The Chinese Gender Imbalance...in the U.S.

The New York Times reports that economists at Columbia and the University of Texas have found strong evidence that many American parents of Chinese, Korean, and Indian descent use various sex selection methods to make sure they have at least one boy:

In general, more boys than girls are born in the United States, by a ratio of 1.05 to 1. [Girls have a better survival rate.] But among American families of Chinese, Korean and Indian descent, the likelihood of having a boy increased to 1.17 to 1 if the first child was a girl....If the first two children were girls, the ratio for a third child was 1.51 to 1—or about 50 percent greater—in favor of boys....

On the basis of census and birth records through 2004, the incidence of boys among immigrant Chinese parents in New York was higher than the national average for Chinese families. Boys typically account for about 515 of every 1,000 births....Among Chinese New Yorkers having a third child, the number of boys was about 558.

Notably, the gender imbalance at birth is much more dramatic in China, where 120 boys are born for every 100 girls. That's the overall rate, not (as in the American research) the rate for families that already have a girl. Sex-selective abortions, though illegal in China, are the preferred method for getting a boy/avoiding a girl there, whereas Chinese Americans also use in vitro fertilization or sperm sorting. While acculturation and economic improvement may partly explain why immigrants from China are more likely to have girls than parents who remain there, the country's strict population controls surely have much to do with it. When parents are limited by law to one or two children (depending on where they live), they are more likely to take extraordinary measures to ensure that the first or second is a boy. The combination of a preference for boys and the "one child" policy also leads to widespread abandonment of baby girls in China.

A couple years ago, I explored the nexus between China's population policy and international adoption in "Thank Deng Xiaoping for Little Girls."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Cal Lipigian||

    So by having those mail order bride ads in the sidebar, Reason is attempting to even out the Asian Male/Female ratio in the US and performing a public service?

  • SpongePaul||

    Us AMerican boys will take al the asian girls that they dont want, when there 18 of course. MMMM hot asian girls!

  • SpongePaul||

    ugh keyboard batery dyng

  • ||

    keyboard batery

    Sweet, sweet RC'z Law.

  • Two Foot Stools||

    "If the first two children were girls, the ratio for a third child was 1.51 to 1-or about 50 percent greater-in favor of boys...."

    And if the first two times I flip a quarter it comes out tails, what are the odds that the third flip will come out heads?

  • ||

    China is at peak vaginas right now. What will the crash look like?

  • UnPC||

    This one is easy to fix. Merely commoditize Asian females and let the market sort it out.

  • Two Foot Stools||

    "This one is easy to fix. Merely commoditize Asian females and let the market sort it out."

    I'm giving a recommendaition of buy.

  • Vermont Gun Owner||

    And if the first two times I flip a quarter it comes out tails, what are the odds that the third flip will come out heads?

    50%, or 1 to 1.

  • ||

    Here's hoping they don't go all Rainbow Cadenza.

    Kevin

  • ||

    Any technology that is used to inhibit the creation of Asian girls should be banned.

  • ||

    And if the first two times I flip a quarter it comes out tails, what are the odds that the third flip will come out heads?

    Facetious, or innumerate?

    I'm giving a recommendaition of buy.

    Is there a lease option?

  • Jennifer||

    Natural selection applies to cultures as well as individuals, and if a culture has such a low opinion of females that it can't keep itself going, then goodbye, good riddance, and when the last lonely horny Chinese male dies of frustrated virginal old age (or some embarrassing suffocation/masturbation debacle), a culture with a healthy gender balance can move in to the abandoned country and do something useful with it.

    Same goes for you, too, India. Either learn to appreciate females or go extinct; 'tis all the same to me. I promise to be extra-graceful when I dance on your collective grave.

  • Steven Wright||

    They should skip even having a first or second child and go right for the third.

  • ||

    Jennifer, traditionally, excessive males leads eventually to war as all those males who can't get a wife start to get pissed off. So, while it would be nice for this policy to screw those who practice it, it ends up screwing those around them too. I mean, if your culture has too few women, the one next over has some, right?

  • PANIC||

    THEY
    WILL
    COME
    FOR
    OURS

  • ||

    Asian hordes want women
    they invade in tiny riceburners
    spoilers quivering

  • Xeones||

    I don't remember who, but someone wrote once that all the excess Chinese males should get up with all the excess women in Russia and form a new nation in Siberia. It was pointed out that this wouldn't work, however, because the Chinese males are mostly under the age of 25 while the Russian women are all, like, 60.

    (If i inadvertently summoned the cougarbot, i apologize.)

  • Michael Ejercito||

    They could just share women.

    Is that not what socialism is about?

  • monkey on juice||

    Sugarfree - is that an attempt at haiku?

  • ||

    --==* Cougarster.Com *==-- Best Cougar dating site in the world!
    For Cougars, dating younger man can be exciting and feel younger. And also you may find yourself more compatible with young man. For younger man, dating older women has numerous advantages. You can learn valuable advice from her on how to conduct himself in difficult situation. She is best listener and supporter.
    Join us and contact tens of thousands of cougars and cougar admirers!

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Despite your feelings about abortion, I really do feel it's morally rotten to just abort a potential human life because it's doesn't fit into your "ideal gender picture" of your kids.

  • ||

    Leave me alone, Monkey. I'm already beating myself up about the 8 syllable 2nd line. I offer a "distraction at work" not as an excuse, but as a reason.

  • Jennifer||

    Jennifer, traditionally, excessive males leads eventually to war as all those males who can't get a wife start to get pissed off. So, while it would be nice for this policy to screw those who practice it, it ends up screwing those around them too. I mean, if your culture has too few women, the one next over has some, right?

    With luck, the excess Chinese males will start a fight with the excess Indian males and the two groups will kill each other off while the women from both benighted countries emigrate to a Western nation that has evolved beyond the belief that virtue, intelligence and self-worth reside exclusively in the human penis.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Jennifer - I hope you're be facetious, because I have no desire to see millions of people die, regardless of their abhorrent cultural beliefs.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    * - being. Christ, I cannot type today.

  • monkey on juice||

    Come on Sugarfree, its easy...

