Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    This is an interesting situation.  Isn't this selective type of
    process the same thing which we were fighting against and appaled
    at in the 1940's (Hitler).  Is it not that bad anymore?
    
                                                  Mike

    
    
    Yes, as a matter of fact it IS the very thing we were fighting
    against! They now have offices set up with doctors specializing
    in "producing" children of specific gender. Since the success
    rate of boys is much greater than that of girls, some doctors will
    only attempt a male offspring.
    
    Couples have done this for many reasons I'm sure everyone can imagine
    (nonsensical reasons - my belief!) Why can't people be happy with
    what they get?? Is gender **really** that important?? Is this
    the "truest" sense of "family planning"??? 
    
 	-Janine   
 

    I think the title of this note is misleading.  Abortion doesn't
    "lead" to anything.  Tests that can determine the baby's sex can
    be misused - that's what this is all about, and it's horrible.
    
    I didn't want to know what sex my child would be, and didn't have
    any strong preferences either way (despite everyone nudging me and
    telling me that OF COURSE I wanted a boy...)  I feel that by
    knowing beforehand, you could build up some resentment if it didn't
    work out the way you wanted (assuming you had a preference).  I
    like the surprise.
    
    				Steve

    Congratulations, judges.  Those of you who know whats best for India
    please step right up and volunteer your opinions.  Pardon me while
    I take my cultural ignorance off here to the side...
    
    DougO

Of course, by aborting female babies, they're also aborting future generations 
of males and females...If they aborted the males, well, if there was an 
overabundance of females, a male could take several lovers and have several 
women impregnated with future generations at any one time.  Not true of the 
female.  She can take on many male lovers, but only she can be pregnant.

         Oh great...replace one foolish act with another.
    
                                       Greg

Following is a directory listing of the this topic as of today in
VAXWRK::INDIA conference.   

Regards, (RUMI) (c)  (Use select if you want to add the conference etc.)
DECelite development.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Discussions on India
Created: 26-NOV-1986 13:26                                   368 topics                                   Updated: 23-AUG-1988 20:06
                                  -< *** PLEASE *** read notes 2.16, 2.19 before entering topic >-
 Topic  Author               Date         Repl  Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   340  ULYSSE::LEHKY         2-AUG-1988    21  It's time for Indian Women's Lib
        DECALP::DESHMUKH      2-AUG-1988  340.1  Just kidding, but in earnest
           ANT::PKANDAPPAN    2-AUG-1988  340.2  Sorry for the long reply!
          FOR8::SYSTEM        2-AUG-1988  340.3  Science in the wrong hands.
        AKOV11::GUNDEWAR      2-AUG-1988  340.4  A little fuzzy on the main issues.
        SERPNT::SONTAKKE      3-AUG-1988  340.5  The issue had been already addressed
        BARTLE::MACKEEN       3-AUG-1988  340.6  Comments
        AKOV11::GUNDEWAR      3-AUG-1988  340.7  
        NETMAN::KRISHNASWAMY  3-AUG-1988  340.8  some miscellaneous thoughts
        NETMAN::KRISHNASWAMY  3-AUG-1988  340.9  spelling error last note
           ANT::PKANDAPPAN    4-AUG-1988  340.10  Why then?
        SERPNT::SONTAKKE      4-AUG-1988  340.11  Has there been a French Prime-minister / President?
        DECALP::DESHMUKH      4-AUG-1988  340.12  Dowry and Murder - Are they related?
        AKOV11::GUNDEWAR      4-AUG-1988  340.13  Number Play .....
        SERPNT::SONTAKKE      4-AUG-1988  340.14  Another related view point by someone else
        NETMAN::KRISHNASWAMY  5-AUG-1988  340.15  thoughts on .10
        KERNEL::SHARMA        8-AUG-1988  340.16  middle class syndrome...
          AITG::RAVI          9-AUG-1988  340.17  Lib should not be in Lip
        ULYSSE::LEHKY         9-AUG-1988  340.18  Social pressure vs. medical progress
        AKOV11::GUNDEWAR     10-AUG-1988  340.19  
        AKOV13::ARORA        15-AUG-1988  340.20  Seek unbiased information
        AKOV11::GUNDEWAR     16-AUG-1988  340.21  Medical Progress?!? Social Pressures?!?

