The World’s Greatest Genocide | INFJ Forum

The World’s Greatest Genocide

J

jimtaylor

On Holiday
May 19, 2010
1,801
447
636
MBTI
No Need
Enneagram
Yup
There are currently about 7 billion people right now on Earth. According to census data; which is not always accurate, the population is pretty much split right down the middle at 50-50 as far as gender goes. Now the actual split should be 51% female, 49% male as there is just a slightly higher chance that a female is born. For anybody who understands statistics for a sample of 7 billion there is a low margin of error. Meaning that in a study of a hundred, a 2% variation can be expected just because of errors but not with 7 billion where the sample is so large that it accounts for any errors and the results can be trusted.

Now what is the point of this? At one point or another in last century 70 million women who should be alive, vanished. The greatest genocide in human history happened and continues to happen without much flare or concern. The areas that are the worst in regards to this matter:

Afghanistan: 107 boys to every 100 girls
Algeria: 102
American Samoa: 103
Andorra: 110
Bahrain: 135
Bangladesh: 102
Belize: 102
Benin: 102
Bhutan: 112
British Virgin Islands: 104
Brunei Darussalam: 107
China: 108
Cook Islands: 105
Costa Rica: 103
Cote d’Lvoire: 104
Faeroe Islands: 107
Falkland Islands: 107
Fiji: 103
French Polynesia: 105
Ghana: 103
Greenland: 113
Guam: 104
Guatemala: 104
Guinea: 102
Guyana: 105
India: 107
Iran: 103
Iraq: 102
Jordan: 105
Kuwait: 147
Malaysia: 103
Maldives: 102
Marshall Islands: 103
Mauritania: 103
Oman: 129
Pakistan: 106
Panama: 102
Papua New Guinea: 103
Paraguay: 102
Qatar: 307
Saudi Arabia: 121
Solomon Islands: 107
United Arab Emirates: 205
Yemen: 102

Most of these nations are 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] world countries that are dominated by extremist religious sects. How do you make it so that genocide like this is no longer being committed?
 
There is also an unfortunate cultural value (not necessarily religious) of men over women in a lot of these countries, such as China.
I would Imagine Guam (which is a U.S. territory) is likely male dominated because of the U.S. military presence there.
Falkland Islands because of British military presence there.

Education would probably have the best long term affect. However to change the education system in that regard is not really an option. Without social pressure put on these countries nothing will likely change, and this option will probably take a lot longer than the prior. Unfortunately, social pressure against many extremist religious sects will also be taken as an attack against their religious beliefs. General education would have the best immediate affect and then social pressure once the society has developed more humane tolerances.
 
I think genocide is a HUGE leap there.
 
Maybe people could start throwing boy babies into the fire until they get to where they're supposed to be.
 
I'd like to know where you got those numbers. According to the CIA World Factbook, the ratio in Qatar is 1.02 males/female at birth. In the United States, it's 1.05 males/female. I've occassionally heard people claim that the natural sex ratio is 51% female and 49% male, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Even in societies where abortion is impossible, there are more male than female children.

I'll be the first to admit that some of the numbers seem quite strange. Apparently, the ratio for the total population in Qatar is 3.29 males/female. However, I doubt that this is because Qatar is "dominated by religious extremists." If that was the case, you'd expect other countries in the region to show the same tendency, but they don't. One thing I know about Qatar (and other rich countries in the Middle East) is that there is a very large number of foreign construction workers and businessmen living there. The population of Qatar is 1.9 million, but only 250,000 of those are Qatari.

Greenland and the Faroe Islands are also poor examples. Both are autonomous provinces of Denmark, with populations of only 57,000 and 49,000 respectively. Young people from these areas usually move to Denmark to work or study. Fishing is the main source of income for both Greenland and the Faroe Islands, and since it's a male-dominated trade, it's no surprise that there are more men than women living there. It's certainly not because of female infanticide or a lack of secularism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: muir
Gktr said:
I'd like to know where you got those numbers. According to the CIA World Factbook, the ratio in Qatar is 1.02 males/female at birth. In the United States, it's 1.05 males/female. I've occassionally heard people claim that the natural sex ratio is 51% female and 49% male, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Even in societies where abortion is impossible, there are more male than female children.

I'll be the first to admit that some of the numbers seem quite strange. Apparently, the ratio for the total population in Qatar is 3.29 males/female. However, I doubt that this is because Qatar is "dominated by religious extremists." If that was the case, you'd expect other countries in the region to show the same tendency, but they don't. One thing I know about Qatar (and other rich countries in the Middle East) is that there is a very large number of foreign construction workers and businessmen living there. The population of Qatar is 1.9 million, but only 250,000 of those are Qatari.

Greenland and the Faroe Islands are also poor examples. Both are autonomous provinces of Denmark, with populations of only 57,000 and 49,000 respectively. Young people from these areas usually move to Denmark to work or study. Fishing is the main source of income for both Greenland and the Faroe Islands, and since it's a male-dominated trade, it's no surprise that there are more men than women living there. It's certainly not because of female infanticide or a lack of secularism.
Click to expand...

Again, as I said census data is not always 100% correct and depending on the year or agency it can change vastly. The sad truth is that the same statistic can be used to argue multiple sides of an argument depending on if shift how you record the data. Does the United States count its entire illegal migrant workers that could be a majority male? Some reporting agencies do, some don’t. Are you counting migrant populations; where they live in one country for half the year and then another for the other half, vastly changing the numbers?

A simple solution to this problem could be better data collecting and finding that those 70 million missing females aren’t from genocide but instead lost in the numbers.

There are a couple of theories to why this may or may not be true. There are multiple examples of infant genocide in South East Asia and the Middle East where due to society having a male child is more advantageous. There are also theories like the one I mentioned that 51% should be female due to the genetic disadvantage of giving birth. If not for 51% of babies being female, reproduction would slow. Or like the second source here, multiple other ideas explaining the 105:100 male ratio in the world.

You start looking at the industrialized nations though and you do see a trend to it being 50/50 or 51/49. What causes that? Naturally shorter life spans of males? War?

Here are my sources:

Statistics/Economics paper I wrote 3 years ago that I re-read and brought up this thought. lol
http://www.geohive.com/earth/pop_gender.aspx
http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/sexratio.htm
http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states/sex_ratio.html
http://maletofemaleratio.com/
http://nationalatlas.gov/articles/people/a_gender.html
http://www.vitalstatistics.info/sub-category2.asp?cid=16&scid=1723
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_ratio


“The table presents data from The World Factbook (2012),[SUP][1][/SUP] except when otherwise indicated. It shows the male to female sex ratio as estimated by United States' CIA. However, there are differences between the estimates by The World Factbook and numbers reported by the census offices of respective countries. For example, The World Factbook in 2001 reported Switzerland's sex ratio at birth as 1.05,[SUP][2][/SUP] while Switzerland's Federal Office of Statistics in 2011 reported Switzerland's sex ratio at birth as 1.07 per its birth records census data.[SUP][3][/SUP] Similar differences between estimates by "The World Factbook" and census numbers from birth records are known for Sweden, Norway, Ireland, India and Japan”

As a said statistics is not a hard science by any means. Reporting standards vary all over the map.
 
It's because of abortion. In countries where people can have limited amounts of children they sometimes abort baby girls. The incentives are for having boys. We have to remove those incentives whatever they may be.

Is religion the incentive or the tool?

I agree it sucks. Some speculate its the reason gang rape and other violent crimes are becoming a bigger problem in countries like India. Basically groups of single men are getting together and acting like idiots because they don't care about anything and there are no women to calm them down.
 
=(

[video=youtube;vef5NxYU-hA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vef5NxYU-hA[/video]
 
[MENTION=2710]jimtaylor[/MENTION]
I noticed that the numbers of quite a few European nations in which birth statistics are publicized are based on estimates. I looked up data for 2011 for both Denmark and Finland, and this is what I found:

Denmark: 30,014 male births - 28,984 female births - 1.036 males/female (Source)
Finland: 30,596 male births - 29,478 female births - 1.038 males/female (Source)

I'm not sure how the CIA got their numbers, but if the rest of their intelligence is as flawed as their sex ratio statistics, you guys are fucked.

chulo said:
It's because of abortion. In countries where people can have limited amounts of children they sometimes abort baby girls. The incentives are for having boys. We have to remove those incentives whatever they may be.
Click to expand...

That's true, but this is about sex ratios in the overall population; not among unborn children. The fact that people have the option of getting an abortion makes female infanticide useless in cultures where male children are valued higher than female ones.

The numbers indicate that the exact opposite of a "female genocide" is taking place. The life expectancy of an average adult male is considerably shorter than that of the average adult female.
 
Last edited:
Gktr said:
@jimtaylor
I noticed that the numbers of quite a few European nations in which birth statistics are publicized are based on estimates. I looked up data for 2011 for both Denmark and Finland, and this is what I found:

Denmark: 30,014 male births - 28,984 female births - 1,036 males/female (Source)
Finland: 30,596 male births - 29,478 female births - 1,038 males/female (Source)

I'm not sure how the CIA got their numbers, but if the rest of their intelligence is as flawed as their sex ratio statistics, you guys are fucked.



That's true, but this is about sex ratios in the overall population; not among unborn children. The fact that people have the option of getting an abortion makes female infanticide useless in cultures where male children are valued higher than female ones.

The numbers indicate that the exact opposite of a "female genocide" is taking place. The life expectancy of an average adult male is considerably shorter than that of the average adult female.
Click to expand...

No argument here. I am astounded by some of the estimated numbers are thrown out. It’s almost like picking a number out of a hat and saying, yeah we will go with that one
 
chulo said:
Why is everyone adding to my words today?? I never said it was women's job. I said some speculate it causes that. I was just repeating what I saw on an interview about it.
Click to expand...
No offense, but whoever speculated it is terribly wrong..
 
Gktr said:
[MENTION=2710]jimtaylor[/MENTION]
I noticed that the numbers of quite a few European nations in which birth statistics are publicized are based on estimates. I looked up data for 2011 for both Denmark and Finland, and this is what I found:

Denmark: 30,014 male births - 28,984 female births - 1.036 males/female (Source)
Finland: 30,596 male births - 29,478 female births - 1.038 males/female (Source)

I'm not sure how the CIA got their numbers, but if the rest of their intelligence is as flawed as their sex ratio statistics, you guys are fucked.



That's true, but this is about sex ratios in the overall population; not among unborn children. The fact that people have the option of getting an abortion makes female infanticide useless in cultures where male children are valued higher than female ones.

The numbers indicate that the exact opposite of a "female genocide" is taking place. The life expectancy of an average adult male is considerably shorter than that of the average adult female.
Click to expand...

I don't get it. If more females are being aborted than males, that would cause an imbalance in the overall population.
 
acd said:
No offense, but whoever speculated it is terribly wrong..
Click to expand...

Why? I'm not disagreeing it's a cultural problem. That's why I added the words "they don't care about anything". Meaning they have no respect for others. But how can you conclude that speculation is wrong?
 
chulo said:
I don't get it. If more females are being aborted than males, that would cause an imbalance in the overall population.
Click to expand...

The numbers posted are the sex ratio of the overall population. The number that really sticks out is Qatar (307 males per 100 females). However, if you look at the ratio of newborn children, the ratio is 102 males per 100 females - a far more sensible number, and more equal than most - if not all - western countries. My understanding is that we are supposed to discuss the reason why some countries actually have a higher male-to-female ratio among adults than among newborn children. Abortion has nothing to do with that, and the attempts of certain countries to limit the number of female children are irrelevant.
 
chulo said:
Why? I'm not disagreeing it's a cultural problem. That's why I added the words "they don't care about anything". Meaning they have no respect for others. But how can you conclude that speculation is wrong?
Click to expand...
I don't think that the propensity to rape is inherent in all men when there is a disportionate amount of women around. Not all men are rapists waiting to happen.
I also think its absurd to suggest that women are responsible for preventing rape by "calming" men down--with what? Sex? Lullabys? lulz
 
I fail to see how this is genocide.

where do you suppose they vanished to? Aliens?
 
There are cases of infanticide in some countries. I'm not going to point the finger but reasons i've heard for it are things like the need to pay a large dowry when the father marries off a daughter and boys being more valued for manual labour

I think GKtr raised some great points about some places retaining men due to their industries whilst women are having to emigrate for work...that's definately a factor in some cases

I think Chulo has a point about there being problems that arise due to an imbalance in the numbers or availability of women. There are some places where marriage is arranged and sex before marriage is a big no no but prostitution exists as a release valve but one that is unspoken. Perhaps the flames are being fanned by western culture seeping in in the form of more sexual TV, dress and attitudes and pornography

In the UK victorian society was very prudish and repressed but sexual energies seethed beneath the surface and prostitution again acted as a release valve

What can be done about the problem?

I guess it boils down to economics to a large extent. Eradicate poverty so that women are not seen as a burden

A recent Oxfam study revealed that the top 100 richest people in the world made $280 billion in 2012 which is enough to end global poverty 4 times over

Maybe the big question should be over where the flows of money are going?
 
Last edited:
acd said:
I don't think that the propensity to rape is inherent in all men when there is a disportionate amount of women around. Not all men are rapists waiting to happen.
I also think its absurd to suggest that women are responsible for preventing rape by "calming" men down--with what? Sex? Lullabys? lulz
Click to expand...

Huh??? I never said the propensity to rape is in all men. I never said all men are rapists waiting to happen. I never suggested it was women's responsibility to prevent rape. It's rude of you to twist my words around.

The reality is there is an increase in gang rapes and violent crime in countries like India and its being caused by groups of single men who get together and have nothing to do but cause trouble. People speculate that these gangs of single men are popping up because of the disproportionate ratio of men and women.

Do you really truly believe that's an unreasonable speculation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back