Larian Studios Forums General Chat Chat (Anything) The Argumentative Git thread

There is no way IMO to justify the female foeticide in India - same goes for killing baby girls in China (1-child-policy) - even if abortion is used to decrease population growth, it is directed at one gender mainly - so a clear case of gender discrimination IMO - not the only one in India <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/puppyeyes.gif" alt="" /> - and same goes for Indira Gandhi's former policy to force females into sterilisation. Force and pressure are intolerable IMO.

Yes, I wish the norms would be challenged here. Gender should not determine if a child is allowed to live or die. Females should not be treated like waste refuse. And if prediagnostic modern methods are used for "gender murder", I question the ethics of these methods highly (or to be exact: the reasons/impact/output of these methods).

Abortion in general => I do think a woman should have the right to choose freely, but in this case, she can't. She is pre-determined by outer social norms, so a victim herself. And I don't like the thought of abortion being a crony of discrimination. [color:"yellow"]I think one should differ between the choice for abortion and the "force" of aborting[/color], as having daughters might cause financial ruin to some East Indian families (besides other points, females are seen as 2nd class e.g.).
Kiya

Edit, as I had to leave for work: The point in my case ist this => if a female is pregnant and stands before this difficult decision, she should have a choice - and be encouraged to find her own solution. Outer conditions (social, religious, traditional etc.) should not pre-determine her individual personal self-responsible choice - this goes for either way, abortion or not. In the best case, both parties should be able to decide, as there is still a male part involved when it comes to responsibility, right?

So, the question is => what is the root of this problem? Abortion or tradition, social norms? I think the latter. [color:"yellow"]If norms and tradition start to force people, pre-determine => these norms/traditions should be aborted.[/color] <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/suspicion.gif" alt="" />

Hopefully last edit => I'd think the same if we had a society somewhere propagating male foeticide BTW.

And I wish for societies where preventing unwanted pregnancy is a large part of the health information policy. Where females are not determined by their fertility, where they can use AND afford oral contraceptiva or other methods to prevent pregnancy if they wish. Where aid and encouragement determine the wish for pregnancy and NOT tradition, religion, or whatever norms you can think of. Gee, this really makes mad => a society full of empty rules, keeping the herd together, heads bent - deciding for the individual instead of encouraging an individual to think/decide for her/himself. And then? The outcome is criticized instead of pulling out the root that leads to this outcome. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/memad.gif" alt="" />

Pro argument:

Of course there is! Are you talking about the female aspect of it or the foetus part of it? Or both? Anyway, the justification is simple for one of the most overpopulated countries on the planet. So what if families want more males than females? They'll eventually reallise their folly when there are 10 guys to one girl!

Whatever controls the population basically.

Abortion is necessary, very necessary in the world today. We have had no world wars to control our population growth for a long time and it shows. The world population is skyrocketing out of control. If not now then in a few years time measures like sterilisation and the one family-one child will become a necessity.

Contraception? Ha! People obviously don't use it properly! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Maybe I'll get a chance to post a con argument later...

<The devil's advocate>

HA! - the only safe contraception would be total chastity. I would want to see that work.

But my predecessor is right in presuming that there are reasons "pro". If only because it is the lesser evil to killing unwanted female children after birth, which undoubtedly happened before scientific methods allowed avoiding this. Or to condemn her to a life of an unmarried woman?

The society there being what it is, it would be hypocritical to assume that it does not happen. And is it not more humane to abort than to put a grown woman into a conflict of conscience by seeing her parents ruining themselves in order to preserve the good tradition of passing on the family assets to the next generation early, for it to work with and ensure the after next generation's future and growth, rather than keeping it for themselves?

Of course there are those who consider it selfish to try and avoid the spending of a fortune by aborting a female child, but would preserve the chance of getting a sizeable dowry into the family fortune through a male child. But then this is the way to build the possibility of having females in the future in order allow the balance required for the prosperity and growth of future generations.

<end of speech by the devil's advocate>
(you beat me this time, Womble <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />)

that is so wicked, glance. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin1.gif" alt="" /> u play the evil advocate very well.

& speak of the advocate, the parts where u mentioned 'condemn her to a life of an unmarried woman?' & 'is it not more humane to abort than to put a grown woman into a conflict of conscience by ...' is hypocrisy slapped with hypocrisy.

how is it so? nobody & i mean absolutely nobody has prescience to know the future to be bleak for unmarried women, be it indians or otherwise. just because u fear for the future of the unborn, u deny them life & chance to fight their ways to live a full life? & as for abortion (speaking generally of course) to be more humane than bringing a daughter up in india, how can one tell that it is rather than denying her chance to live, survive & thrive despite it all?

abortion is a choice rather than a right of women. right depends on the law & perception of society. choice depends on women & should be as they are the ones who will have to bear the child & all the complications that come with it. & as for female foeticide in india & generally anywhere else, it is up to the women who bear the foetuses, be it right or wrong.

heck, we can say we're right & she's wrong for doing this or that but she is the one with the burden & pain of consequences. she at least has the choice to do what she feels is fair for herself & foetus.

most of us agree that majority rules. that is democracy. so who are we to tell majority of indian women to stop aborting female fetuses just because? are we going to feed the children? are we going to finance their growing needs? education? be their parents?