    RE: Janine's note: I agree 100%.  I have a daughter who now is 17
    months old.  She (and her mom) are her daddy's reason for living.
    She can do as well, if not better, at the most important thing anyone
    can do than any male.  What is that most important thing you may
    ask?  Be a good person by treating others with respect and always
    standing up for what she believes is right.  Along with that goes
    helping people who are in need.
    
    RE: Steve's note:  I was always told about the little boy which
    I wanted also.  Now for the second time (especially since the first
    one was a girl) I am being told the same thing.  When you say that
    all you want is a healthy, happy baby you get this "yeah right"
    look.  Oh well they all mean well, and that's what counts.
    
                                                       Mike 

re:3
>    I think the title of this note is misleading.  Abortion doesn't
>    "lead" to anything.  Tests that can determine the baby's sex can
>    be misused - that's what this is all about, and it's horrible.
    
    Maybe it should read, "Acceptance of Abortion Leads To Femicde".
    If abortion were accepted as immoral, than we wouldn't be talking
    about femicide.
    
    Jim

    Re: .9
    
    Femicide was around long before abortion.  Abortion simply makes
    it easier.  The issues are separate.
    
    				Steve

    re:10
    Granted you can have femicide through other methods than abortion,
    but in India its through abortion that its being done. Without abortion
    femicide would not exist, because taking the life of a born female is 
    considered murder. 
    
    Jim

    Re: .11
    
    To you, maybe.  And legally in India, yes.  But it has been
    practiced for centuries.  Exposure, drowning and more have
    been used.  Take away abortion, and the other methods would
    become more popular.  You're attacking the wrong end of the
    problem.
    
    				Steve

re:12    
>    To you, maybe.  And legally in India, yes.  But it has been
>    practiced for centuries.  Exposure, drowning and more have
>    been used.  Take away abortion, and the other methods would
>    become more popular.  You're attacking the wrong end of the
>    problem.

    Steve,
    the note is talking about INDIA. and if you take away abortion
    the other methods are murder. Abortion is not illegal so there-
    fore it is being used for femicide. The topic is also talking
    about feminist arguing for the mothers right to do what she wants
    because its her body, but are at the same time are against that right 
    when it comes to aborting for the purpose of choosing gender.

    Jim

    I still say you have it backwards, but won't argue the point further.
    
    				Steve

    Steve, 
            I understand that your saying femicide preceded
    abortion, so the title Abortion Leads To Femicide would
    be incorrect. However as it applies to the context of the article
    it is correct, being India had no femicide prior to abortion.
    Besides the title came from Allen Dershowitz, in the Boston Herald
    article.
    
    Jim

    I think its wrong to take a life, no matter where, no matter what.
    
    Ben

    RE. .15
    
    I really suggest you go to the INDIA notesfile mentioned earlier
    and read those notes. India *has* had a history of
    killing/abandoning/removing/loosing/whatever female children. This
    is not to say many other countries don't have this same history,
    because many do to lesser or greater degrees. There is a very long
    history of doing away with female infants all around the globe for
    many thousands of years.
    
    In many cultures females are less "valuable" than males. You need them
    to farm, to provide for you in your old age, etc. But in a place, in
    particular, where there is a tradition of giving large doweries to
    brides, not only are females less valuable, they are a down-right
    liability. Having a family of girls could easily bankrupt a family. 
    
    This is simply a case of today's technology being applied to a much
    older problem, thereby creating new problems.
    
    Tamzen
    

    re:17
    Well put. OK lets rename the title to: Abortion Being Used For Femicide.
    I'm not one to get the whole story from the headlines, I usually
    have to read the topic, but I guess not everybody reads newspappers
    the same. I hope we don't  have to start drawing  pictures.
    