    Come here Chinese girls
    Wen Jaibao doesn't want you
    you love me long time

  • PANIC||

    U MISSED
    WHERE SHE
    SAID WE
    GET TEH
    WOMNZ

  • ||

    TAO,

    Despite our disagreement on the subject, I don't imagine too many PWWATBL think that an abortion under those circumstance is a free choice the woman is making.

    Women who do freely abort on the basis of sex selection are morally abhorrent, but I still wouldn't make it illegal.

  • SpongePaul||

    With luck, the excess Chinese males will start a fight with the excess Indian males and the two groups will kill each other off while the women from both benighted countries emigrate to a Western nation that has evolved beyond the belief that virtue, intelligence and self-worth reside exclusively in the human penis.
    __________________________________________
    I dont think you will get much restiance from the American male, we will take all the asian and indian women they want to send, persian woman from iran/turkey are also very welcome here.

  • ||

    monkey,

    Spend the rest of the day writing haikus and then write them all day tomorrow. You might be able to catch up with the number I've written on these boards.

  • Two Foot Stools||

    "virtue, intelligence and self-worth reside exclusively in the human penis."

    Well you must admit the overwhelming majority of it does.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    SugarFree - I'm talking about in the United States, not in China.

    I wouldn't make it illegal either. Up to a certain point, abortion-on-demand should be the law.

  • mia||

    "Come here Chinese girls
    Wen Jaibao doesn't want you
    you love me long time"

    No ten dollah, no sucky-sucky.

  • Jennifer||

    Jennifer - I hope you're be facetious, because I have no desire to see millions of people die, regardless of their abhorrent cultural beliefs.

    Evolution is a harsh master that offers only two choices: Adapt or die. If a culture's view of women is so low that said culture ends up lacking enough women to keep itself going, I personally would rather see the culture die out rather than figure out a way to import women from other cultures, and keep those women doomed to eternal second-class status.

    And if a massive female shortage isn't enough to make those idiots appreciate the value of women, as apparently it is not, that suggests "adapt" might be beyond their ability. So they can, quite literally, drop dead, and if you want to turn this into a PC cultural-sensitivity thing, I'll point out that my XX chromosomes give me a trump-proof victim card to play in this primarily male comment board: I will NOT be "tolerant" of a culture which teaches that I myself am a second-class creature.

  • ||

    I'm talking about in the United States, not in China.

    I am too. Immigrant populations can face cultural pressure as strong as the ones that stayed home. Think about the Islamic women you see in this country that still wear veils and scarves. Nothing about our over-culture forces them to wear them, but they still do.

    (Yes, some may do it voluntarily... but there must be a high percentage that don't. And "voluntary" gets thin on the edges.)

  • ||

    I think, Jennifer, that TAO is objecting to your collectivist view where you contend all males in the society think less of women, and therefore deserve to die. Are we individualists here or not?

    Women who do freely abort on the basis of sex selection are morally abhorrent

    Why? You have no objection to a woman aborting an unwanted fetus for other reasons; who cares about her reasons in this case?

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Episiarch - not true. I'm personally judgmental enough in many cases of abortion, but I'm lenient to a great deal in my judgmentalism. If the woman isn't emotionally or financially ready, as is the case in many abortions, I understand that. That's the responsible choice to make. On the other hand, being ready and willing to take care of child but aborting it because it doesn't have the right genitals, or eye color, or hair color, is personally abhorrent and superficial to me.

    And if a massive female shortage isn't enough to make those idiots appreciate the value of women, as apparently it is not, that suggests "adapt" might be beyond their ability. So they can, quite literally, drop dead



    For one, yes, as Epi said, these are individuals you're hoping die because of their differing viewpoints from your own.

    Two, I suggest you look back and survey history and see how many human societies died out because they objectified women. Hint: fucking none of them. So, "respecting" women isn't quite the evolutionary advantage you think it is.

    I believe in female equality as much as the next person, but that's in defiance of evolutionary precedents and biological imperatives, not in compliance with them.

  • Jennifer||

    I think, Jennifer, that TAO is objecting to your collectivist view where you contend all males in the society think less of women, and therefore deserve to die. Are we individualists here or not?

    God save me from semantic purists. Very well. Next time I criticize, for example, "the Saudi Arabains' barbaric view of women," I will take the additional time to tack on the required disclaimers about how SOME Saudis no doubt have complete respect for the autonomy of the female adult individual whatever whatever whargarbl, and after I spend several hours and dozens of pages typing out all the specific exclusions everyone whose eyes have not glazed over can shout "Hosanna to Jennifer for her exquisite use of language to communicate rather than obfuscate! I now know exactly what she's talking about, when she criticizes some-but-not-all-of-the-Saudis! In honor of her achievement we'd like to present her with this 'Golden Dildo Award,' so that the next time her job duties require her to go to a we-hate-women mosque, she can brandish the dildo and shout 'Behold! I have a dick! Now will you fuckheads look me in the eye?'"

    Oops, there. Apparently my annoyance with a real-life situation is spilling over onto the Internet. O, how quaint.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    I wasn't being nearly that picky. I was objecting to your apparently latent wish that "cultures" that aren't sufficiently feminist kill themselves off via a war that will cost millions of lives.

    I mean, yikes.

  • ||

    who cares about her reasons in this case?

    A woman who gets pregnant by choice with a nominal 50-50 chance of aborting the fetus is morally off to me. She can do want she wants with her body and I certainly have no "sanctity of life" issues, but I find the practice to be on shaky moral grounds.

    But it gets thin on the edges, like I said. Would she be doing this if not for the boy-preference in her over-culture? Is she freely making this choice? So no condemning or stoning from me, but it's certainly nothing I would ever do... which is my moral compass.

    That said, if they want a certain sex of baby, technology is making that possible now and it's just going to get easier.

    I am a complete and total relativist on ethics and I never expect anyone to share my ethics. But a lack of common ethical grounding doesn't endear a person to me.

  • ||

    TAO, I have no objection to the procedure of abortion. Therefore, why would I object based on the motivation of the woman? It's like saying prostitution is ok if the guy is really lonely but morally abhorrent if he's sick of his wife. Who cares why he's going?

