Hacker News Reader

Comment by ZeroGravitas | Hacker News Reader

> 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

View on HN

>But we do..

Who is 'we' here? USA? Canada?

Obviously not. In those countries it's the male fetuses that are more likely to be aborted.

you 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?

>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.

OK, well, I guess you're right that "our society" does not value boys over girls as much as China and India. I don't really see the relevance if you're arguing "no, sex-selective abortions will not happen."

>I don't really see the relevance if you're arguing "no, sex-selective abortions will not happen."

OP argued that there will be abortions based on sexual orientation as a justification for hiding research results from the public. As one of my counter-arguments, I argued that this isn't inevitable by providing a counter-example of lack of sex-selective abortions in most of the world (specifically the society I grew up in).

> >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.

>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"?

> >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?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com