Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: muawiyah

Do you have a cite to back that up?

My understanding is that while many young women died in childbirth, many young men died in battle or in dangerous occupations so it evened out.


12 posted on 06/18/2011 3:30:56 PM PDT by Lorianne (o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: Lorianne
She spends a devastating chapter talking with PAUL EHRLICH, the man who mainstreamed overpopulation hysteria in 1968 with "The Population Bomb" — and who still seems to think that getting rid of girls is a capital idea (in part because it will keep families from having more and more children until they get a boy).

Ms. Hvistendahl also dredges up plenty of unpleasant documents from Western actors like the FORD FOUNDATION, the UNITED NATIONS and PLANNED PARENTHOOD, showing how they pushed sex-selective abortion as a means of controlling population growth. In 1976, for instance, the medical director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, Malcom Potts, wrote that, when it came to developing nations, abortion was even better than birth control: "Early abortion is safe, effective, cheap and potentially the easiest method to administer."

The following year another Planned Parenthood official celebrated China's coercive methods of family planning, noting that "persuasion and motivation [are] very effective in a society in which social sanctions can be applied against those who fail to cooperate in the construction of the socialist state."

As early as 1969, the POPULATION COUNCIL's Sheldon Segal was publicly proclaiming the benefits of sex-selective abortion as a means of combating the "population bomb" in the East. Overall Ms. Hvistendahl paints a detailed picture of Western Malthusians pushing a set of terrible policy prescriptions in an effort to road-test solutions to a problem that never actually manifested itself.

____

The usual suspects.

13 posted on 06/18/2011 3:35:42 PM PDT by Lorianne (o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Lorianne
With women marrying at 12 and 13, childbirth came early ~ and the statistics then are like the statistics now ~ what differs now is that we have machinery and medications to help survival.

As far as the men dying early, that's in comparison to the women who survived into their 30s and 40s, but warfare wasn't all that big a deal in peasant societies.

War was for gentlemen ~ the wealthy and powerful.

14 posted on 06/18/2011 3:49:01 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Lorianne
Do you have a cite to back that up?

Can't see the correlation.

Life Expectancy by Age, 1850–2004

15 posted on 06/18/2011 3:55:01 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Lorianne; muawiyah

muawiyah is misinformed and parroting pro-abortion nostrums about the danger of childbirth and also incorrect information about age of marriage and first birth.

If the death rate of women was higher than men, Nature (or Nature’s God) wouldn’t have resulted in the 105/100 ratio. The fact that the natural biological ratio is weighted towards men is indicative of who has the higher death rate through the ages.

Hunting is more dangerous than gathering. The most dangerous agricultural jobs were done by men, not women. Farming is still in the top five for occupational deaths.

Men also drink more, engage in more risk taking behaviors, gambling, fighting, racing, etc.


23 posted on 06/18/2011 4:29:08 PM PDT by Valpal1 ("No clever arrangement of bad eggs ever made a good omelet." ~ C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson