Thank you so much for reminding me.
Pinging the Mark Steyn Ping List.
On or off, FReepmail or Ping me.
Cheers,
knewshound
knewshounds blog
Posted on 06/02/2008 6:15:29 AM PDT by OESY
...If it's any consolation to Senator Clinton, she's not the only female to find that social progress is strangely accommodating of old-time sexism....
There's a lot of that about. Sex-selective abortion is a fact of life in India, where the gender ratio has declined to 1,000 boys to 900 girls nationally, and as low as 1,000 boys to 300 girls in some Punjabi cities. In China, the state-enforced "one child" policy has brought about the most gender-distorted demographic cohort in global history, the so-called guang gun — "bare branches." If you can only have one kid, parents choose to abort girls and wait for a boy, to the point where in the first generation to grow to adulthood under this policy there are 119 boys for every 100 girls. In practice, a "woman's right to choose" turns out to mean the right to choose not to have any women....
And what of the western world? Between 2000 and 2005, Indian women in England and Wales gave birth to 114 boys for every 100 girls. A similar pattern seems to be emerging among Chinese, Korean, and Indian communities in America....
Smaller families may mean just a boy or a girl for liberal Democrats, but in other societies it means just a boy. The Indian writer Gita Aravamudan calls this the "female feticide." Colleen Carroll Campbell writes that abortion, "touted as the key to liberating future generations of women," has become instead "the preferred means of eradicating them." ...[A]demographer of impeccably liberal credentials put the future in a nutshell in the title of his essay: "The Return Of Patriarchy."
Enlightened progressives take it for granted that social progress is like technological progress— that women's rights... once invented they can't be uninvented. But that's a careless assumption....
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
“Brave New World”, indeed.
Let’s see, liberal “thinking” leads to:
Liberal women supporting feminism (abortion of mainly women).
Liberal Jews supporting Obama (betray Israel, death to Zionists).
Yep, makes sense to me.
I've said it a million times -- abortion is the best ting that ever happened to men and the worst thing that ever happened to women. The real power of woman is the power to give birth to the next generation and the power to grant her sexual favor to man. Men have feared that power and have worked for centuries to overcome it. If women only understood this we would rule the world.
The rise of capitalism in Red China does not necessarily mean a rise in human rights. They may have some freedom to view the outside world through modern media, but obviously they do not have the freedom to determine their own destiny nor their family’s.
It's not supposed to make "sense"; logical, "cognitive" reasoning is a tool of the oppressive patriarchy.
Didn't you ever hear of the "affective domain"? If it "feels good", it's OK. (Especially so when it contradicts "patriarchal" reasoning.)
/me looks around for bridge to "sell"
Most people do not realize that China has just about the oldest population of any developing nation.
The key statistic: the median age of a woman in China is 34.2 years old.
If you adjust for China's 6-year-lower life expectancy for women, the median Chinese woman is older than the average American woman.
Almost half of China's women are past prime childbearing years.
And the lack of women is exacerbating this trend: women in Chinese cities now realize that they are a hot commodity. They no longer marry at age 20 or 21 - they date for years and settle down at 30, having one child or no children.
Some never marry, enjoying the power to play the field.
In Shanghai there are tens of thousands of men who have given up hope of finding a wife or even a girlfriend and instead frequent a "girlfriend" prostitute - a professional who spends a few hours with him a week to act like a girlfriend or a wife - to make him a meal, take in a movie or a show, sleep with him, etc.
.
Ping list ping
In the big cities the die is already cast, it seems.
Well, look on the bright side. Massive female fetus abortion may be the very thing to limit the worldwide population explosion. And, if not, all those testosterone packed men who can’t find babes (pun intended) of their own, will reduce the population in their own way. Mother Nature, like the capitalist economy, has ways of adjusting.
A worldwide excess of men will mean that men like me--who will manage to remain powerful themselves--will be in a position to choose only the best for their daughters.
The natural love of a father for his daughter (exceptions dismissed as anomalies) aside, this will be a means of assuring the continued reproduction of his progeny.
Bump.. do you have an interest in the live blog of the Steyn trail posted on Mcleans? I was thinking of posting a thread when it gets underway at 9:30 pacific...thinking that if all freepers interested in it keep hitting refresh, we may overwhelm the server..
http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/05/30/trial-of-the-century-year-week/
A world run by the likes of Warren Jeffs and Osama bin Laden is not a world I want to live in, thank you very much.
Opressive, patriarchal societies aren’t so much fun for men either. Re: Taliban Afghanistan.
I have heard of anthropologists who theorized the reason human beings beat out the Neanderthals is our invention of the nuclear family over the harem system (i.e.: one boy, one girl).
