Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Selective-sex Abortion

PetersSmith
Posts: 5,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2016 11:08:28 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
For those of you who are unaware, selective-sex abortion is when you terminate the pregnancy if the fetus turns out to not be the sex you want (if you wanted a girl and you figure out it's a boy, then you abort it). This practice is most well-known in China, where they aborted females in favor of males. India does the same. In the United States, there have been several attempts to federally ban it. In 2010 and 2011, sex-selective abortions were banned in Oklahoma and Arizona, respectively. Legislators in Georgia, West Virginia, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York have also tried to pass acts banning the procedure. The reasons people give are cultural preference, disparate gendered access to resources, one-child policy, and Trivers"Willard hypothesis (available resources affect male reproductive success more than female and that consequently parents should prefer males when resources are plentiful and females when resources are scarce).

This practice has led to missing women, trafficking and sex work, and widening of the gender social gap. Some "positives" argued are that women become more valued, it is a mother's "duty" to produce a son, and it takes away much of the discrimination women would face later in life.

So, what does the DDO user-base think of this practice? Do you think it should be banned? Do you think it should be allowed under certain circumstances, or should people be able to abort their child based on their sex? Discuss.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Peepette
Posts: 1,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2016 11:19:11 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
I personally have a problem with selective sex abortion. In China or India, I understand why it occurs. In countries where women cannot inherit land or family wealth, selective abortion is a bi product to keep commodities within familial lines.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2016 11:47:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 11:08:28 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
So, what does the DDO user-base think of this practice? Do you think it should be banned? Do you think it should be allowed under certain circumstances, or should people be able to abort their child based on their sex? Discuss.

I don't see why it should be banned; the problem isn't the abortion so much as it is what lead the person to make that decision.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2016 11:57:22 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
If abortion were still legal, how would you enforce a ban on selective-sex abortion? How can you know what the parent's intentions are?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 12:07:11 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Another possible fix is mass castration. Seriously: if the imbalance becomes too big China will eventually have serious issues with gang rape and female tourists being endangered.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 3:51:45 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.

Men are born at slightly higher rates than women. However, because of warfare women have been slightly more numerous than men throughout history as a general rule. Apart from in Greco-Roman society, sex-selective infanticide does not appear to have been common. In fact, societies that practiced child sacrifice generally sacrificed sons instead of daughters. China's sex ratio imbalance has only been in effect for about 30 years and it was brought on by modern sex screening technologies and the unintended consequences of a nationwide population control program.
That is, a "there's too many men" scenario is not natural and as such nature (assuming it is an intelligent force) would not have prepared for it by inventing homosexuality.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 3:58:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
I think the practice of having an abortion on the basis of a child's gender is morally repulsive, and that a person who did such a thing is obviously a terrible one.

But I don't see a reason to force my moral values on other people.
Tsar of DDO
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 4:17:25 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 3:51:45 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.

Men are born at slightly higher rates than women. However, because of warfare women have been slightly more numerous than men throughout history as a general rule. Apart from in Greco-Roman society, sex-selective infanticide does not appear to have been common. In fact, societies that practiced child sacrifice generally sacrificed sons instead of daughters. China's sex ratio imbalance has only been in effect for about 30 years and it was brought on by modern sex screening technologies and the unintended consequences of a nationwide population control program.

That's not true of China; female infant abandonment is very old in that society, because the laws and customs basically made women an economic drain and men an economic boon to the family finances. Among the lower classes, daughters were too often seen as a prohibitively expensive luxury. I think they even had a word for it; 'baby-water', or something, to refer to the pail that infant girls would be drowned in at certain points in history, and in certain provinces.

There are instances of centuries-old propaganda campaigns to stop Chinese female infanticide.

It was also widely practiced in pre-Islamic Arabia (Islamic dower laws largely disincentivized the practice by making daughters an asset).

That is, a "there's too many men" scenario is not natural and as such nature (assuming it is an intelligent force) would not have prepared for it by inventing homosexuality.