    Jim

RE: .4
    
>               -< It used to be called "the white man's burden" >-
>
>    Congratulations, judges.  Those of you who know whats best for India
>    please step right up and volunteer your opinions.  Pardon me while
>    I take my cultural ignorance off here to the side...
>    
>    DougO
    
    Thank you for saying what I had wanted to say.
    
    For the rest of you, I doubt if you would be able to pinpoint the
    location of India if I were to throw a globe at you.  Besides, what do
    _you_ want to do?  Abolish abortions in India?  That's the most
    ridiculous thing that I have heard in a long time!  And if you really
    want to do that, become an Indian citizen and get _elected_ to change
    Indian Laws. 

    If someone wants to discuss this issue rationally, they are more
    than welcome to join the conference VAXWRK::INDIA.
    
- Vikas

    The issue isn't India per se. Its abortion for the sake of femicide,
    and the problems associated with it. It just happens that India
    is a country practicing it. I happen to condemn it, like I would
    if they were commiting genocide.   
         
    Jim

    RE:.19
    Instead of getting all bent out of shape, maybe you could give us
    some information which would be of interest to the people of this
    file.  I don't, however, think questioning peoples knowledge of
    geography is any contribution at all.  I happen to agree with Jim.
    India is not the subject at hand, abortion as it relates to femicide
    is, as a global problem.  There are many things which were designed
    and performed in the name of right which were wrong wrong wrong.
    A prime example is the use of DDT as a pesticide, or agent orange
    as a defoliate.  Too often people are so wrapped up in what appears
    to be needed today to fix a problem that they don't use any foresight
    to see what the long range ramifications might be.  I see this as
    a basic problem with much that is going on today (including with
    abortion).
                                                      Mike

    Today, in WOMANNOTES, someone entered a similar topic, only there the
    people under discussion were the Chinese.  In China, dowry is not
    the problem--their "one family, one child" solution to population
    growth has been precipitating "femicide" for some time now.  Many men
    there cannot bear being deprived, by chance, the opportunity to ever
    father a son.  It has lead to many murders of newborn female babies as
    well as to a lot of mental breakdowns.

    Someone responding to the topic in WOMANNOTES made the point that this
    disruption of natural selection would, at least, result in their goal
    of stopping population growth.  If the practice becomes too widespread,
    it should also lead to some interesting cultural phenomena when women
    become a minority in the next generation.

    As others have pointed out, I don't think that we can judge them (or
    the Indians) since their cultural situation is very much different from
    our own.  Their overpopulation problem is *intense* -- it's imperative
    that they deal with it somehow.  That their child-quota laws have lead
    to this interesting wrinkle may be unfortunate, but not our problem.

    								-- Mike

   Re. .19 by Vikas Sontakke, 
        
>    For the rest of you, I doubt if you would be able to pinpoint the
>    location of India if I were to throw a globe at you.  Besides, what do

    That's not nice ! It's certainly annoying to be subjected to 
    (patronizing) advice, but we don't want to have the opposite situation:
    operating without feedback and sorrounding ourselves with
    like-minded people and agreeable opinions. Besides, we (Indians
    in India, recent immigrants, etc) are fairly brutal in our judgements
    about perceived deficiencies in this society. 
    
    Re. the actual issue involved : selective abortion as a feminist
    issue : I'm pessimistic. From what I understand, amniocentesis is
    a relatively simple technique, and a legal ban might just make it
    go underground. Abortion is legally permitted, anyway. 

    / Jon 
        

    RE: -1  What do you mean by that comment?  If you are saying that
    a natural ending of a pregnancy is the same as human mechanical
    or chemical intervention to end the pregnancy are the same, you
    are sadly mistaken.  
    
    One thing I have found out about most (not all) people who I have
    seen who are pro-abortion is that they have done very little, if not 
    zero research into the subject.  They have made up  there mind and
    that is it.  Most people (not all) I have dealt with who are
    anti-abortion have done alot of research on the subject and have
    made their decision based on this information.
    