However, this must remain a theory as bones and stones can’t prove it either way.
Abortion and Islam, perfect together.
No problemo.
Brilliant observation, very true!
I heard a priest say something similar, but in a slightly different way, years ago. He said, "There is something very wrong with a culture that takes a woman at the most vulnerable point in her life (pregnant) and tells her that the only way for her to survive -- socially and economically-- is to kill a part of herself and deny the power of her gender in the world. How can promoting abortion be interpreted in any way "pro-woman"?
I don’t have time to look up the stats, but if you’re interested you could do a google with keywords like “abduction female kidnapping wife capture china” -— I’ve read a number of articles on these themes in the last year. Sometimes two men (brothers, maybe) will kidnap -— or purchase from indigent parents -— one young woman to serve as wife-— I should say bedmate and domestic servant -— to them both on a rotating basis.
I very much doubt that magic of the marketplace will translate the scarcity of females into esteem and power for women.
I don't think it will.
As I described above, the market will enable the haves among women to pick and choose and delay marriage. Many of the have-nots among women will have to choose between prostitution or other less direct forms of exploitation.
Remember that males tend to be physically stronger than females. I think the skewed sex ratios will lead to women being treated like slaves.
Remember that males tend to be physically stronger than females. I think the skewed sex ratios will lead to women being treated like slaves.
The next round in that cycle comes when those 'other culture' problems swing 'round to bite us in the a$$.
Now there's a lesson we should have learned by now!
Quite true. It's unfortunate that too few understand that prosperity works just as well if not better to limit population.
Thanks, knews_hound.
Hey, why not? In Obama's Cook County, Illinois, many fallen heroes from the Spanish-American War still show up in the voting booths come November. It's not unreasonable for some of them to turn up at an Obama campaign rally, too.
The man can certainly turn a phrase.
Ah! Your comment activated a Pavlovian response in me.
Here is an essay I wrote in college in 1977 in response to Roe v. Wade.
The Final Solution to Overpopulation
Of course, abortion is the best form of birth control. Condoms break, you can forget to take the pill, and IUDs can pierce a woman’s uterus and scar and injure her. Spermicidal jellies and foams are messy and not likely to be used. Tubule ligation and vasectomies work only for those who are willing to make such a commitment, as does abstinence. Pregnancies caused by birth control mistakes are proverbial in our culture. The surest solution to the world’s greatest problem, that of overpopulation, is abortion. It is safe when done early in pregnancy, and 100% certain to eliminate an unwanted pregnancy. However, abortion doesn’t go far enough in reducing population growth, and in reducing population itself.
The world’s population has increased nearly three billion since the landmark Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade in 1973. World population under the best estimates will stabilize at eleven billion after 2050. The world’s ecosystem is already severely stressed with the six billion people on the earth. More needs to be done to reduce population. What is the next step?
Roe v. Wade determined the first 23 weeks of pregnancy are eligible for abortion since the fetus is not yet viable. More recent court rulings have permitted abortions through the last trimester of pregnancy for the health of the mother, mental and physical. Using the principle of “viability” and the principle of what is best for the mental and physical health of humanity, the next logical step is to permit “post natal abortions” (PNAs) on non-viable “post natal fetuses” (PNFs).
Although the majority of PNFs are wanted, not a single PNF is viable. It cannot survive without an adult caregiver. Further, they are a mental and physical burden upon the caregiver and should not be permitted to live without the full and willing desire of the caregiver. Why should PNFs be permitted to burden our sorely taxed ecosystem by allowing unwanted ones to grow to full maturity? Is it not kinder, gentler, and more humane to safely terminate them should the caregiver find them a burden? Is not the caregiver fully within their privacy rights to manage this life form within their own home as they see fit?
There need be no moral qualms about this policy whatsoever. Our society has already established the legal morality of abortion up through the end of the third trimester. What difference should the simple process of parturition make to morality of removing a non-viable life form from a possibly miserable existence? Just as abortion removes the burden of an unwanted fetus from society, so a PNA can terminate the mental and physical burden of an undesired PNF. A simple injection of potassium cyanide or a pill of the same can quickly and painlessly remove this ecological disaster waiting to happen.
The benefits of PNA’s cannot be exaggerated. They are safer than abortions in the third trimester. They alleviate a financial burden on the family and society in general, reserving resources for those individuals chosen to enter the human family. With a worldwide policy of PNAs, all individuals will be wanted. Without undesired PNFs, the negative influence of humanity upon the earth will decrease, not increase. Air and water pollution will begin to decrease. The welfare rolls will decrease, reducing the tax burden.