Well, evolutionary influence on human biology had its heyday long before human societies arose. The basic gist is that many social animals, including a lot of primates, are polygamous. There is one male, which mates with multiple females, and many other males who compete for dominance. In highly social animals, it is more beneficial if, in the case of male overpopulation, the male population 'teams up' instead of engaging in widespread infighting. Infighting can be damaging to the survival of the group, especially when an upset in dominance results in infanticide/abortive harrasment (which is why it's such a big no-no in game conservation to kill the alpha male unless he is no longer producing young). So a series of hormone progressions which trended with increased male births would be an ingenious way to promote more group stability and increase collective survivability; the females which possessed this trait would have more stable social groups, and theirs would be better able to grow in population sustainably and compete with neighbors. This basic dynamic also applies to tournament species. Then there are Bonobos, which will fvck anything that looks at them. Homosexuality became vestigial in some monogamous human societies, but was worked into others, based on dominant cultural and political conditions.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 4:52:57 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 3:51:45 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.

Men are born at slightly higher rates than women. However, because of warfare women have been slightly more numerous than men throughout history as a general rule. Apart from in Greco-Roman society, sex-selective infanticide does not appear to have been common. In fact, societies that practiced child sacrifice generally sacrificed sons instead of daughters. China's sex ratio imbalance has only been in effect for about 30 years and it was brought on by modern sex screening technologies and the unintended consequences of a nationwide population control program.
That is, a "there's too many men" scenario is not natural and as such nature (assuming it is an intelligent force) would not have prepared for it by inventing homosexuality.

Many countries actually have more females than males, but world-wide countries with "male preference" such as India and China distort the number so it appears that the birth ratio favors males.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
tejretics
Posts: 6,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 5:55:26 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
I think the primary danger to it -- at least in a country like India where the practice used to be common prior to the ban on sex determination -- is that it would significantly change the overall sex ratio, which might cause an impression of social differences between men and women. While the abortion itself doesn't pose a harm, the justification for that might encourage further sexism in society.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 5:57:12 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
In fact, India's ban on sex determination is -- at least from a theoretical point of view -- an excellent law. The problem is the enforcement of the same (e.g. illegal sex determination and back-alley abortions). So, if theoretically such a law could be enforced without back-alley sex-selective abortions, I'd support maintain sex determination as illegal, at least in India.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 6:02:44 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
To further add to my previous post, it is possible to enforce such a law well in India -- but the government, to quote the Supreme Court, "has sloppy implementation of the Act." At least according to the SCOI, better enforcement and implementation of the law is possible. From an India-perspective, sex-selective abortions significantly reduced the child sex ratio and caused much less women, which I don't think would be a positive for a country. Diversity benefits the economy, and if, on average, the number of men and women in a country are equal, it would result in better acknowledgement of each of their individual rights and lessen overall socially relevant differences.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 5:58:43 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 3:58:01 AM, YYW wrote:
I think the practice of having an abortion on the basis of a child's gender is morally repulsive, and that a person who did such a thing is obviously a terrible one.

But I don't see a reason to force my moral values on other people.

The reason to restrict sex-selective abortion isn't "forcing moral values on other people." There is an actual harm that arises from sex-selective abortion. First, the entire purpose of government is to ensure that harm is not restricted to a few, or to minimize and distribute harm. In other words, government should curb fascism in all forms. Categorization and sex-selective abortions encourage fascism. Second, and much more importantly, sex-selective abortions reduce the female-to-male sex ratio significantly -- while that hasn't happened in the US, it has *most certainly* happened in India. The ban on sex determination does pose enough of a deterrent and the sex ratio has fairly evened out (regardless of poor enforcement of the ban). A low sex ratio has been demonstrated to cause economic harms, etc.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 7:08:59 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/25/2016 5:58:43 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:58:01 AM, YYW wrote:
I think the practice of having an abortion on the basis of a child's gender is morally repulsive, and that a person who did such a thing is obviously a terrible one.

But I don't see a reason to force my moral values on other people.

The reason to restrict sex-selective abortion isn't "forcing moral values on other people." There is an actual harm that arises from sex-selective abortion. First, the entire purpose of government is to ensure that harm is not restricted to a few, or to minimize and distribute harm. In other words, government should curb fascism in all forms. Categorization and sex-selective abortions encourage fascism. Second, and much more importantly, sex-selective abortions reduce the female-to-male sex ratio significantly -- while that hasn't happened in the US, it has *most certainly* happened in India. The ban on sex determination does pose enough of a deterrent and the sex ratio has fairly evened out (regardless of poor enforcement of the ban). A low sex ratio has been demonstrated to cause economic harms, etc.

