a horrible horrible person

[badseed1980.livejournal.com]

I guess I am too, because I lol'd.

I'm usually quite a big fan of two boys for every girl (especially when I am the girl) but geez, China! This is stupid!

[donnad.livejournal.com]

It's nothing new, The Chinese have always preferred boy children over girls. A boy child can take care of aging parents better, a girl child is expensive and usually becomes responsible for her husband's parents, not her own.

Only now they can find out and abort before the child is born instead of commiting infanticide or leaving the child on the doorstep of an orphanage.

Not saying it's right by any means, but it's nothing to be shocked about, it's been going on for generations.

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

It's nothing new

Yes, I know. However, the culture I live in recognizes a difference between infanticide (the old method) and abortion (the new method).

it's nothing to be shocked about

Beg pardon?

[taura-g.livejournal.com]

Er... yeah, just because its been going on for generations doesn't mean it isn't something to be shocked about.

Also, I think the addition of modern technology to the practice is just making it that much more precise...which by itself is not shocking, technology can be used for good or ill--but the numbers its creating is a bit shocking.

[donnad.livejournal.com]

Are there numbers telling how many girl children were victims of infanticide or abandonment prior to the technology being available? For that matter how many men committed justifyable homicide or insisted on divorce because their wives couldn't give them sons? How many children are born at home and immediately killed and reported as still born because they were female?

I don't think it's shocking, but I find it sad that some cultures put that much emphasis on the sex of the heir. It's a cultural thing.

[donnad.livejournal.com]

I don't find it shocking, I find it a bit saddening, but the practice of selecting for a child's sex (in the past after a child was born) is something that has been happening for a very long time. The fact that they keep records now and we have numbers is what brings it to the news. Here in the US, infanticide is practically unheard of, thus hearing about it is shocking to some people, but it is and was quite common in other countries.

ETA: I'm not saying it's right, but rather it's a cultural thing that we because we live in the US, cannot quite understand the reasoning behind.

[katkt.livejournal.com]

Freedom means letting other people make bad choices.

[arianhwyvar.livejournal.com]

There is a horrible, awful thing going on here that you should hate, and that thing has to do with sexism, treating women as both worth less than men and as commodities. That is the thing that is causing this problem, not abortion. Get rid of the wretched attitudes about women, and sex-selection abortion largely goes away. Get rid of abortion, and sex-selection just moves to unsafe abortion and infanticide, and the attitudes towards and treatment of women certainly do not improve.

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

Yah. Basically, it's just a new form of, "I hate everything you're saying, but will defend your right to say it."

[arianhwyvar.livejournal.com]

I think I actually disagree with this. (Not the 'I hate what you're saying...', but that this situation is just a new form of it.) I think that applies to people who honestly with full agency use abortion in ways we don't approve of; i.e., I'm sure that there are a few people who choose to have sex, don't use birth control because they just aren't bothering, and have abortions repeatedly, while in my opinion people shouldn't be choosing to have sex unless they are also making the best effort they can to use birth control, unless they want children.

Whereas this situation reflects an actual problem that is probably hurting a lot of people as well as the society in general. The fact that abortion is used in furthering this problem does not mean abortion is the problem, but it also doesn't mean we should pretend there isn't a problem because abortion shows up in it.

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

Good point, important distinction.

[arianhwyvar.livejournal.com]

Also...I have to wonder how many of those sex-selected abortions are up to the free choice of the pregnant woman. I'm sure that a great many of them are - if only because women can believe plenty of sexist things, and if their society makes it so that a girl child will make their lives harder, and a boy will make their lives easier...well. But these things, plus possible situations where the pregnant woman would be happy to have a girl child but other people make the decision that she will abort -- none of that is really free choice where abortion vs continuing a pregnancy is concerned.

I believe that being pro-choice also means supporting giving women the ability to choose to bear a child when they are pregnant, which means trying to make sure their situation allows it. If you would really like to have a child, but you flat-out lack the resources to support a child, or necessary medical care, or have an abusive partner who will hurt you or the child if you give birth, yes it's important to be able to choose abortion if that's the best choice for you, but it would be even better to be able to freely choose to carry to term if that's what you really want.

