Bonfire of the Little Girls

http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/05/double-x-syndrome/

Do you know what you get when you selectively abort girls?

An army of frustrated horny young men who are all primed to go loot neighboring countries.

Japan may wish to reconsider their constitutional limit of no more than 1% of their gross national product going for defense spending. Though I can understand why other nations might not want to encourage that.

China already has some 20 to 25 million “surplus” males under the age of 30 or so. That means they can field an army of 10 million, right now, quite easily.

If the US can’t repay our financial debt to China, I wonder what China will demand to satisfy that debt? Oil? Coal? Land? Women? Slave labor? Human organs? (Let us have your kidney, and we’ll wipe $5,000 off that credit card debt you owe.)

If your US bank “sells” your oustanding personal credit card balance to China, how will you pay it off or work it off, if you are unemployed?

What’s that huge tract of land (size of a city) that China has recently purchased in Idaho? Could Chinese factories be built there, and manned by US credit-card debtors until their debt is paid off?

Will China use that army of 10 million or more surplus males to force the US to pay off its debt?

The last two graphs sum it up nicely:

For if “choice” is the moral imperative guiding abortion, then there is no way to take a stand against “gendercide.” Aborting a baby because she is a girl is no different from aborting a baby because she has Down syndrome or because the mother’s “mental health” requires it. Choice is choice. One Indian abortionist tells Ms. Hvistendahl: “I have patients who come and say ‘I want to abort because if this baby is born it will be a Gemini, but I want a Libra.’ ”

This is where choice leads. This is where choice has already led. Ms. Hvistendahl may wish the matter otherwise, but there are only two alternatives: Restrict abortion or accept the slaughter of millions of baby girls and the calamities that are likely to come with it.

If the US can’t repay our financial debt to China, I wonder what China will demand to satisfy that debt? Oil? Coal? Land? Women? Slave labor? Human organs? (Let us have your kidney, and we’ll wipe $5,000 off that credit card debt you owe.)

Books.,
the Pacific is a big moat, and so are sovereign default.

Still, the possibility of an economic shake down, when we are already trying to get up is by no means insignificant.

The male imbalance ratio has long lead me to conclude, other factors apart, war is inevitable. This is not going to be pleasant for anyone involved.

When His Majesty created our army of clones, he had the parent DNA reengineered to make the clones more fearless and less inclinded to question orders. I once asked His Majesty why we didn’t have the DNA reengineered to remove their sex drive as well; it seemed to me that this would solve a host of problems. His Majesty simply chuckled at my naivete.

I hear a lot of talk about how the lack of women will cause instability in China and possibly war. I wonder if it’s just as likely that the wide availability of pornography will make those “excess” males practically indifferent to women. Not that that would be much better.

Ahh…. but we are talking about China here. Although it seems strange to us, they don’t have the same kind of access to filth that we do. If they did, you might have a point… But the spirit of immorality that grips the world today, in combination with zero outlets, and a gender imbalance is a politically explosive situation. IMHO.

This is not new news. And, just so the links are handy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1265068/China-The-worlds-new-superpower-beginning-century-supremacy-alarming-surplus-males.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8229789/China-preparing-for-armed-conflict-in-every-direction.html

Bear in mind, all those young Chinese men are only children. That makes then a bit less dispensable.

John M., no, not “all” the excess males are children. The one-child policy started in 1979. I don’t know how the distribution goes by year, but the oldest cohort is now 31-32. Nor do I know at what age the average Chinese man gets married these days. Supposing it’s age 25, then you would have the unmarried 25-31 age group “realizing” they were “surplus”. I think I remember reading somewhere that their term is “dead branch.” When that realization is made, the young man is ripe to be used as cannon-fodder.

The first article I linked to states that by 2020, there will be 30 million “surplus” men of marriagable age (let’s assume that starts at age 21) up to age 41 (to include those born in 1979.) I’m not sure how to work the numbers to extrapolate that back to how many there are _now_, but I’m estimating at least 10 million (of age 21 and over) today.

Another strange item: in order to comply with the 1-child policy, many families have shipped off (sold off?) their “unreported” girls to work in countries all along the Pacific rim, before the girl reaches the age when she must be registered to the Chinese government in order to enter the work-force.

Also, those families “stuck” with a girl child (duly reported and registered with the gov’t as a child), their one-and-only child, believing she won’t be able to support them in their old age, have sold such daughters to human traffickers, and many of those young women are “working off” their smuggling debt in Chinese restaurants all along the Pacific rim. In fact, you can find them in many of the larger Chinese buffet restaurants all around the US. If you find some who can’t speak English (other than restaurant vocabulary), you’ve probably met some of the ones I’m talking about.

I also have my suspicions about the many “Chinese Massage” storefronts that are popping up around the US, employing young adult females who can’t speak English. I once had a chair-massage in the middle of an indoor shopping mall. When I realized the girl couldn’t speak English, I realized the pattern was similar to what I encounter at some of the larger Chinese buffet restaurants. (Smaller places employ just family members, it’s the larger ones that have to hire non-family.)

Correction: 3rd graph above, “Also, those families ‘stuck’”, should read “Also, some of those families ‘stuck’”.

I shall restate: all those young Chinese men, to a first-order approximation, are the offspring of parents who have no other offspring. Their loss to warfare would be problematic an a personal family basis and on a national demographic basis in a way that it would’t for a people without an inverted population pyramid.

That’s an interesting point, John. So long as there’s any chance at all of the son eventually marrying, there will be strong opposition from the parents to using him as cannon fodder.

Of course, the question is whether that opposition can be expressed effectively in a totalitarian regime. Especially if the son himself sees life in the military as more attractive than being single outside the military.

Another way to work off American debt: “Here, take care of these old people.”

Of all the possible resolutions of our debt to China, actually doing something to pay it off is among the least likely.

A war would do little to threaten people, illogical as it sounds. Having a son is a specific thing they want, while war is general and uncertain. After all, their son might come back a hero, or at least alive. Oh, for sure, real war is even more uncertain than that, but how many of us have really been though that?