Except that's not going to happen in the United States, because we do not have a no child policy and there is no evidence to suggest that anything more than a marginal percentage of parents would seek to abort a child on the basis of their gender, and beyond that, there is no evidence that girls would be disproportionately aborted in America. After all, in the United States unlike other countries we allow women to do things like inherent property.
Tsar of DDO
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 7:27:44 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.

So is the idea that the sons she has later down the line have less of a chance of reproducing anyway, so they might as well be well-suited for looking after the children of his siblings i.e., have "gay tendencies"?
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 2:46:48 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/25/2016 7:27:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.

So is the idea that the sons she has later down the line have less of a chance of reproducing anyway, so they might as well be well-suited for looking after the children of his siblings i.e., have "gay tendencies"?

Well, that's an eventual niche for gay people to occupy within the social group. Societies often have had gay people occupy intellectual or military slots, which benefit the groups in other ways. But the original reason was just the fact that they wouldn't have to chose between being sexually frustrated and challenging the dominant male, since the upset of those sorts of sexual social groups usually means the culling of the old alpha male's offspring. That's waste of energy when you look at collective survival, as is the infighting itself. Male homosexuality reduces infighting in sexually competitive societies, and societies become more sexually competitive as the proportional male population increases.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
film
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 6:50:20 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. [wrong]. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. [wrong]. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find. [wrong].
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 6:55:36 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/26/2016 6:50:20 AM, film wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. [wrong]. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. [wrong]. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find. [wrong].

Wow, we've attracted a real savant to DDO this time. What shocking acumen, what a dazzling command of the English language!
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
film
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 7:15:45 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/26/2016 6:55:36 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/26/2016 6:50:20 AM, film wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. [wrong]. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. [wrong]. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find. [wrong].

Wow, we've attracted a real savant to DDO this time. [wrong]. What shocking acumen, what a dazzling command of the English language! [wrong].
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 1:30:17 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/26/2016 7:15:45 AM, film wrote:
At 3/26/2016 6:55:36 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/26/2016 6:50:20 AM, film wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. [wrong]. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. [wrong]. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find. [wrong].

Wow, we've attracted a real savant to DDO this time. [wrong]. What shocking acumen, what a dazzling command of the English language! [wrong].

This is, perhaps, the most hilarious post that I've ever seen on DDO.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
film
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 3:03:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/26/2016 1:30:17 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/26/2016 7:15:45 AM, film wrote:
At 3/26/2016 6:55:36 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/26/2016 6:50:20 AM, film wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. [wrong]. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. [wrong]. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find. [wrong].

Wow, we've attracted a real savant to DDO this time. [wrong]. What shocking acumen, what a dazzling command of the English language! [wrong].

This is, perhaps, the most hilarious post that I've ever seen on DDO. [wrong]
Peepette
Posts: 1,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2016 4:01:15 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Selective sex abortion is reflective of a social value judgment that males are more beneficial than females. Within India's caste system and China's economic caste, the preference for males gets more exaggerated. I recently read an article that the competition for females in China has brought about wife purchasing. The kidnapping women from the country side for sale as brides; this has created a larger problem. As a commodity these women are treated very poorly. Due to original economic status these women are not in particularly good heath for child bearing, many are disappearing without investigation. Exacerbating the issue is aging parents. Typically it is the wife's role to provide care to the husband's parents. Yet another reason females are less desirable, no later in life care giving option for parents of a female. Wifeless males who do not have sufficient economic status to obtain a bride are abandoning their parents. Culturally, it is beneath a male to undertake the role of caregiver.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 3:39:02 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/26/2016 2:46:48 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2016 7:27:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/24/2016 3:25:40 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/24/2016 12:01:47 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Considering that one male could potentially impregnate hundreds of women, women are a more vital part of sustaining the population. This sex ratio imbalance will inevitably result in a demographic bomb.
As for the angry single-for-life males, they can probably be appeased through a policy of free pornography for all. Importing women from the rest of the world to serve as wives/prostitues is a bad fix because it'd more or less be exploitation of women.