Personal, free (? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/suspicion.gif" alt="" />) choice, right or priviledge - that is one side of viewing it. But in the discussion of ethics, ethical behaviour of society, what about the ethics of the "service" providers?

[color:"orange"]Diagnostic teams with ultrasound scanners which detect the sex of a child advertise with catchlines such as spend 600 rupees now and save 50,000 rupees later.[/color]

Obviously it addresses itself to people, who have 600 Rupees, and have the potential to lose 50.000 Rupees - which, I am pretty certain, is not everybody in India.

This is a purely economic, profit oriented, business model. Why does nobody discuss the ethics of this? Is it sufficient that a "need" exists, or potentially exists, to justify any "service"?

And this attitude, I fear, is not traditionally Indian, but the influence of "advanced", "modern" (western <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/badsmile2.gif" alt="" />) liberal capitalism and the mercantile exploitation of medical science and technology.

I did <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />
Kiya

Both, as my edit yesterday showed <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />- see?


Kiya

It's difficult for me to see this topic from a merely intellectual approach. I don't consider abortion/killing babies as an appropriate method to fight over-population. This could be done in a better way by preventing pregnancy with a health information policy and free access to contraceptiva. Besides that, norms determining fertility as something positive and valuable should be questioned. And no, I don't consider forced sterilisation as an appropriate method either.

Idle thought => it's strange, rat experiments showed that they turn infertile due to over-population - sadly, our organism (the oh, so advanced one) doesn't have this regulative. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/think.gif" alt="" />

[color:"orange"]..they turn infertile due to over-population - sadly, our organism (the oh, so advanced one) doesn't have this regulative.[/color]

Indeed - mankind is not like rats, more like lemmings <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

Mankind is a virus....

A virus?

- mutates constantly <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/question.gif" alt="" />
- is contageous <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/question.gif" alt="" />
- epidemic <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/question.gif" alt="" />
- resistant to anti-biotics <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/question.gif" alt="" />
- parasitarian <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/question.gif" alt="" />

=> all of the above <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/exclamation.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin1.gif" alt="" />

Yes, that's what one of my colleagues said as well. I should simply accept my role as being a representative of this species instead of pointing out the "sapiens" part. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" />
Kiya

Perversely speaking, if abortion is permissible then aborting females only is permissible. Or males only. Or twins only. Or twins if one is female and one is male...

Most people have to deal with real life; "meaning" is a luxury. And in real life, in many parts of the world, raising a girl costs more and brings less benefit to the family. A very simple equation: boy=asset; girl=liability. We're not talking people here, we're talking economics.

Unless and until the related social conditions change, aborting female foetuses is at least kinder than the also prevalent killing of female babies...

The Pragmatist

Kiya,
I appreciate your heartfelt reply.
In some respects I agree with you, but we also have some fundamental differences which I invite you to address if it suits you.
The only manner in which abortion can be justified as a woman's right to choose is if the fetus is not considered to be a child, a human being. Clearly if the fetus is truly a human being then abortion is the equivalent of killing or murder. So if the fetus is not human, not a child, then it shouldn't make any difference to an advocate of a woman's right to choose whether or not it is female. You say "Females should not be treated like waste refuse." Neither should any child/fetus.
You say "Outer conditions (social, religious, traditional etc.) should not pre-determine her individual personal self-responsible choice - this goes for either way, abortion or not." Even in the West do women not choose to have abortions because of outer conditions such as family, career, soccial, etc. Some women will choose to abort a child for economic reasons. This is the same in India.
You say "In the best case, both parties should be able to decide, as there is still a male part involved when it comes to responsibility, right?" It is my understanding that in many cases it actually is the man who pushes the woman to have an abortion; she is the one who will carry the scars. Where is the woman's right to choose?
Abortion of a fetus/child just because it is female is heinous. I fully agree with you there. It degrades and debases the humanity of the woman and man who decide to do it. I would argue that with the exceptions of rape, incest, and saving the life of the mother, any abortion degrades and debases the humanity of the woman and man who decide to do it. We devalue human life by supporting abortion, and the abortion of females in India is a glaring example of the outcome.
If abortion is considered to be an acceptable means of family planning, well, isn't female feticide a form of family planning, as reprehensible as it may be?