    Now, before I get pummelled by people, I want to make it clear that
    this is from my own personal experience.  This is not a judgement,
    rather an observation.  Yes, some of the people I have talked to
    have had abortions and have performed abortions.  
    
                                                          Mike

    The word abortion originally meant the ending of a pregnancy without
    a living baby. The term spontaneous abortion still applies to
    the natural ending of a pregnancy.
    
    And once again, murder is the illegal killing of another human being.
    Since abortion is legal it is not murder. You can refer to it correctly
    as *killing* another being if you wish.

    Bonnie

re:28    
>    	If you think miscarriage doesn't fall into the category of
>    a mechanical or chemical intervention, *you* are sadly mistaken.
>    
>    	Now, they both result in expulsion of the fetus, so if one
>    is killing, are not they both killing?  If one is murder, what's
>    the other?

    Miscarriages are not planned. Abortions generally are. If a woman
    does something purposely to cause a miscariage, such as the coat
    hanger trick, then she has in effect performed an abortion.
    
    Jim

    re .29
    
    Are you reading my notes?
    
    THE TERM ABORTION INCLUDES BOTH NATURAL AND INDUCED TERMINATION
    OF A PREGNANCY.
    
    
    Bonnie

    
    The term 'abortion' does indeed cover all reasons for an 'aborted'
    pregnancy . But these days we tend to use miscarriage for the
    accidental and abortion for the pre-meditated types .
    
    Abortion in the above sense is - as defined by our statute laws -
    a lawful killing . If it ever becomes unlawful then a miscarriage
    (through neglect) may one day be open to a charge of manslaughter .
    
    Different countries , different customs , different morals .
          
    In China , a woman about to have her second child is given a choice.
    She will have to give back to the state all of the money she has
    received to support her family , her first child is removed from
    school and not allowed to return , her husbands job is put on the
    line , and her parents are shamed .
    Or , she must have the pregnancy terminated by a direct poisonous
    injection through her stomach .
     
    Some choice .
    
    John J

    RE:.27&.29  This seems to be a pretty pointless argument.  In todays 
    society an abortion is thought of as one done in an abortion clinic and
    a miscarriage as a spontaneous abortion.

    RE:.28  If you reread my note it says human mechanical or chemical
    intervention.  Although I think you know just what I mean.  I think
    *you* are just trying to argue over wording which *I* really don't
    want to get involved in.  It kind of seems like your grabbing at
    staws.  Not to be nasty, but it really does.
     
                                                  Mike

re:    
>    Are you reading my notes?
>    
>    THE TERM ABORTION INCLUDES BOTH NATURAL AND INDUCED TERMINATION
>    OF A PREGNANCY.
    
Argh, are you reading mine ? I said abortion GENERAllY is planned,
which means not always.
As 31 & 32 are saying, in todays understanding of it, abortion
is planned, and not naturally induced.
    
    Peace
    Jim 
    
    

    Just because people use a word incorrectly doesn't make the
    meaning different.
    
    Peace also
    
    Bonnie

From the American Heritage Dictionary

    abortion n. 1. Induced premature termination of pregnancy or development

That seems reasonably specific. It also seems to include the word induced.

    From the American Heritage Dictionary
    
    abortion n. 2. A fatally premature expulsion of an embryo or fetus
    from the uterus.
    
    Medically the term abortion is used to mean the same as miscarriage
    in the case of 'spontaneous abortion', which is distinguished from
    induced abortion. The word has come to mean only the latter to
    the general public but that still doesn't make the term correct.
    
    Bonnie

   <<< Note 268.36 by WMOIS::B_REINKE "As true as water, as true as light" >>>
                               -< one more try >-


Silly me, using the primary definition, when you have a much better one handy.

    The secondary definition is still a valid definition for a word.
    And Medically the words are used as I described.
    
    Bonnie

    Can we change the title of this note to "Redundant Semantic Nitpicking"?