That's why nature invented homosexuality. There's a reason that, the more sons a woman has, the more likely each son has of being born with gay tendecies. That's one of the few really solid biological patterns that they can find.

So is the idea that the sons she has later down the line have less of a chance of reproducing anyway, so they might as well be well-suited for looking after the children of his siblings i.e., have "gay tendencies"?

Well, that's an eventual niche for gay people to occupy within the social group. Societies often have had gay people occupy intellectual or military slots, which benefit the groups in other ways. But the original reason was just the fact that they wouldn't have to chose between being sexually frustrated and challenging the dominant male, since the upset of those sorts of sexual social groups usually means the culling of the old alpha male's offspring. That's waste of energy when you look at collective survival, as is the infighting itself. Male homosexuality reduces infighting in sexually competitive societies, and societies become more sexually competitive as the proportional male population increases.

Any idea why homosexuality is selected for as opposed to just sexual disinterest?
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 4:41:00 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 3:39:02 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/26/2016 2:46:48 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2016 7:27:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:

So is the idea that the sons she has later down the line have less of a chance of reproducing anyway, so they might as well be well-suited for looking after the children of his siblings i.e., have "gay tendencies"?

Well, that's an eventual niche for gay people to occupy within the social group. Societies often have had gay people occupy intellectual or military slots, which benefit the groups in other ways. But the original reason was just the fact that they wouldn't have to chose between being sexually frustrated and challenging the dominant male, since the upset of those sorts of sexual social groups usually means the culling of the old alpha male's offspring. That's waste of energy when you look at collective survival, as is the infighting itself. Male homosexuality reduces infighting in sexually competitive societies, and societies become more sexually competitive as the proportional male population increases.

Any idea why homosexuality is selected for as opposed to just sexual disinterest?

It's probably easier on a biological level to just tweak the sexual drive than to eliminate it altogether, since there's already a biological template there as far as sexual desire goes (the female libido). But asexuality does trend in the same way as homosexuality when it comes to birth order, so the selective origin is probably the same, homosexuality is just a bit more common, and a lot more controversial..
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 5:00:56 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 4:41:00 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:39:02 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/26/2016 2:46:48 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2016 7:27:44 PM, dylancatlow wrote:

So is the idea that the sons she has later down the line have less of a chance of reproducing anyway, so they might as well be well-suited for looking after the children of his siblings i.e., have "gay tendencies"?

Well, that's an eventual niche for gay people to occupy within the social group. Societies often have had gay people occupy intellectual or military slots, which benefit the groups in other ways. But the original reason was just the fact that they wouldn't have to chose between being sexually frustrated and challenging the dominant male, since the upset of those sorts of sexual social groups usually means the culling of the old alpha male's offspring. That's waste of energy when you look at collective survival, as is the infighting itself. Male homosexuality reduces infighting in sexually competitive societies, and societies become more sexually competitive as the proportional male population increases.

Any idea why homosexuality is selected for as opposed to just sexual disinterest?

It's probably easier on a biological level to just tweak the sexual drive than to eliminate it altogether, since there's already a biological template there as far as sexual desire goes (the female libido). But asexuality does trend in the same way as homosexuality when it comes to birth order, so the selective origin is probably the same, homosexuality is just a bit more common, and a lot more controversial..

Makes sense.

Do you know if they've ruled out the possibility that the effect is by accident, reflecting the fact that women get depleted of certain hormones the most sons they have? I've heard that prenatal hormones are relevant to homosexuality.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2016 7:17:04 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/27/2016 5:00:56 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/27/2016 4:41:00 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/27/2016 3:39:02 PM, dylancatlow wrote:

Any idea why homosexuality is selected for as opposed to just sexual disinterest?

It's probably easier on a biological level to just tweak the sexual drive than to eliminate it altogether, since there's already a biological template there as far as sexual desire goes (the female libido). But asexuality does trend in the same way as homosexuality when it comes to birth order, so the selective origin is probably the same, homosexuality is just a bit more common, and a lot more controversial..

Makes sense.

Do you know if they've ruled out the possibility that the effect is by accident, reflecting the fact that women get depleted of certain hormones the most sons they have? I've heard that prenatal hormones are relevant to homosexuality.

Technically, all adaptions are by accident.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -