4 ms·

>>This means there are 100 million girls less today in these countries alone Actual numbers are way off the real numbers. In my kids school you can see a very

by kamaal 6y ago

>>This means there are 100 million girls less today in these countries alone Actual numbers are way off the real numbers. In my kids school you can see a very noticeably difference in the count of boys and girls in any standard and section. It's noticeable to a point, if you walk in to a classroom you can see at least visually boys outnumber girls by a good enough difference. I also refuse to believe this due to infanticide or foeticide. The dirty little secret is at least in most urban centers, even tier 2 cities, these practices are dead today. You can't blame these practices for the difference anymore. How then is the difference arising? Again on a pure anecdotal evidence basis, I see people who have boys tend to have more boys. That is male kids are born more to families with more male kids. Also having the first kid as a boy couples tend to go in for more kids. On the other hand these days if some one had a daughter as the first child they don't even bother to have another child. This way boys are born way ore than. This is a huge problem. Reason being this is not wrong by any means. This not illegal or unethical. Yet it creates a larger social problem. These problems will never go away in India as long as there are big fat wedding expenses(Pretty much entirely paid by the girls side) and dowry. And girls not allowed to take care of their parents, both in presence help and financial help. The other part is of course due to Thyroid illness become prevalent in India. Many couples aren't able to have kids. I expect the gender ratio imbalance to not only continue but get way worse in India. Like really to a point, where an upper middle class man wouldn't be able to find a bride after decades of searching.

saithound 6y ago
Your proposed (not illegal, not unethical) explanation does not work out mathematically. Even in the extreme scenario where all families stopped would stop having kids after the birth of a daughter, the expected number of male children would equal the expected number of female children. And even if say 52 percent of babies born are boys, you won't ever get a male excess of the discussed magnitude (1100 men for every 1000 women) this way. You can try a Scala simulation here: https://pastebin.com/4US9a6aE https://pastebin.com/4US9a6aE.
- kamaal 6y ago
  Mine was just an anecdotal evidence. Also that 52% boy babies count itself is too low. The real scenario for my comparison is 3 boys for every 1 girl born. It's also way more complicated than your simulation. Say the first kid was a boy and the second kid was a girl, people don't stop. They think their risk(Having a boy to provide in old age) is hedged and are likely to try for one more kid. If you have families where 3 boys are born in a series, and a family on the other hand stops at the first daughter. Or a family that has 2 boys + 1 girl - Compared to a family having just one girl. Do this for a billion people, and you will the see things start going real bad soon. Also note, just a small imbalance is not enough to cover for marriages. In India getting married is a long series of AND conditions you have to pass through. Religion, Caste, Language, Skin Color, Dowry affordability, Age, Social Standing etc etc. You are likely to end up a section of society that just doesn't get any girls. India is a society where a daughter means a huge wedding expense, plus dowry. All this a drain to your retirement savings, plus now not having a provider in old age(which you would have one if you had a boy instead of a girl). That's how screwed up the society is. It's really one of the worst places on earth for a woman to be born in. You are dealing with a society that's ridiculously good at not having daughters. A practice perfected for decades.
  - saithound 6y ago
    > You are dealing with a society that's ridiculously good at not having daughters. A practice perfected for decades. I agree. I just doubt the "not illegal, not unethical" explanations. > If you have families where 3 boys are born in a series, and a family on the other hand stops at the first daughter. Or a family that has 2 boys + 1 girl - Compared to a family having just one girl. Do this for a billion people, and you will the see things start going real bad soon. No, this is precisely the kind of "family planning" that mathematically won't be able to affect the expected gender ratio at all. The ratios are skewed in India, but that's definitely caused by something else. Is it the conception of male children being more likely? No, probably not, we have very good evidence that about 51% of children are conceived male. So it's caused by something else. Selective abortions would be my best guess, but that's not "not illegal, not unethical".
burfog 6y ago
The girl shortage will change the culture. Dowry will disappear, possibly to be replaced with a bride price.
- kamaal 6y ago
  Solution for this is already seen somewhat. Basically the rich will get brides, settle for somewhat less dowry. The mid to lower middle class people neither get brides nor dowry. Poor manage some how. I have even seen people these days waiting till age 35 - 40 for brides to get the right match(that is everything else plus dowry).

by kamaal 6y ago

saithound 6y ago

Your proposed (not illegal, not unethical) explanation does not work out mathematically. Even in the extreme scenario where all families stopped would stop having kids after the birth of a daughter, the expected number of male children would equal the expected number of female children. And even if say 52 percent of babies born are boys, you won't ever get a male excess of the discussed magnitude (1100 men for every 1000 women) this way. You can try a Scala simulation here: https://pastebin.com/4US9a6aE https://pastebin.com/4US9a6aE.

kamaal 6y ago
Mine was just an anecdotal evidence. Also that 52% boy babies count itself is too low. The real scenario for my comparison is 3 boys for every 1 girl born. It's also way more complicated than your simulation. Say the first kid was a boy and the second kid was a girl, people don't stop. They think their risk(Having a boy to provide in old age) is hedged and are likely to try for one more kid. If you have families where 3 boys are born in a series, and a family on the other hand stops at the first daughter. Or a family that has 2 boys + 1 girl - Compared to a family having just one girl. Do this for a billion people, and you will the see things start going real bad soon. Also note, just a small imbalance is not enough to cover for marriages. In India getting married is a long series of AND conditions you have to pass through. Religion, Caste, Language, Skin Color, Dowry affordability, Age, Social Standing etc etc. You are likely to end up a section of society that just doesn't get any girls. India is a society where a daughter means a huge wedding expense, plus dowry. All this a drain to your retirement savings, plus now not having a provider in old age(which you would have one if you had a boy instead of a girl). That's how screwed up the society is. It's really one of the worst places on earth for a woman to be born in. You are dealing with a society that's ridiculously good at not having daughters. A practice perfected for decades.
- saithound 6y ago
  > You are dealing with a society that's ridiculously good at not having daughters. A practice perfected for decades. I agree. I just doubt the "not illegal, not unethical" explanations. > If you have families where 3 boys are born in a series, and a family on the other hand stops at the first daughter. Or a family that has 2 boys + 1 girl - Compared to a family having just one girl. Do this for a billion people, and you will the see things start going real bad soon. No, this is precisely the kind of "family planning" that mathematically won't be able to affect the expected gender ratio at all. The ratios are skewed in India, but that's definitely caused by something else. Is it the conception of male children being more likely? No, probably not, we have very good evidence that about 51% of children are conceived male. So it's caused by something else. Selective abortions would be my best guess, but that's not "not illegal, not unethical".

burfog 6y ago

The girl shortage will change the culture. Dowry will disappear, possibly to be replaced with a bride price.

kamaal 6y ago
Solution for this is already seen somewhat. Basically the rich will get brides, settle for somewhat less dowry. The mid to lower middle class people neither get brides nor dowry. Poor manage some how. I have even seen people these days waiting till age 35 - 40 for brides to get the right match(that is everything else plus dowry).