The thing is: they abort children because they're female. Had it been a male, they wouldn't have done it, but now it's a female, so they do it. Just because they don't whant to pay for her wedding. This is clearly social.
Shure, females in west abort their children because of economic reasons, but there is no difference between males and females here. That is because families doesn't have to pay for their daughter's wedding here. They have to there. And not just that, they have to pay a guy to marry her (sounds like bribery, don't you think?).
And about abortion in general: If the mother doesn't whant the child, if she's not fit as a mother or if she can't afford it (giving birth to a child, and then have it live in poority isn't a very wise choice for either the mother or the child), she shouldn't have to go through nine months of pregnancy followed by a really painfull surgery. Shure, she could give the child away, but 1) If she really whant the child, but can't take care of it going through those nine months and that surgery just get's more painfull, since she will have to give the child away. And 2) giveing away nine months of her life for a child she doesn't whant doesn't feel fair. It's not just the child's life we're talking about, it's the mother's life too. And she DOES have the right to decide over that.

Übereil

Cleg, I will gladly follow your invitation - as I have a tummy ache when it comes to abortion.

there are many reasons for a female to abort - and the one you mentioned is very sad indeed. but I know females in Germany who decided to have their baby in spite of the man not wanting it. And they were able to raise it by help of the social policy here and their families. As the birth and raising were solely on her shoulders, they were in dire need for aid for this decision. And here I see the chance => if a female wishes to have the baby, she needs support. If a female wishes to abort, she needs support as well. So, maybe I should rephrase to this => conditions in the society should be an aidful one: respect the female's intent and support her either way. But I couldn't use this argument, as you wanted us to see the East Indian conditions, right?



We're allowed to abort until the 40th day IIRC (Germany) - and this conglomeration of cells at that early state is not a baby/full being in my opinion. But I do understand it if others say, it is. Therefore I do think, that a female is in a terrible inner state by deciding what to do.


I can't see it as an acceptable means - as family planning can start far far earlier by a better health info policy. And if family planning is seen as => only male babies are desireable => no, my tummy revolts. I wish for a society where abortion is seen as the last resort not as a "normal" way to plan a family. I wish, I could express it better. Do you know what I mean? And I wish for a society where the "last resort" is then respected, as the female has to bear the "output", sole responsibility for the child, finances etc. as she is the one "who bears the scars" in either way. If I define "scars" as marks for a life (important stepping stones).


Yes, and if this is the only reason for her to abort, society is questioned again to show her: "Look, if you think, you can't afford the baby - here is the help you can get (financial, social help). Do you think, you feel the courage now? You're not alone." And if she still says no - then the main reason lies somewhere else. It is her life at the moment - she has to see the variations/possibilities - and she has to decide.
Kiya

Cleg, how many females do you know personally who aborted? And what were her reasons? I'm curious.

I know 1 woman and her offspring whose husband abandoned her and strongly urged her over and over to have an abortion and gave her advice on how to do it--this was in the 1940's. She did not have the abortion, never remarried, and her son became a happy successful professional with a family of his own.

I cannot tell you exactly how many girls I know who have had an abortion; there are several. The abortion in all the cases I can recall were basically for birth control--at least 2 of the children who were aborted were the result of casual sex with a partner whom they did not know well.

My son has told me about a girl he knows who was raped at the age of 15 and had an abortion. I have no problem with an abortion under such circumstances.

I apppreciate your well thought out responses.

If my question is too intrusive, please, say so:
The casual sex "outcome" => how informed were the couple about preventive methods? Age? Drunk? Support from families or not? Do you wish to share with me how the ladies felt before/after the decision and operation?

I'm not asking out of pure curiosity in this case - but your sentence is very short <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/puppyeyes.gif" alt="" /> I don't know very young ladies who did that - only females 29/30+. I simply want to understand, not judge.

Same for "birth control" => were preventive methods faulty? Some are safe others not.

I couldn't take oral contraceptiva myself after a few yrs (too strong side effects) - so, I fought 2 yrs for my sterilisation and was turned down by several male docs (sometimes I felt like a witch at a tribunal). I knew I never wanted a child, but they didn't believe me - and they didn't care that I was determined to abort if the catastrophy of pregnancy would happen (meant only for me, ok?). I had a fix relationship when the "catastrophy" happened, a catastrophy I wanted to avoid by sterilisation.
Kiya

Actually this was a long time ago in the 60's or early 70's which is why I can't remember many details. The 2 women I mentioned I only knew in passing; I knew their male partners well. Now that I think on it there were 3 of my friends, not 2 who got girls pregnant. The girls would have been in their late teens or early 20's. Might or might not have been drunk. These were college educated folks who had to have known about preventive methods.

In the 70's I went through several residential sessions to learn a therapy approach similar to Gestalt. IIRC there were several women in my group who had had abortions and they all bore psychological scars--primarily guilt.

Cleglaw

Thanks for answering, Cleg. Yes, I know ladies myself who bore these scars, in my therapy group (Gestalt <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" /> ) My XP from that time => each one had felt terribly alone, even though they had support. Alone during their decision process, alone during the steps they had to take after they had made their decision - alone afterwards. I think the XP of having aborted is a faithful "silent companion" throughout some of their lives. Scars. Therefore these ladies are in need of support - after abortion.
Kiya

1) You're pretty off topic. You know that? And
2) Doesn't XP mean experiencepoints???

Übereil