    Jennifer, that's a good rant. Still, what you are doing is essentially the same as saying "all French are cowards". You mostly attacked the culture, which makes sense, but wanting untold numbers of men to die as if they were all guilty is, well, wrong. Sorry.

  • Jennifer||

    I was objecting to your apparently latent wish that "cultures" that aren't sufficiently feminist kill themselves off via a war that will cost millions of lives.

    Actually, if you'll re-read my comments (move your lips if it helps), you'll see that I did not criticize any culture for being "insufficiently feminist," but for having such a low opinion of females that they lack enough females to keep the culture going.

    Big. Fucking. Difference.

  • ||

    Jennifer,

    I, for one, appreciate you posting here. Thanks.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Episiarch - ummm, I suppose that's your ethical choice to make, but I do see a moral and ethical difference between visiting a prostitute if you're lonely and doing to cheat. I don't have any objections to the act of sexual intercourse qua sex, but if you're engaging in it to say, fuck with someone's head, or as a revenge fuck, or in the course of adultery, do you really not morally distinguish those cases from two emotionally-stable adults engaging in it for fun or out of love?

    I mean, I don't think that pressuring a girl into having sex should be illegal or categorized as rape, but any dude who browbeats or guilts a chick into it is a real fucking douche.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Jennifer - whatever. I don't care what "difference" you want to draw, you're practically dancing on the grave of millions of men.

    you wished them death. and you couched it in some ridiculous notion of "evolution", as if "appreciation of women" was some kind of evolutionary advantage.

    What a joke.

  • ||

    So how is the Chinese & Indian desire to reduce the number of females any different/similar to the S.C.U.M. Manifesto?

  • ||

    I mean, I don't think that pressuring a girl into having sex should be illegal or categorized as rape, but any dude who browbeats or guilts a chick into it is a real fucking douche.

    You're just feeling guilty about all those pity fucks you've attempted to get.

    do you really not morally distinguish those cases from two emotionally-stable adults engaging in it for fun or out of love?

    I really don't care about their motivations as long as no force is involved, no. People are fucked up and do lots of fucked up shit for weird reasons.

    A woman who gets pregnant by choice with a nominal 50-50 chance of aborting the fetus is morally off to me.

    Why? This would indicate that you have a partial objection to abortion, as if getting rid of a few cells was bad in certain cases. This seems to contradict previous positions taken by you.

  • ||

    who cares about her reasons in this case?

    I wouldn't make it illegal, but I reserve my absolute right to consider her superficial, self-centered, weak-minded, and unethical/immoral.

    As I read Jennifer, what she is saying is that she won't shed any tears if cultures that intentionally engineer massive shortages of women and concomitant social instability go to war with each other.

  • Xeones||

    "virtue, intelligence and self-worth reside exclusively in the human penis."

    Well you must admit the overwhelming majority of it does.


    Yes. Specifically, in MY penis.

  • Xeones||

    For the record, i read Jennifer's post the same way RC did, and find myself not in disagreement.

  • ||

    I wouldn't make it illegal, but I reserve my absolute right to consider her superficial, self-centered, weak-minded, and unethical/immoral.

    Why? If abortion isn't bad, how is this different than her cutting off all her hair or getting a tattoo?

  • The Angry Optimist||

    I really don't care about their motivations as long as no force is involved, no. People are fucked up and do lots of fucked up shit for weird reasons.



    Are you telling me that your moral and ethical evaluations of the actions of others is based solely on whether they engage in force? That, to me, is not only incomprehensible, but I find it highly unlikely.

    Have you ever felt "wronged" by someone? I mean, do you only feel "wronged" by people if they hit you over the head or something?

    As I read Jennifer, what she is saying is that she won't shed any tears if cultures that intentionally engineer massive shortages of women and concomitant social instability go to war with each other.



    Not really different from Falwell saying that 9/11 is our fault, is it?

  • ||

    TAO, I have no objection to the procedure of abortion. Therefore, why would I object based on the motivation of the woman? It's like saying prostitution is ok if the guy is really lonely but morally abhorrent if he's sick of his wife. Who cares why he's going?

    This is well said.

    As someone who believes abortion should be legal, I don't give a fuck what the reason is. I don't see how aborting for sex selection is more morally abhorrent than aborting because u didn't use protection.

    I also want to step in and say I agree with Jennifer.
    I don't this characterization is correct:
    I was objecting to your apparently latent wish that "cultures" that aren't sufficiently feminist kill themselves off via a war that will cost millions of lives.

    She did nothing of the sort. What I read from her comments was essentially : if these people choose live in an arcane world with an arcane mindset and they wind up going extinct because of it, I wouldn't shed a tear. They would be getting what they deserve.

    I don't see her celebrating or wishing it, just merely asserting that she wouldn't lament the loss of a backwards society that thinks females are inherently inferior. It's especially NOT tragic when the people have a choice in the matter.

    Nature is a bitch like that. Adapt or die. And if you CHOOSE not to adapt, why should others mourn?

  • dhex||

    If the woman isn't emotionally or financially ready, as is the case in many abortions, I understand that. That's the responsible choice to make. On the other hand, being ready and willing to take care of child but aborting it because it doesn't have the right genitals, or eye color, or hair color, is personally abhorrent and superficial to me.

    i get what you're saying, but i also don't: at the end of the day it's still an abortion.

  • dhex||

    "So how is the Chinese & Indian desire to reduce the number of females any different/similar to the S.C.U.M. Manifesto?"

    being put into actual practice on a large scale?

    just for starters...

  • ||

    i get what you're saying, but i also don't: at the end of the day it's still an abortion.

    Exactly. All the rest is a bunch of rationalizing to try and justify to ones self the existence of something they aren't really comfortable with.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    As someone who believes abortion should be legal, I don't give a fuck what the reason is. I don't see how aborting for sex selection is more morally abhorrent than aborting because u didn't use protection.



    What in the blue hell does your view of what the legal status of abortion should be have to do with your view of what the ethical and moral implications of an individual choosing to engage in that act are?

    Look, folks, I think adultery should be *legal*. I reserve the right to call you a total *fuckhead* for being an adulterous sonofabitch, though.

    Does anyone here think that racism should be outlawed? Now, does anyone here find racism totally morally abhorrent?

    Was that so hard?

    Nature is a bitch like that. Adapt or die. And if you CHOOSE not to adapt, why should others mourn?



    Common human decency and moral agency are natural feelings as well. I didn't know you had the moral agency of a fucking rock.

    And, again, the subjugation of women has ZERO to do with evolution. Nothing.

  • ||

    Are you telling me that your moral and ethical evaluations of the actions of others is based solely on whether they engage in force? That, to me, is not only incomprehensible, but I find it highly unlikely.

    I do not tend to overly care about people's interpersonal actions as they are theirs and not mine. If you said "that girl cheated on her boyfriend just to hurt him" I'd say "that's fucked up and shitty". I'd stay away from her. But I'd be more curious about why she felt the need to do that than I would be in engaging in moral approbation.

  • dhex||

    All the rest is a bunch of rationalizing to try and justify to ones self the existence of something they aren't really comfortable with.

    i'm not quite so didactic; i think abortion is a kind of killing - or at least the cessation of a future being, a future consciousness - but i have no urge to involve the government and make it worse. but i'm not sure i see a difference between "cannot take care of" and "don't want" or "don't want because it's a girl" beyond the cultural factors involved.

  • ||

    Look, folks, I think adultery should be *legal*. I reserve the right to call you a total *fuckhead* for being an adulterous sonofabitch, though.

    Really? What if it was a woman cheating on her husband who was already cheating on her? What if it was pre-arranged that extra-marital affairs were perfectly fine?

    This is why I tend to stay out of moral judgments of other people's interpersonal behavior: because I don't know the whole story.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Like I asked you previously, Epi, do you only feel "wronged" if someone initiates force against you?

    If your answer is "no", then your ethics go a little bit deeper than your libertarianism.

    But I'd be more curious about why she felt the need to do that than I would be in engaging in moral approbation.



    And if you asked her and she said "I did it because I wanted to hurt him", that's morally wrong, and I think it would make you kinda a relativistic, spineless POS not to speak up and say so.

  • dhex||

    And if you asked her and she said "I did it because I wanted to hurt him", that's morally wrong, and I think it would make you kinda a relativistic, spineless POS not to speak up and say so.

    a better question would be "who the hell asked you, anyway?"

  • ||

    "being put into actual practice on a large scale?

    just for starters..."

    And what of similarities?

  • dhex||

    "And what of similarities?"

    which are?

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Episiarch - we're talking about two different things. At some point, you have enough information to pass judgment. I know that "judgment" is some kind of dirty word in America, but it's appropriate to judge people. It's what you're supposed to do.

    Hey, on the other hand, you don't know the full story behind that racist Klanmember over there, so who are you to judge him?

  • Randy Bottoms||

    "And, again, the subjugation of women has ZERO to do with evolution. Nothing."

    Then why are there so many people in China and India?

  • ||

    And if you asked her and she said "I did it because I wanted to hurt him", that's morally wrong

    Why did she want to hurt him? Maybe he cheated on her with her sister. Maybe he smacked her around.

    I think it would make you kinda a relativistic, spineless POS not to speak up and say so

    WHAT THE FUCK business is it of mine? What business do I have telling her how to run her personal life? You have some screwy priorities, buddy.

  • ||

    Common human decency and moral agency are natural feelings as well. I didn't know you had the moral agency of a fucking rock

    If the wound is self inflicted then I don't really feel a sense of loss or sorrow or sadness or whatever.
    I don't shed tears for people who are victims of themselves.

    Just like I don't mourn Darwin Award Winners.

    That doesn't mean I have the "moral agency of a rock". It just means I save my emotions for people who deserve them (like people who are wronged by others or who are victims of others).

  • The Angry Optimist||

    I'm not telling you to go around being a nosey-parker, Epi, but if you want to just default to "no use of force? Not my problem!" I think that makes you a terrible person, and probably a pretty bad friend.

    Shit, let's say that your best friend is wrecking himself on booze. What business is it of yours to speak up and tell him how to run his personal life? Best to just keep your mouth shut and say nothing.

  • ||

    "which are?"

    That one gender is superior to another. That taking steps to reduce or eliminate one gender is deemed a social good.

    just for starters...

  • The Angry Optimist||

    So, ChicagoTom, you're just going to see a war between China and India and just shrug your shoulders?

    Right.

  • ||

    "I know that "judgment" is some kind of dirty word in America, but it's appropriate to judge people."

    Kinda funny when one considers that the dictionary defines "wisdom" as the ability to judge.

  • dhex||

    I know that "judgment" is some kind of dirty word in America, but it's appropriate to judge people. It's what you're supposed to do.

    why?

    that's just a very weird thing to say, dude. if someone's cheating on someone else, it's tragic for the children involved, if any, but otherwise just how people figure things out (or don't).

    some people are just bad at romances. or bromances, even.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Why did she want to hurt him? Maybe he cheated on her with her sister. Maybe he smacked her around.



    Yeah, and maybe she's a bad person. Again, you're appealing to incomplete information. I'm not telling you to jump to conclusions, but I am telling you that at some point you will have enough information to decide "that was warranted adultery" or "that was a fucking chach move, and you're a bad person for it".

  • ||

    Shit, let's say that your best friend is wrecking himself on booze. What business is it of yours to speak up and tell him how to run his personal life? Best to just keep your mouth shut and say nothing.

    I love this line of thinking. It's the epitome of being a busy-body.

    Doing nothing isn't a bad option, because quite honestly my friend already knows he has a drinking problem, he doesn't need me to tell him. And it isn't useful to try and force help or change on someone who doesn't want help/to change.

    And chances are that if I were to stick my nose into his business he would tell me to fuck off or he might decide to not be friends with me anymore.

    So yeah, it might be best to just keep your mouth shut and let adults do what they want. There are A LOT of things people do that I think is destructive to them, but until someone asks me for my perspective, I don't feel its my right or obligation to tell them my opinions on their behavior.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    why?

    that's just a very weird thing to say, dude. if someone's cheating on someone else, it's tragic for the children involved, if any, but otherwise just how people figure things out (or don't).



    no. no. Just no.

    are you saying there is never a time and a place for social sanctioning? For moral judgment? The cheating thing is just one hypothetical we're discussing, but change it to "totally legal racism" and see where you go from there.

  • ||

    Shit, let's say that your best friend is wrecking himself on booze. What business is it of yours to speak up and tell him how to run his personal life?

    You are jumping from promoting the idea of telling a stranger that she's immoral to not talking to your friend about a perceived problem. You're being disingenuous.

    Other people's personal lives are not my business. The most I would do is judge, from what I can tell from their actions, whether they are someone I would associate with, or watch out for, etc. But I'm not getting up on a moral high horse without the full story, sorry.

    You sound a lot like the stereotypical gossipy housewives of yore who loved to rush to a moral judgment on the tiniest info.

  • Jack Thread||

    The State Department asked the social networking Web site Twitter last weekend to postpone scheduled maintenance that would have cut daytime service in Iran on Tuesday, just as protests against official election results were heating up, U.S. officials said.

    Twitter, which has emerged as a leading unofficial news source from and into Iran since the Friday presidential election there, is still up and running in the Islamic republic, even though it has reportedly blocked text-messaging services.

    The popular site had planned regular maintenance, which would have disabled access to it and its mobile version for several hours over the weekend. State Department officials noticed an announcement about the interruption and called Twitter to discourage it from going ahead with its plans.

    "We highlighted to them that this was an important form of communication," a senior official told reporters. "One of the areas where people are able to get out the word is through Twitter. They announced they were going to shut down their system for maintenance and we asked them not to."

    http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/16/state-asks-twitter-to-keep-site-up-in-iran/?

  • The Angry Optimist||

    ChicagoTom - are you really totally incapable of knowing the difference between "being a good friend" and "being a busybody"?

    I can only assume that you're terribly emotionally stunted.

    And chances are that if I were to stick my nose into his business he would tell me to fuck off or he might decide to not be friends with me anymore.



    Wow, what a terrible consequence that might be...I mean, he might choose not to be your friend anymore if you prevent him from killing himself. Oh Jesus, not that! Best to stay silent and let him kill himself...that way he won't stop being your friend until he dies.

  • Jennifer||

    As I read Jennifer, what she is saying is that she won't shed any tears if cultures that intentionally engineer massive shortages of women and concomitant social instability go to war with each other.

    Bingo.

    What I read from her comments was essentially : if these people choose live in an arcane world with an arcane mindset and they wind up going extinct because of it, I wouldn't shed a tear. They would be getting what they deserve. I don't see her celebrating or wishing it, just merely asserting that she wouldn't lament the loss of a backwards society that thinks females are inherently inferior.

    Right again.

    Here's a fact of biology: for all that I support legal equality of the sexes, there's still great biological inequality. To wit: only ONE gender is currently capable of getting pregnant and having babies. Coincidentally, that is also the gender held in low regard in China and India, such low regard that these cultures are actually facing a female shortage. This might be fun in a gay male porn movie, but in the real world it can have harsh consequences. And if a culture's opinion of women is so low that said culture ends up lacking enough women to keep itself viable ... too damned bad. Either learn to appreciate why it's good to have women around, or you can damned well go extinct. And I won't shed a single tear if this happens.

  • ||

    So, ChicagoTom, you're just going to see a war between China and India and just shrug your shoulders?

    Wow talk about moving the goal posts. That's quite a leap from going to extinction because they abort women to starting a war.

    I'll tell you what, if that war starts, I'll be concerned and Ill lament how we got there. Until then, if people choose to shoot themselves in the foot because they are holding on to arcane beliefs about the primacy of the male (or whatever) I'll just shrug and think "what a stupid culture"

  • The Angry Optimist||

    The most I would do is judge, from what I can tell from their actions, whether they are someone I would associate with, or watch out for, etc. But I'm not getting up on a moral high horse without the full story, sorry.



    Where did I say "don't get the full story?"

    YOU'RE the one who said you don't have any other moral judgments outside of "Did they use force?" and now you've admitted that's not true. I never said anything like "jump to conclusions" or "be gossipy".

    Learn to read.

  • Abdul||

    Why? If abortion isn't bad, how is this different than her cutting off all her hair or getting a tattoo?

    I think the problem is that many people are pro-choice not because they believe abortion to be morally neutral, but because they think that outlawing abortions is a worse option.

    To extend your prostitution analogy, i think prostitution is wrong. But since prostitution will exist anyway, I'd rather it be legal because legalized prostitution tends to be safer for the participants.

  • ||

    This seems to contradict previous positions taken by you.

    Technically, what I'm really against is forced pregnancy. It's the flip-side of the abortion debate that normally ignores everything except the rights of the fetus.

    Our hypothetical Chinese woman has every right, in my mind, to abort any child what for any reason she chooses, but that doesn't mean I have to think it's an ethical action. It's the intentionality to have a child, but then aborting it because of something superficial. It makes gender into a birth defect that must be corrected. And that rankles me.

    Do we already have a libertarian motto to the effect of:

    You can do anything you want to yourself except expect me to be happy about it.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Jennifer - still dancing on the graves of millions of men, for a culture that is, for the most part, not their fault. Dress it up all you want, but you're practically wishing that millions of people die.

  • ||

    YOU'RE the one who said you don't have any other moral judgments outside of "Did they use force?" and now you've admitted that's not true.

    Let me rephrase this: I don't tend to make much of a moral judgment in most cases because a) it's none of my business and b) I don't know the whole story. You are correct that I do sometimes do so, but it is rare.

    Now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's return to:

    are you saying there is never a time and a place for social sanctioning? For moral judgment?

    You know how I socially sanction? I avoid people like racists and other assholes. What do you do?

  • ||

    ChicagoTom - are you really totally incapable of knowing the difference between "being a good friend" and "being a busybody"?

    The irony of this comment.

    If you think "being a good friend" is equivalent to "giving your unwanted opinion about the choices of others" then you are more confused than I thought.

    Wow, what a terrible consequence that might be...I mean, he might choose not to be your friend anymore if you prevent him from killing himself. Oh Jesus, not that! Best to stay silent and let him kill himself...that way he won't stop being your friend until he dies.