[ultra-lilac.livejournal.com]

I read a good article recently where it was made clear the mother often has little choice and faces enormous pressure from family. Wish I could remember where!

It's a wider societal attitude towards the value of women, and the refusal to let customs like doweries die out that is causing the problem, not the right to choose an abortion.

[infinitehotel.livejournal.com]

It strikes me as a similar dilemma to trying to reconcile a belief in the need for a US military with My Lai. That is, it's an unpleasant institution that exists for a good reason. Recognizing a failure in a system doesn't obviate the need so you try to figure out how to reform the abuses rather than eliminating the institution altogether.

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

I'm glad to see you resisting the temptation to say, "Freedom of choice is okay for me, because I have good values, but it's not okay for them, because they have bad values."

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

I have my moments of clarity.

[minkrose]

Well, maybe this will help. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8305217.stm

BBC report on a study that found that banning abortion does not reduce the rate of abortion - in other words, women will have abortions whether it is legal or not.

The difference is, when abortion is illegal, more women die due to unsafe practices. I think that is the single best argument against banning abortion anywhere. I wish we could make all lawmakers understand this crucial point.


So yes, it's hard to feel okay with their decision! But on the other hand, it's likely these women would be trying to find some way to get rid of their unwanted daughters, and I'd rather they were able to do that in a safe, healthy environment. Banning abortion would not stop them.

[devoken.livejournal.com]

I'm with arianhwyvar on this one. This isn't a pro-choice issue or debate, this is a sexism issue, and because of that I honestly don't think there's much use in trying to come up with a pro-choice argument against it. Best I can do is something like "Abortion should be an option for anyone, but keep in mind that it's a serious issue and the choice to have one should involve serious consideration - which most of these people are not doing."

Just out of curiosity (and feel free to not answer), why wouldn't you have flipped a coin?

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

why wouldn't you have flipped a coin?

We both wanted a girl.

[debsquared.livejournal.com]

Not sure if anyone else has said this, but the way you reconcile the two positions is that both involve hatred of women. Femicide Is obvious, that a female does not have enough value to exist. Pro life reduces a woman's value to her ability to bear children (hopefully male).

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

I said "pro-choice", not "pro-life".

[debsquared.livejournal.com]

I got that part, don't worry! I reframed both positions to be on the same side. The reverse of pro femicide and pro life would be against femicide and pro choice. I just used the political terms because everyone is familiar with them.

[stakebait.livejournal.com]

My reaction is, icky as that is, it would be decidedly ickier to be an unwanted girlchild born into a family that feels that way. The problem, IMO, is sexism, not abortion, and removing the abortion without removing the sexism would only make it worse -- as indeed, we know of places with much higher rates of illness and death among girl children because when resources are scarce their families choose to feed the boys better and/or get them medical care.

(And I should clarify that I mean sexism in the society, not just the parents. Considerations like dowries and earning potential and so on mean that even the most personally egalitarian parents have their preference or lack thereof influenced).

I don't find your hypothetical to be quite the same, in that you are positing two preexisting lumps and no option of either a) both or b) take the first one we create, whichever it turns out to be, and don't create the second. The latter would be a much closer parallel.

In any case I don't think it is inherently bad to have a gender preference as an individual/couple. What's troubling is that they don't average out across the society.

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

HVISTENDAHL: In the 1960s and ’70s population growth was a huge issue, maybe like climate change today. The concern was genuine, but, unfortunately, in searching for ways to solve the problem, population control organizations came up with all sorts of wild solutions. It turned out to be a pretty dark period for reproductive rights. In the ’70s, 6 million men were sterilized in India, some of them forced. When the president of the Population Council wrote an article for Science in, I think, 1969, he ranked the various methods and ranked sex selection as having a high moral value. Sex selection emerged as a method that would be voluntary, and one that would appeal to those in the developing world, as [previously] most couples in those places would keep having children until they had a boy.

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

It's darkly ironic that population control ended up being linked to female empowerment.