Words of Death: It’s a Girl

Several countries in South Asia are notorious for killing girls—before or after birth.  In fact, it’s considered a “practice” in these countries.  Parents who can afford an ultrasound to find out if their baby is a girl and pay for an abortion often do so.  Poorer parents just wait until their baby is born.  If she’s a girl, she’s killed or left to die alone.  The countries participating in this gendercide are China, India, Taiwan, South Korea, Pakistan, and likely more.

The U.N. has reported that 113-200 million girls and women who should be here aren’t.  They are “the missing.”  Many of these missing girls were aborted or killed after birth.  The U.N. specifically attributes these figures to infanticide or girls not getting as much food and medical attention as their brothers or fathers.  To put it in perspective, Ram Mashru reports, “India and China are said to eliminate more female infants than the number of girls born in the US each year.”

In 2005, the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) put out a researched document entitled Women in an Insecure World.  Although with horrors committed against women such as “honor killings,” acid attacks for refusing a suitor, sexual exploitation, and human trafficking, this document mentions the effect that female gendercide has had on the world.  Taking all of these horrors together (with the abortions and infanticide contributing the largest numbers of deaths), here’s what DCAF wrote:

The number of the ‘missing’ women, killed for gender-related reasons, is of the same order of magnitude as the estimated 191 million human beings who have lost their lives directly or indirectly as a result of all the conflicts and wars of the 20th century—which was, with two world wars and numerous other murderous conflicts, the most violent period in human history so far.

A sustained demographic ‘deficit’ of 100-200 million women implies that each year 1.5-3 million girls and women are killed through gender related violence.  In comparison:  each year, some 2.8 million people die of AIDS, 1.27 million of malaria.  Or, put in the most horrible terms:  violence against women causes every 2-4 years a mountain of corpses equal to the Jewish Holocaust.

This is horrific, on so many levels.  But female gendercide is the natural consequence of “free choice” for all.  When people believe that the lives of their children are in their own hands and that they can choose to either keep or kill an already created child, this is exactly what happens.  We thought that abortion and “choice” would give us a world where women were empowered and valued to a greater degree.  It has given us just the opposite.  StopIt is no surprise, given their track record, that Planned Parenthood and NARAL–organizations who claim to be so pro-woman–actually oppose sex-selection abortion bans.

The mindset prevalent in South Asia isn’t a whole lot different from the mindset of abortion supporters in the U.S.  Now, I know many of you are going to object to this.  Very few Americans actually abort their children based on gender (though it definitely happens).  However, what’s the point behind aborting a female child?  In South Asia, it’s not convenient to give birth to a daughter.  You have to pay a dowry for her; she doesn’t earn you any money (unless, of course, you sell her into human trafficking, but that’s a whole separate issue.)  Sound familiar?  In American, if it’s not convenient for us to have a baby; if the baby will cost us too much money, we just kill it.  Same problem; same answer.

Now, granted, there are far more problems in South Asia related to the killing of little women than we have here in the U.S.  For example, some mothers are in fear of their own lives if they do not produce a male heir.  Other women fear that, since their government only allows them to have one child, only a son can provide for them in their old age.  Do these reasons justify the abortions or infanticide of girls?  No.  They don’t.  But, we can admit that any woman who keeps her daughter in spite of these circumstances is a very brave person.

What’s doubly sad is that female gendercide often includes women killing women.  So much for women’s empowerment.  Mothers—or their women friends—are usually the ones to perform an abortion if they can’t afford a doctor.  Mothers are often the ones to strangle or otherwise murder their daughters after birth.  Women killing women.  What a sad world “choice” has brought us.

Be on the lookout for “It’s a Girl”, a documentary coming out later this year that discusses this widespread tragedy of killing girls before and after they are born.

  • http://www.facebook.com/RachelElessar Rachel Ford

    With all due respect…why on earth would you want these girls born into a culture where, as you say, they will die due to less medical care; they will be sold into sexual slavery; or they will be put into a situation where they will fear for their lives if they don’t provide a male heir for their husbands? What sort of life is that?? Is life ‘for the sake of life’ really the end-all-be-all, even if it’s a life of absolute hell? Does quality of life not matter? You really think it’s better to be born into a life where all you will ever know is abuse, end up a sex slave, and die prematurely in a brothel, or maybe live until you have no more “value” to the brothel, and then end up on the streets, a pariah?
    We are more merciful to animals — when there is no quality of life for them, we put them down. If these fetus’ grew into girls, many if not most of them would either have died in childhood or gone on to live miserable lives and be forced to repeat this cycle. What is the purpose of being born only to suffer and make more people who will suffer like you have?