    You're funny. You really are. If he is my "best friend" as you said than yes it would be a problem. I wouldn't want to stop associating him because I don't agree with his choices or I think he is acting destructive. And I wouldn't want to push him away by forcing "help" or opinions on him that he doesn't want.

    I have a number of very good friends that I have had for years (since grade school). DO you know why it's like that? Because we don't pass judgement and we don't stick our nose in each other's business (unless someone asks us to). There are lots of things my friends do that I don't agree with. But I am mature enough to understand than unless I am their mom or dad, it isn't my place unless they ask me.


    Adults are fucking adults. My choice is to accept him or not. It's not my place to tell him how to live his life.

    Why is that so contraversial?? I am NOT my brothers keeper.

  • dhex||

    are you saying there is never a time and a place for social sanctioning? For moral judgment? The cheating thing is just one hypothetical we're discussing, but change it to "totally legal racism" and see where you go from there.

    i see where you're rolling here, but the sort of judgments you're calling for are more akin to masturbation than social sanctioning. i don't think anyone was saying that you have to go into business with adulterers/racists, but probably something more like adultery not being a bfd and racism being more of a bfd. adultery is shitty for the people involved; racists are seen as potentially violent or otherwise harmful to third parties not involved.

    what i'm saying, i guess, is that love is a battlefield.

    i was also hung up on judgment being something we're "supposed to do". inclined, yes, but i tend to roll with the general idea that judge not lest ye be judged is a good idea for me. (the ye is judged by thou, like a snake eating its tail.)

    It makes gender into a birth defect that must be corrected.

    i see what you're saying sf, but you could step back and say that abortion in general turns life into a birth defect.

  • ||

    still dancing on the graves of millions of men, for a culture that is, for the most part, not their fault.

    How is it not their fault?

    The people of a nation aren't responsible for their culture and the continuation of arcane cultural ideas?

    What?

    Whose fault is it ?

  • ||

    Two Foot Stools:

    "virtue, intelligence and self-worth reside exclusively in the human penis."

    Well, at least in the male it does.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    You know how I socially sanction? I avoid people like racists and other assholes. What do you do?



    Tell them they're assholes, and why.

    If you think "being a good friend" is equivalent to "giving your unwanted opinion about the choices of others" then you are more confused than I thought.



    Please shut up. I didn't say anything like that. I said that there are times where you're an unwanted busybody and times where people are practically crying out for someone to ask "Do you need help?" if you're too stunted to realize that and you still consider that part of being an adult, I feel sorry for your superficial life.

    Adults are fucking adults. My choice is to accept him or not. It's not my place to tell him how to live his life.



    Like I said, don't worry about that "good friend" on the path to self-destruction. He's an adult; you're being a better friend by staying out of it.

    Shit, ChicagoTom, why stop there? you should tell your mom to fuck off too. I mean, you're an adult. Who the hell is she to worry about the choices you're making? Adults are adults.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    The people of a nation aren't responsible for their culture and the continuation of arcane cultural ideas?



    To certain extent, yes.

    Now, if you can tell me the difference between these two statements:

    "I won't cry if the United States is attacked, because of their culture with respect to abortion and gays"

    and

    "I won't cry if millions perish in a Sino-Indian war, because of their culture with respect to women"

    I'd be glad to hear it.

  • Jennifer||

    Jennifer - still dancing on the graves of millions of men, for a culture that is, for the most part, not their fault.

    Whose fault is it, then? If the Chinese are not to blame for Chinese anti-female attitudes, then who is?

    And whether I blame them or not, the fact remains: no women means nobody capable of making babies. No babies means the culture dies. So my opinion changes not the fact that the Chinese have two choices: adapt or die. Apparently they're not going with option one, as their continued gender imbalance demonstrates.

    Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but: wasn't one of your earlier Internet incarnations the one who insisted that Lebanon "deserved" to be bombed by Israel because the Lebanese -- including the infants, schoolchildren and incontinent old farts -- weren't "doing enough" to stop Hamas? If Lebanese share collective guilt, in your eyes, for the behavior of a relatively few terrorists in their midst, why aren't the Chinese equally responsible for what is, for them, a mainstream viewpoint?

  • ||

    It makes gender into a birth defect that must be corrected.

    Only conceptually, as imagined by you. To the woman, it's a choice. You may not like that choice because of your stated reason, but that choice may be important to her.

    Let's take another, weirder scenario: a woman finds out her fetus will have brown hair but she and her husband are blond (mutations are possible). She didn't cheat on him, but she knows he will think she did. So she has it aborted. Is that wrong too?

  • ||

    dhex,

    i see what you're saying sf, but you could step back and say that abortion in general turns life into a birth defect.

    It's the intentionality that causes me to balk, not the abortion. A woman who got pregnant for the sole purpose of having an abortion would also get "a non-willingness to associate with" from me as well.

  • dhex||

    Tell them they're assholes, and why.

    ha!

    man, you must be fun at parties. ok, well, you'd be fun at my parties.

    but more seriously, do you really lecture strangers on the regular?

  • Jennifer||

    Angry Optimist, would it make you feel better if I said "The Chinese culture is going to die out if they don't have enough women, but I hope the men all die of lonely old age instead?" (Granted, this is very unrealistic; a culture filled with unattached males who have zero chance of ever getting laid is not likely to be peaceful. But I can hope human nature makes an exeption where the Chinese are concerned. I will also hope human nature changes enough to make the Communist utopia a reality, because poverty sucks and I'd love to see it vanish.)

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Did I say deserved? Maybe I did. Regardless, that does not mean that I was as pleased at the prospect as you are.

  • dhex||

    It's the intentionality that causes me to balk, not the abortion.

    well, there's no functional difference. i'm not sure that "i don't want this baby" is that much different than "i don't want this baby girl". neither child-to-be is wanted, and that's about that.

  • $$$||

    "No babies means the culture dies."

    Cloning defeats your argument.

  • ||

    Tell them they're assholes, and why.

    Really? So you are the end-all be-all of what constitutes assholeness, enough so that you can walk up to people and tell them so?

    Racism is easy. But what about passive aggressive people? They're pretty obnoxious. Do you walk up to them and call them assholes too?

    If you drove an SUV, would a person who thinks SUVs are killing the planet be justified in walking up to you and calling you an asshole?

  • The Angry Optimist||

    but more seriously, do you really lecture strangers on the regular?



    Not to be tautological, but if they say something I think warrants speaking up, then, uh, yeah.

    I mean, if someone said "Hey, I wouldn't mind if all the faggots/niggers/spics died" at a party, you can bet your sweet ass he'd never hear the end of it.

    And if someone at a party said "I regularly screw around on my wife, because she's too much of an airheaded bitch to know, and what she doesn't know won't hurt her", well, that kind of crap doesn't need to go unchallenged.

  • ||

    Is that wrong too?

    You seem to be mistaking my disapproval as a statement I am making about objective morality. This is not the case. "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." I reserve the right to think anything I like, thank you.

  • ||

    well, there's no functional difference.

    Sorry, but I'm not talking about the intentionality of the abortion but of the pregnancy.

  • $$$||

    "Let's take another, weirder scenario: a woman finds out her fetus will have brown hair but she and her husband are blond (mutations are possible). She didn't cheat on him, but she knows he will think she did. So she has it aborted. Is that wrong too?"

    I'd say she is ignorant of genetics (and perhaps you are too as it certainly takes no mutation for two brunettes to produce a blonde given the dominant / recessive nature of genes.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Really? So you are the end-all be-all of what constitutes assholeness, enough so that you can walk up to people and tell them so?



    Uh, yeah, who else would be? If I'm the one who determines who is an asshole, then....yeah, I guess I would be the who determines who is an asshole. I get to decide when I speak up, where, when and why. If it has social consequences, so be it. I'm fully capable of making that decision, judgment and balancing between "being a spineless coward" and "being an overbearing fuckwit".

  • dhex||

    I mean, if someone said "Hey, I wouldn't mind if all the faggots/niggers/spics died" at a party, you can bet your sweet ass he'd never hear the end of it.

    And if someone at a party said "I regularly screw around on my wife, because she's too much of an airheaded bitch to know, and what she doesn't know won't hurt her", well, that kind of crap doesn't need to go unchallenged.


    the first part, sure, i don't want people like that around, if only because they'll hog all the tostitos and dip made by homosexual african-americans and it would make my nose hurt not to point that out.

    the second? eh. it's a little too jesus-y for my tastes to get all "thou shall totally get up on the coventry of thine wife, yo" and whatnot. i'll probably skip giving him a handjob in the bathroom later, but that's true of so many people.

  • dhex||

    Sorry, but I'm not talking about the intentionality of the abortion but of the pregnancy.

    ahhh, gotcha.

    hmm.

  • ||

    and perhaps you are too as it certainly takes no mutation for two brunettes to produce a blonde given the dominant / recessive nature of genes

    I said it was two blonds producing a brunette, not two brunettes producing a blond. Read carefully. And gene pairing is more complicated--vastly more complicated--than the dominant/recessive paradigm you learn in high school.

  • Civil Discourse||

    "I mean, if someone said "Hey, I wouldn't mind if all the faggots/niggers/spics died" at a party, you can bet your sweet ass he'd never hear the end of it."

    I respect your right to use those words.

  • ||

    I reserve the right to think anything I like, thank you.

    You will think what I tell you, bitch. Or not think what I don't tell you.

    "I DON'T PAY YOU TO THINK!"

  • The Angry Optimist||

    CD - it's entirely possible to respect the right as a right, but still have no respect for the employing of said right.

  • ||

    I'm fully capable of making that decision, judgment and balancing between "being a spineless coward" and "being an overbearing fuckwit".

    If you tell some guy at a party who has admitted to cheating on his wife that he's an asshole, I'm going to call bullshit on your statement there. Because that would put you into "overbearing fuckwit" territory.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    That's your call, Episiarch. I don't see why it is that it's perfectly valid for someone to say what was said in the hypothetical, but it's somehow unacceptable for me to call him out on it.

    Oh well. I think you saying nothing makes you spineless and weak. There you go.

  • Jennifer||

    I'm fully capable of making that decision, judgment and balancing between "being a spineless coward" and "being an overbearing fuckwit".

    I have yet to see evidence of this alleged balancing act.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    oooh, *zing*, Jennifer. Good personal attack.

  • Civil Discourse||

    "CD - it's entirely possible to respect the right as a right, but still have no respect for the employing of said right."

    I agree. But there are some who would ban those words for all time.

  • ||

    Oh well. I think you saying nothing makes you spineless and weak.

    I find it utterly fascinating that my not poking my nose into someone else's business, and not pushing my personal morality on them, makes me spineless.

    Let's say you call the guy an asshole for adultery, and he gets in your face and calls you a fucking shithead pussy. What do you do now?

  • The Angry Optimist||

    anyway, jennifer, I'm not sure where it was I said that I was trying to appease you.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    I find it utterly fascinating that you can just listen to a guy talk about how he runs around on his "airhead bitch" of a wife and just act like nobody said anything offensive.

    Let's say you call the guy an asshole for adultery, and he gets in your face and calls you a fucking shithead pussy. What do you do now?



    Defend myself, just like I would do with anybody who gets in my face. What, am I not supposed to speak my opinion because the dude *might* get in my face?

    Alright, so say the guy said "I wouldn't mind if the all the fags died"...what are YOU going to do, Epi?

  • ||

    Defend myself, just like I would do with anybody who gets in my face.

    What does that mean? He hasn't touched you yet. So I want to know what--exactly--you would do. Would you insult him back? Swing on him?

    Alright, so say the guy said "I wouldn't mind if the all the fags died"...what are YOU going to do, Epi?

    I would turn around and walk away, immediately. I want nothing to do with someone like that.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    I want nothing to do with someone like that.



    Why? He didn't use force against you. Or is it because you find something morally objectionable about what he said?

    What does that mean? He hasn't touched you yet. So I want to know what--exactly--you would do. Would you insult him back? Swing on him?



    I suppose I would tell him that I think he's a piece of shit for saying what he said and for cheating on his wife. I mean, is his response some kind of morality meter or something? I am failing to grasp the point here.

  • ||

    Please shut up. I didn't say anything like that. I said that there are times where you're an unwanted busybody and times where people are practically crying out for someone to ask "Do you need help?" if you're too stunted to realize that and you still consider that part of being an adult, I feel sorry for your superficial life.

    Yes you did. You keep asserting that there is a moral flaw in anyone who doesn't go around forcing their beliefs on others who don't share those beliefs.

    Every single example you posted are examples of being an unwanted busy-body. I can see you clutching your pearls and fainting at the thought of it.

    And up until now I have refrained from making personal attacks on you, but since you keep making it personal...

    Fuck you, busybody. My life is superficial? HA! The loser who gets off on giving moral lectures to strangers who is convinced of his own moral rightness is going to judge me??? That's fucking rich.

    Let me tell you something you moralistic piece of shit, adults don't need you to save them. The problem isn't others' behavior, it's the inability of losers like you to mind your own fucking business.

    And yes, as an adult I have told my mom to fuck off whenever she sticks her nose in my business without invitation. *MY* morals are just that -- MINE. And your (or anyone else's) opinions of them aren't even remotely interesting or wanted.

    I know that moral crusaders like yourself have this deluded notion that shaming people and saving them from themselves is not only a good idea, but required -- but that's exactly why no one wants people like you around.

    You are nothing but a judgmental piece of shit nanny with a superiority complex. The fact that you are here asserting that there is something flawed with people who don't stick their nose in other peoples lives shows what kind of a pathetic person you truly are.

    Go ahead Mr. Morals. Keep asserting how superior you are for being willing to pass judgement on others who don't conform to your pathetic world view. That delusional sense of superiority and $1.50 might get you a cup of coffee at a diner.

  • ||

    Why? He didn't use force against you. Or is it because you find something morally objectionable about what he said?

    Are you being disingenuous again? I posted, above, that you were correct that at times I did make a moral judgment, just rarely. This would be one of those times.

    I suppose I would tell him that I think he's a piece of shit for saying what he said and for cheating on his wife. I mean, is his response some kind of morality meter or something? I am failing to grasp the point here.

    The point is that you feel that your morality is so correct, that escalating a social situation into one of potential violence is perfectly ok.

    You're chest-beating, and it reminds me of joe. It's quite ugly.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    The point is that you feel that your morality is so correct, that escalating a social situation into one of potential violence is perfectly ok.



    So, wait, I'm the one who escalated this situation? Now it's my fault for speaking my mind?

  • Jennifer||

    I'm not sure where it was I said that I was trying to appease you.

    I'm guessing it's in the same comment -- read only by you, because nobody else on this thread has seen it -- where I wrote things like "Non-feminists all deserve to die."

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Yes you did. You keep asserting that there is a moral flaw in anyone who doesn't go around forcing their beliefs on others who don't share those beliefs.


    No, I didn't, so the rest of your post is a bunch of noise. I said that there are times to speak up and say something, and not all instances thereof = nannyism or busybodyism.

    Oh well. I cannot help it if you cannot comprehend that.

  • The Angry Optimist||

    Yes you did. You keep asserting that there is a moral flaw in anyone who doesn't go around forcing their beliefs on others who don't share those beliefs.


    No, I didn't, so the rest of your post is a bunch of noise. I said that there are times to speak up and say something, and not all instances thereof = nannyism or busybodyism.

    Oh well. I cannot help it if you cannot comprehend that.

  • g-male fantastico||

    A shortage of females in China means there will be a lot of angry men who can't get laid. Sounds like a recipe for a war-like people, like in Islamic cultures where polygamists horde women, leaving many men with nothing.

    In America, a shortage of Chinese females means more Chinese men will be seeking women outside their culture.

  • ellipsis||

    Social evolution tends to have pendulum swings, and China would be no exception.

    If China gets to the point where it has vast amounts of males unable to get laid, the most logical place to vent their anger would be against the commie government. The ensuing civil war would reduce the male population. And probably allow a power vacuum where democracy could rise up. In the new Chinese democracy, women would have more rights, and the gender balance would be closer to 50/50.

    So there you have it. Red China is inadvertently sowing the seeds of democracy. And although I wouldn't rejoice about the ensuing deaths, the tree of liberty grows from the blood of patriots and tyrants.

  • Oops!||

    Here's a fact of biology: for all that I support legal equality of the sexes, there's still great biological inequality. To wit: only ONE gender is currently capable of getting pregnant and having babies. Coincidentally, that is also the gender held in low regard in China and India, such low regard that these cultures are actually facing a female shortage. This might be fun in a gay male porn movie, but in the real world it can have harsh consequences. And if a culture's opinion of women is so low that said culture ends up lacking enough women to keep itself viable ... too damned bad. Either learn to appreciate why it's good to have women around, or you can damned well go extinct. And I won't shed a single tear if this happens.

    Only one flaw in your theory. The cultures where women are held in low esteem are the ones that are reproducing like crazy. It's the ones that they're held in high esteem that have a decreasing population.

  • MJ||

    It is not so much that women are held in low regard (though there is some of that), it is that chinese parents have a culturally driven economic interest in having a son. Culturally, sons are responsible ofr taking care of elderly parents, daughters are responsible for her husband's parents. It is not that the Chinese hate their daughters, it is that raising a daughter is an expense, rasing a son is an investment. Couple that with a totalitarian government's ham fisted population control policies, it easy to see how girls get the short shrift. If culturally the Chinese and Indians hated having daughters, how did there get to be around a billion of each in there ancestral nations alone?

  • MJ||

    "As someone who believes abortion should be legal, I don't give a fuck what the reason is." - Chicago Tom

    This seems to be an odd flavor of "if x is illegal, then it's immoral" with the twist being "if you think x should not be illegal, then you are not allowed to think that x is immoral". Whatever, it is still an abdication of thought.

  • Celtic Tiger||

    Gender ratios are just as bad in democratic Asian states like India, South Korea or Taiwan as they are in commie China.

    It comes down to culture not political system. What's more, those nations have been living with this gender imbalance for millenia with no more warfare than Western Europe.

    In fact, they are arguably far less warlike. There is a reason we conquered North and South America and Australia instead of Asians.

    Further more, Asians males are decidedly more feminine and less aggressive. In a lot of ways, they are sexless. I believe they evolved this way so they could live in overcrowded societies who a large number of men are celibate.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement