One son policy

Watching 60 minutes last night on the fact that in China’s new generation, there are 120 boys for every 100 women, due to the one-child-policy and the abortion of girls by those who insist on a son, an obvious answer came to me.

Instead of a one-child policy, have a one-son policy. Ie. after you have your first boy, you must stop. (China actually forces sterilization or insertion of an IUD under surveillance, which I obviously don’t think is a great way to do things.)

A one-son policy, would obviously increase the population pressure, since strice one-child means 1 child for every woman (though in practice it is not perfect, so it’s a bit more than that,) while one-son probably results in about 1.7 children per woman.

But in theory, there would be far less aborting of girls. There might be a cap of 3 children, which would mean that after 2 girls, the parents might consider abortion of a third, but this would apply to a much smaller fraction of pregnancies than it does today. In addition, a number of couples would stop with all girls after 2 or many times even 1, both because they can’t afford more children, or state pressure still pushes them to stop. The policy would actually be that one should still have only one child, but that draconian measures would not be taken on those who have daughters who insist on trying for a son.

The key is simply to present the easiest path. Right now aborting a child based on sex is illegal, it’s illegal for a doctor to tell the parents the sex of a child, and that would probably remain true. They just have to make it so that those daring enough to break the law to identify and then abort a girl would take the slightly easier, if perhaps more bureaucratic, path of having another child.

And of course, as long as you’re not aborting based on sex, you will get an even sexual balance no matter what rules you place on when to stop.

They need to do something. Lots of evidence suggests that a giant surplus of men who will never find women will sharply increase the crime rate and cause other problems. (Though perhaps it will cause revolution which would probably not be all bad.) Already one new nasty crime of desperation has sprung up — kidnapping girls, sometimes just as babies, to be future brides. I had hoped that being so valuable would increase the women’s power, but this may have been a false hope.

A search reveals I am not the only one with this idea, but it has not yet gathered much of a foothold. Both approaches are draconian, of course, and have no place in a free society.

One-Son Policy

One child, one vas. Second child, next vas and end of problem.

Option of complete removal of the organs in question really should be made readily available for those who are both ready and willing (with spousal counselling and consent if wedded) to entirely stop fecking around. There are even sweeter things in human life than hormone-driven compulsive fecking and all the adult-grade kinderscheiss that follows.

Got Anger Management?

The change is both permanent and (for those indeed ready, but not others so no compulsory orchiectomies, ever!) deeply refreshing. Removal of massive systemic distraction, y'see. The ancient Chinese Emperors were wise.

Got Wisdom?

Lao Tsu (senior Imperial Librarian and author of the Tao te Ching) knew this well, oh yes he did. Learn to actualize Canto 16 well from a decent translation and become wise indeed. (Still takes time; set some aside daily for this.)

There are ancient Chinese instructions for the attainment of eternal life (no particular external savior-figure necessary) embedded in the text. From Feng/English, read "unchanging" as "constant" and "be" as "become" and you are on your way, Young Grasshopper.

The Feng/English translation is back in print. Worth putting to work long before one has Had Enough and become plenty good 'n' ready for the Ultimate Cut. Take in the movie, "The Last Emperor" for a brief but germane historical re-enactment scene (mid-flick). Theirs were lopped by means of sword. (Modern surgery is somewhat better.)

Lao Tsu (and many others) gave 'em up for the sake of safety, peace, and an improved degree of public service. Goodness knows, we need all of those Just Everywhere these days. (Only the bravest of volunteers need apply at first.)

Now as for persuading those hot-blooded, stiff-prong'd, fun-lovin' war pimps in our midst to settle down... {;-)o<

Nudge nudge wink wink say no mo'.

it is horrable

hi it is not nice to do this they should have girls is well as boy xx

You misunderstand

A one son policy attains this goal. Humans naturally have an even number (roughly) of girls and boys, no matter what policy they use on when to stop having children. Every individual child is roughly equally likely to be of either sex.

What changes this is if people abort the girls because they fear they will never have a son if they don't do so. Take away the reason to abort and people will have even numbers of both.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

His name is Brad Templeton. You figure it out.
Please make up a name if you do not wish to give your real one.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Personal home pages only. Posts with biz home pages get deleted and search engines ignore all links
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options