    • Guest

      But you’re missing the big picture, Rachel. If there were a larger availability of women, would we -need- a sex trafficking trade?  Killing a baby girl to keep her from a brothel is not the answer. Educating our sons that women are more than the body parts they covet is the answer.  Actually valuing women as more than sex objects (ironically a by-product of the more recent feminist movement) is the answer.  Not killing them.

      The answer is a cultural shift towards valuing human life, not a cultural shift in the opposite direction, devaluing life further by allowing the legal murder of those we consider “inconvenience”.

      • Guest

        I don’t mean to imply, by the way, that a sex trafficking trade is necessary. It’s not, and it’s repulsive.  But part of the success of the sex trafficking world is the lack of women in certain parts of the world, combined with the fact that men (not all but certainly a large percentage) view women as merely objects of sexual pleasure to be thrown away when they are done with them.  Women are disposable and the babies they carry are disposable, in a nutshell.

        By making women more scarce, they’ve increased the FINANCIAL WORTH of women (as in, how much money someone can bring in by exploiting the women that are present), while at the same time annihilating the VALUE of a women.

        • http://www.facebook.com/RachelElessar Rachel Ford

          Sex trafficking happens all over the world, including in this country and others where women are not “scarce”. Scarcity is not the reason people prey on other people.
          I should also point out that women are not the only victims of sex trafficking (although they are the most frequently exploited). Boys are victims of this as well. Consider the “dancing boys” of Afghanistan — also sold for the sexual pleasure of men who would exploit them.

          • Guest

            Again, it’s all about fighting to make all life sacred, whether that’s females, young boys, old men or the unborn.  Just because it happens all over the world doesn’t make it right. Just because it happens to children of all ages of both genders doesn’t make it right. And just because we can kill our children in the womb doesn’t make it right.

            I repeat (once again, like a broken record), then answer is a complete shift in our society and around the world in how we view women, life, the unborn, and any other objectified and exploited group, and doing everything we can to reinforce the sacredness of being a human being.  In all cultures, around the world. 

      • http://www.facebook.com/RachelElessar Rachel Ford

        If people respect women, yes, there is hope. But we’re talking about people and cultures/sub cultures that do not. That is the problem.

        You don’t really think that there is a “need” for sex trafficking, do you? Or do you think that all Johns are single, lonely guys who just need some time with a female? Of course not. They are guys who want a “new” woman, no strings attached. There will always be guys who would rather pay a small amount of money for a woman they can do whatever they want to outside of their real relationship, or in place of a real relationship.

        I seriously doubt that western feminism is the cause of devaluing females in the cultures we are talking about — not least of all since these problems far predate modern feminism… Heck, back to Muhammad’s day in Arabia, they were killing female children after birth for the same reasons (and he actually outlawed the practice); this is not a “new” phenomena, and it’s quite silly to lay this at the feet of feminism…

        • Anonymous

          Wow, you’re really sure you know everything — including what’s in people’s minds! It’s also telling you praise a child rapist like Mohammed, and find no irony in the mutilation of women’s genitals in the countries where his religion reigns. Really, your willingness to shrug off this horror is amazing. I guess it’s the same mentality that said, “Eh, if it’s so bad in Nazi Germany, the Jews are better of dead.” That’s actually what Ghandi said in his letter to his friend Hitler: They should have all just committed suicide.

          Forgive those of us who are quaint and unenlightened enough to oppose infanticide.

          • http://www.facebook.com/RachelElessar Rachel Ford

            Muhammad and Islam have nothing to do with FGM; it is a cultural practice that some groups who adopted Islam incorporated into their religious practice, but it was ADDED to Islam (as practiced by SOME Muslims), not a RESULT of Islam.
            Furthermore, it isn’t “praising” someone to state fact. Muhammad did end the practice of killing newborn girls. You might be so blinded by your hate of Muhammad that you can’t admit any fact that reflects positively on him, but that’s your problem, not mine.
            Finally, I was specifically discussing gender-based abortions, not “infanticide”. I’m not talking about killing a living human being, but of preventing a human being whose life will be only misery. Is it a good thing? No. But until the world is at a place where the little girl that fetus could become has a shot at any quality of life (which, by the fact that her potential parents would abort her because, as a female, she is not “worth” it, indicates that she doesn’t), what is the point? The author doesn’t offer any real solutions to that; all she does is cry that millions more people were not made and made to live miserable lives.

          • http://www.facebook.com/jeep.obsessed Brooke Mehr

            “I’m not talking about killing a living human being, but of preventing a human being whose life will be only misery.”

            Did you miss the part of the article that discussed the girls that were born and then left to die? Do you not consider even a child that has been born a “living human being”?

            “the little girl that fetus could become”

            So when does it become a little girl? According to you, it is not even a girl when it can be seen as female on an ultrasound. If it is not a girl at that point, when is it?

