godofthunder9010
Active member
Most people have heard of the law in China disallowing families from having more than one child. Most also know that having a boy for a child is far more valued than having a girl, and because of this, there have been a lot of cases where a baby girl is drowned in a nearby ditch or killed in some other way. Its a phenominon is one that the Chinese government has certainly tried to stop, but it still occurs to this day.
But that's not what I wanted to discuss. I recently read an article that the fact that the first Culled generation is about to turn 18. The numbers cited are 70% boys vs 30% girls for people of that approximate agegroup in China. I can't vouch for the numbers since I just read them in an article, but it stands to reason that there would be a significant amout of disproportion of boys to girls. What impact will this have on China?? Does the value of a baby girl increase when over half of the rising generation of boys will never have the chance to marry? Does the power of women increase by default simply because they are a rare comodity that not everyone can have? Does that unmarried 40% lead China toward a more agressive, warlike future? (That last was the primary concern cited in the article and not the foremost in my own thoughts, but I suppose it should be mentioned.)
But that's not what I wanted to discuss. I recently read an article that the fact that the first Culled generation is about to turn 18. The numbers cited are 70% boys vs 30% girls for people of that approximate agegroup in China. I can't vouch for the numbers since I just read them in an article, but it stands to reason that there would be a significant amout of disproportion of boys to girls. What impact will this have on China?? Does the value of a baby girl increase when over half of the rising generation of boys will never have the chance to marry? Does the power of women increase by default simply because they are a rare comodity that not everyone can have? Does that unmarried 40% lead China toward a more agressive, warlike future? (That last was the primary concern cited in the article and not the foremost in my own thoughts, but I suppose it should be mentioned.)