4 ms·
>In the world we live in, this would be used to abort babies that don't pass the PGS to the vast majority of people who have this information. Are you sure abo
by macspoofing 4y ago
>In the world we live in, this would be used to abort babies that don't pass the PGS to the vast majority of people who have this information.
Are you sure about that? We have a pretty good way of predicting the sex of the fetus and somehow our misogynistic and sexist society doesn't have a mass problem of aborting females.
>So, in this case, where we have an oppressed group that can be oppressed further, is knowledge better than ignorance?
Abortion is oppression?
Today, in most regions, you can abort a fetus for any reason ... even terrible reasons. Are you advocating for abortion controls so that abortion is only done for the 'right' reasons?
>I want to make one thing clear, this is not a silly thought experiment. This is very possible right now with the advent of biobanks, GWAS tooling, and machine learning.
If it is possible today, where are those mass abortions?
>I presume that most of you would agree that releasing this information for anyone to know would have negative consequences, and should maybe be controlled.
You assume you can hide this information. Why do you assume that?
And no, I don't agree that it should be controlled.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago> We have a pretty good way of predicting the sex of the fetus and somehow our misogynistic and sexist society doesn't have a mass problem of aborting females. But we do... > The natural sex ratio at birth is approximately 103 to 106 males for 100 females.[37][38] However, because of sex-selective abortions, the sex ratio at birth in countries with high proportions of missing women have ranged 108.5 in India to 121.2 in Mainland China.[6][18] As a result, counts of missing women are often due to missing female children.[18] It is estimated that the cumulative number of missing female births due to sex-selective abortion globally is 45 million from 1970 to 2017.[38] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_women https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_women
- macspoofing 4y ago>But we do.. Who is 'we' here? USA? Canada?
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago> >In the world we live in, this would be used to abort babies that don't pass the PGS to the vast majority of people who have this information. Same "we" as the line you responded to, and your own response.
- macspoofing 4y ago>Same "we" as the line you responded to, and your own response Is it the same? If China has a problem with abortion of female fetuses and I said "we" don't have that problem...does it sound like the same "we"?
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago> >In the world we live in, this would be used to abort babies that don't pass the PGS to the vast majority of people who have this information. > Are you sure about that? So you asked this question to someone who said "In the world we live in", you actually meant "Are you sure that this thing that does happen in the world we live in will also happen in some unspecified nation that I live in". I don't think that's what you were asking, but if you where, why would you ask that?
- gweinberg 4y agoObviously not. In those countries it's the male fetuses that are more likely to be aborted.
- UIUC_06 4y agoyou said "If it is possible today, where are those mass abortions?" and he gave you the answer, notably China, the largest country in the world. So now you're saying you actually meant just North America?
- macspoofing 4y ago>So now you're saying you actually meant just North America I said "our society" isn't performing abortions on female fetuses - so clearly I must have meant China and India - the two societies that are? And yes, I want to know why "our society" isn't.