          • Jodi

            You are kidding yourself. That fetus IS that little girl already! So you should just kill her and rip her from her mothers womb before she can be born? Isn’t that child abuse? I am talking about fully formed babies that feel the pains of that knife slicing her up alive! The word fetus is just a word! It actually means little one in latin. It doesn’t mean unhuman!

    • Anonymous

      It’s sad to see someone, presumably a woman, rationalize murder. Did you read where it says live, cooing, breathing INFANTS are left alone to starve to death or murdered while they’re alive? You really think that’s better — and you really think the answer to how poor women have it in these “cultures,” which you apparently assume are better than ours, is to murder all the women in them? If this was happening in America, and these were white babies, I’m pretty sure you’d have another opinion. Actually, I often hear America is a bad place for women, so perhaps someone will decide you’d be better off dead and hold a pillow over your face until you stop breathing.

      Don’t go struggling, hnow. You’re better off.

      • http://www.facebook.com/RachelElessar Rachel Ford

        Umm, you’re sort of contradicting yourself here. In one breath, you think that I’m saying these cultures are “better than ours”, and then you suggest I wouldn’t “rationalize murder” if the people were American (presumably, the culture I like less). So, are you saying that I love those cultures more than ours, or less??
        Do I think it’s better for someone to never be born than know only suffering and abuse? Absolutely. I don’t care if they are “white” and “American” or “green” and “Martian”. The whole point of the article is that these girls weren’t born because their culture, or the subset of it that their parents exist in, completely devalues women; that the women who are born end up dying because of lack of medical care, get trafficked into the sex trade, etc. To complain that someone wasn’t born into a life that is pure and utter hell seems, well, cruel. In many of these cases, it never got to the “someone” point…a genetic blueprint was created, and then destroyed, before a human being ever came of it.
        Here’s something that’ll no doubt blow your mind. I also support end-of-life rights — because, to me, “life” is nothing without “quality of life”. Life becomes a punishment, in fact. If someone’s quality of life has degraded to a point where there is no value left in it, I believe they have the right to end their suffering.
        It’s really pretty sad that you feel you have to sink to contradictory racism and pseudo-threats to get your point across…always a sign of a strong position.

        • Guest

          So you don’t buy into the basic tenet of personhood.  It’s not a ‘genetic blueprint’. It’s a baby. An old enough baby, as a matter of fact, to be able to determine from ultrasound whether that child is male or female.  So no, it’s not “Potential”. It’s a life.  And that life gets cruelly cut short before he or she even has a chance to live.  And you say that’s totally fine, because that child could be born into a family that doesn’t love her or want him or her.  So again, you’re saying that the cultural shift of making it okay to kill this baby is the answer, instead of the cultural shift of making -all- human life sacred.

          Also, it doesn’t blow my mind that you’re all for end of life care.  Because most people who are for abortion are also for euthanasia.  You’re not really surprising anyone with that statement.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jeep.obsessed Brooke Mehr

      So you’re thinking isn’t to fix the problem it is to “save” the girls from the possible/probable hardships by taking their lives? How does that seem right? Kill them so they don’t have a hard life…

      And, when you mention “quality of life” that screams eugenics in my mind. Not your comment, but the idea that some may as well not live if their “quality of life” isn’t what we would all consider ideal.

      • http://www.facebook.com/RachelElessar Rachel Ford

        “So you’re thinking isn’t to fix the problem it is to “save” the girls
        from the possible/probable hardships by taking their lives?”
        I would absolutely support a realistic solution to save these girls from a hellish existence over aborting them, especially later term abortions. I don’t see a solution in this article, though, only moralizing. It’s well and good to say that we need to start “valuing” life, but linking these issues to western abortion is silly as these cultural ideas predate abortion; show me how we can impact these girl’s lives in a meaningful life, and I will gladly listen.

        ” but the idea that some may as well not live if their “quality of life” isn’t what we would all consider ideal.”
        A life as a sex slave isn’t just what I wouldn’t “consider ideal”. I am not saying that this is a great solution. What I am saying is that the abortions are a symptom of the problem. Fixing the symptom, when it’s going to only lead to more suffering for those kids and then their offspring too, isn’t a better solution. That’s my point.

    • Jodi

      Rachel,,  Think about what you are saying. They are already living, feeling pain little babies. Is it not child abuse to cut them up alive and tear them from their mothers body? So we should torture and murder these children just in case the may be abused after they are born. I am talking about the millions of babies aborted way after when they are completely developed, old enough to feel every slice of the knife or burning of the acid used to kill them . If you think they aren’t living human beings then why don’t they just induce labor and not harm the child. Let them be born, then decide if they are real babies or not! Many are born alive too and are killed or left to die. I would kill myself before I would do this to an innocent little child. By the way, fetus means little one one in latin. It is only a word!