I like your reasoning, and you are right on target.
Unfortunately, the article is only poignant because it involves the seemingly contradictory situation of free-choice women aborting their little girls, as though somehow for these women, that makes it particularly odious. If it serves the purpose, so be it.
Otherwise, the entire subject is so obnoxious, so horrible, that we are to believe that somehow if the little babies being targeted were males, that it would be OK for the women to abort them simply because they had male plumbing? Nothing about abortions makes any sense. Instead of having an abortion, the mother could carry the child to term and allow adoption of the baby. But, no, they would rather murder their unborn offspring, whether male or female.
Most likely these feminists think they are being very respectful of their cause by refusing to see how silly and horrid their actions are. Their cause trumps aerything, their sons, their daughters, their county’s well-being - nothing matters than the BIG me and my airhead boyfriend.
Assuming there is a boyfriend around, still. This is the entire result of disassociating sex from procreation. Not an unexpected outcome or a terrible consequence if you’re committed to each other in something like, you know, marriage.
And for thsoe that say 50% divorce rate, I say eliminate “no fault” divorce, bring back all the “fault” divorce reasons, and make adultery a criminal offense again.