Yet, even a vigorous, worldwide program of PNAs, administrated under the auspices of the United Nation’s World Health Organization (WHO) does not go far enough. There are millions and billions of individuals worldwide who are no longer viable. Although they were human at one time, they are no longer self-supporting. Many can no longer communicate and are not conscious. They are all draining society’s resources and all require care of some other human being. Using the same moral principle as Roe v. Wade and other pro-abortion rulings, we may safely and ethically consider such entities as “post human lives” (PHLs). In view of human induced global warming and the possible worldwide catastrophe that is pending, is it not nobler to remove these life forms from existence than to permit them to continue to consume the world’s limited resources? Such an act of mercy would spare the functioning, productive humanity this unwanted burden, and more importantly, would reduce the space pressures humanity puts on endangered species worldwide. Concurrent with a program of PNAs there must be a worldwide program of “post human abortions” (PHAs).
As good as PNAs would be, PHAs would be even better. PHLs consume far more resources than PNFs. All the benefits enumerated for PNAs would be multiply true for PHAs. Society would become free of all individuals who are not productive. Taxes could be reduced, or the freed up funds could go toward art, literature, and good public works. Cares and worries of old age would be a thing of the past. Once a person becomes a burden to anyone, they are simply considered a PHL and given a gentle PHA. The social security trust fund will become adequate and even generous, with a reduced future burden upon working humanity.
PNAs and PHLs have benefits even beyond these. They will give birth to a new age of medical research. There will be an unlimited supply of organs and stem cells for the benefit of human population. Very likely, the human lifetime will be considerably extended. This will create additional population pressure, so PNAs and PHAs need to be executed and enforced ubiquitously.
How is a sweeping, worldwide program of PNAs and PHAs best to be administrated and implemented? It should start with the UN. As part of UN membership, every country should have laws that require every caregiver to sign a certificate of humanity to their offspring or to any non-viable entity in their care. At a minimum, these certificates should be renewed annually, like drivers’ licenses. Each country may add additional requirements for their definition of viable humanity. This allows each country to retain its own sovereignty and cultural distinctiveness. By entrusting such a critical definition to each federal government, we can be sure the same care and wisdom shown in governmental taxing and welfare programs will be applied toward this critical program of PNAs and PHAs.
It is expected that some countries will put political requirements into their definition of humanity, some will put religious requirements, some physical requirements, such as a certain height, weight, body build, or skin color. Aside from promoting cultural diversity, this mosaic of laws will catch PHL’s who travel from one country to another and further reduce world population. The varied laws will also purify the human gene pool, catching the ignorant and unwary, classifying them as PHLs and terminating them, protecting mother Earth from the corrosive effects of their former human existence.
Even such a beneficial program will surely have opposition. Religious extremists and radical anarchists are likely to resist blessing mankind with a healthier, less intrusive life upon this earth. A simple and effective method of dealing with such evil-minded beings is to classify them as PHLs and perform PHAs upon them. This action will quickly bring about worldwide consensus for this uniquely effective approach to population control.
With unwanted PNFs eliminated through PNAs, with burdensome PHLs removed through PHAs, with humanity’s genetic lines improved through the forced evolutionary selection of diverse laws worldwide, a new age will dawn. No longer will pollution wreck our planet’s rivers, lakes, and oceans. No longer will smog dominate cities. No longer will teeming millions suffer and starve. No longer will species die out through human encroachment upon their habitats. With the moral principles put forth in Roe v. Wade, logically extended and applied, humanity will joyfully march forward into a brave, new world.
“The man can certainly turn a phrase.”
Here’s my favorite from this piece:
“How else to explain why their gal got clobbered by a pretty boy with a resume you could print on the back of his driver’s license, a Rolodex apparently limited to neo-segregationist racebaiters, campus Marxist terrorists and indicted fraudsters, and a rhetorical surefootedness that makes Dan Quayle look like Socrates.”
I wish that phrase could fit in a tagline. Every word is important.
Giggle. Needs repeating.
Mark Steyn has written some great columns, but this is perhaps the most significant subject he has ever addressed. The world is asleep, and disaster lurks just around the corner. Millions of angry young men will vent their frustration in a multitude of destructive ways. Political opportunists will take advantage of their anger, and channel it to their political advantage.
Armageddon may be on its way.
Going ... going ...
I’ve read that Russian women in eastern border areas are turning to Chinese men for husbands. They are less likely to be alcoholics and are better providers.
Probably true.
In the larger scheme of things, the net effect of this phenomenon will be minuscule, however. There can't be more than a quarter million Russian women fitting that description.
Ping...
It's my impression that women used to understand this truth all too well.
But, as you point out, no longer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.