China's birth limits create dangerous gender gap

[Randy W]

 

Except this report states the opposite...

 

http://www.insightbureau.com/insight_artic...urent.Nov08.pdf

 

Statistics.... well... I think most know the saying..

 

but I do find this link is how I have felt... and I've asked in the past if anyone has heard of the Tb--son born relationship... which this link is one of the rare ones to mention.

 

Maybe we look for stats which support our own views

 

 

The study is about urban vs. rural, not across provinces

 

There is a simple principle at play here that I thought everyone understood - the "One child policy" does not cause any births, does not cause any deaths, before or after child birth, and will NOT by itself affect the ratio of male to female births. The ratio at conception is 50:50 regardless of any previous or future births or potential births. The one-child policy does not change this, nor does it change the ratio at birth (usually considered to be 1.7 to 1). What DOES change this ratio is the number of selective abortions, or any other survivability factors. If a couple keeps trying, keeps having girls (or aborting them) until they finally have a boy, it doesn't matter - the ratio is the same for each one. Only the selective abortion of females can change this ratio.

 

So his statement that ¡­" the data suggests that it might actually only have a minor causative role, and that the bias is more a function of relative education standards and traditionalism" is of course true, simply because the one-child policy does not (directly) cause abortion.

 

He did NOT study these factors across provinces, only between urban and rural.

[IllinoisDave]

 

Except this report states the opposite...

 

http://www.insightbureau.com/insight_artic...urent.Nov08.pdf

 

Statistics.... well... I think most know the saying..

 

but I do find this link is how I have felt... and I've asked in the past if anyone has heard of the Tb--son born relationship... which this link is one of the rare ones to mention.

 

Maybe we look for stats which support our own views

 

 

The study is about urban vs. rural, not across provinces

 

There is a simple principle at play here that I thought everyone understood - the "One child policy" does not cause any births, does not cause any deaths, before or after child birth, and will NOT by itself affect the ratio of male to female births. The ratio at conception is 50:50 regardless of any previous or future births or potential births. The one-child policy does not change this, nor does it change the ratio at birth (usually considered to be 1.7 to 1). What DOES change this ratio is the number of selective abortions, or any other survivability factors. If a couple keeps trying, keeps having girls (or aborting them) until they finally have a boy, it doesn't matter - the ratio is the same for each one. Only the selective abortion of females can change this ratio.

 

So his statement that …" the data suggests that it might actually only have a minor causative role, and that the bias is more a function of relative education standards and traditionalism" is of course true, simply because the one-child policy does not (directly) cause abortion.

 

He did NOT study these factors across provinces, only between urban and rural.

Exactly. And the stats I cited make no mention of the one-child policy, only the gender imbalance. And the study doesn't attribute that imbalance solely to the policy.

[whome?]

 

Except this report states the opposite...

 

http://www.insightbureau.com/insight_artic...urent.Nov08.pdf

 

Statistics.... well... I think most know the saying..

 

but I do find this link is how I have felt... and I've asked in the past if anyone has heard of the Tb--son born relationship... which this link is one of the rare ones to mention.

 

Maybe we look for stats which support our own views

 

 

The study is about urban vs. rural, not across provinces

 

There is a simple principle at play here that I thought everyone understood - the "One child policy" does not cause any births, does not cause any deaths, before or after child birth, and will NOT by itself affect the ratio of male to female births. The ratio at conception is 50:50 regardless of any previous or future births or potential births. The one-child policy does not change this, nor does it change the ratio at birth (usually considered to be 1.7 to 1). What DOES change this ratio is the number of selective abortions, or any other survivability factors. If a couple keeps trying, keeps having girls (or aborting them) until they finally have a boy, it doesn't matter - the ratio is the same for each one. Only the selective abortion of females can change this ratio.

 

So his statement that ¡­" the data suggests that it might actually only have a minor causative role, and that the bias is more a function of relative education standards and traditionalism" is of course true, simply because the one-child policy does not (directly) cause abortion.

 

He did NOT study these factors across provinces, only between urban and rural.

 

You are right Randy but the one-child policy does "cause" the gender imbalance because of the perference for sons over daughters in the past 20 years usually in the rural areas.

 

The topic of the post was does this gender imbalance create a possible problem for the future. The article David provided stated at the end: "The question that needs to be addressed, is how will this surplus of males be managed?" This is the question.

 

However it seems Jin and Lilic want to beleive hte problem is not real no matter how many reports from the Chinese government you provide.

 

Does not matter to me .. I have my Chinese wife so I do not need to worry.

[whome?]

you know this very privince biased ?

 

in yunnan there is no restriction (imposed) on villages or a preference for gender on children.

Also most dont care in cities (yunnan) if children are girls or boys, I realise this is different in the north and east in some cities and villages, but it is changing.

Not province-based according to further statistics from the study:

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2216236/

 

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas. However, the ratio rose very steeply for second and higher order births in cities 138 (132 to 144), towns 137 (131 to 143), and rural areas 146 (143 to 149), although the numbers of second order births in cities were low. These rises were consistent across all provinces, except Tibet, with very high figures for second births in Anhui (190, 176 to 205) and Jiangsu (192, 174 to 212).

Except this report states the opposite...

 

http://www.insightbureau.com/insight_artic...urent.Nov08.pdf

 

Statistics.... well... I think most know the saying..

 

but I do find this link is how I have felt... and I've asked in the past if anyone has heard of the Tb--son born relationship... which this link is one of the rare ones to mention.

 

Maybe we look for stats which support our own views

 

What do you mean by we look for stats that support our own views? The article you provided here is a very good one and provides two reasons for the upcoming large gender imbalance in China (Tb and Birth Sex selection). However it also verfies the orther articles on here from the Chinese government. So I am confused how anyone is using stats to support their own view.

[whome?]

Fact: there is a govt policy of 1 child

Fact: the enforcement is different depending on location or who the person is

Fact: the gender balance is not what would be normal without the policy in place

Concern/Topic: this will cause some problems in future (as discussed in Chinese and global media)

Debateable: usa gov't is more rigid than chinese gov't

 

What you said was fine and true but does not change the fact that the current policy has caused a gender imbalance. in some areas and for some people the policy is not an issue or enforced but overall it is. what was the point of your post .. that the issue does not exist?

 

And you did not need to include the last part... both gov't have policies and laws and both gov't allow exceptions based on who you are, connections, and money.

\

 

I think you made a mistake of generalization of the problems back in China. -- The Chinese government says the gender imbalance is a problem and have/are taking actions to correct. I did not generalize anything about China. I took issue to Jin's statement that this is not a whole China problem - it will be a nationwide problem.

 

For what seems like the 1,000th time I will say live in China and love it and hte people. This does not mean I cannot see something negative in China just like I see many negative things in USA about our life and people....

 

Yes, we have the birth control policy, one family one child. Do you have problems with that and want to see by next century there are no other races than Chinese/ -- I have no problem with the policy and never said I did.

 

Yes, the minorities have their special policies, but to say they reproduct as rabbits are rude and out of touch with reality. I think there are limit to two or three. --

 

Yes, there are some people back in China trying to kiss the people in charge's face just to have more kids.... but isnt that corruption happening everywhere in the world, including in USA? -- Yes corruption happens everywhere especially in the USA. I like China better because usually the corruption is in the open. Everybody knows it and understands it. In the USA we like to pretend it does not exist and then are surprised at people like the former AG of New York.

 

And there are a few who care boys more than girls, but then again, you cant generalize it, in which Jin is right: not all Chinese care about the gender of the kids. You cant say the birth control policy causes a gender inbalance, there is always a gender inbalance. If memory serves me right, the number in America is 1:1.o4 and china is 1:1.06? What a big deal? See the articles from your own government. It will become a problem and in some areas like Hainan it is already a problem.

[GZBILL]

you know this very privince biased ?

 

in yunnan there is no restriction (imposed) on villages or a preference for gender on children.

Also most dont care in cities (yunnan) if children are girls or boys, I realise this is different in the north and east in some cities and villages, but it is changing.

 

Not so. It is not based on province.

 

What happens is that in some provinces there are certain ethnic groups and any ethnic group that is not Han is legally allowed to reproduce like rabbits. Han Chinese in Yunnan are under the population planning rules.

 

true and not true, china is not as rigid as usa govt control

 

Not a very lucid statement that anybody who has been in China for more than 4 days would find true.

 

When the Chinese government wants to exercise control, they can do it very rigidly and in the most brutal ways imaginable.

 

Oh, really? Show us an example.

 

As far as I know, when the fishing ship went to the coatline of Russia, the Russians fired at them, killing 7 out of 16.

 

Last month, the same thing happened in the Chinese coast line by American so called research ship, did we kill the Americans? Negative.

 

You must be confused.

 

Tiananmen, Tibet ... dozens -- if not hundreds -- of lesser incidents of the government exercising brutal control.

 

For those who are not freethinkers, I did not say that any forms of rigid, brutal control are wrong. I simply say that it exists here and, more often than not, much more than in the USA.

[GZBILL]

I thought these were an interesting comments:

 

While popularly referred to as the "one child policy", the rule actually restricts just 35.9 percent of the population to having one child, Yu Xuejun, a spokesman with the commission, said in a Webcast on the government's website (www.gov.cn).

 

Except in Central China's Henan Province, couples can have two children if they are both only children, he said.

 

In addition, more than 11 percent of the population, mostly minority groups, is free to have two or more children, he said.

 

http://chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-07/11/...ent_5432238.htm

 

Han people are free to have more than one child; they just have to pay more tax. A few families do it, but to what I've heard others at my office share, there aren't that many Han that have a second child.

 

This is false.

 

Those that are subject to the one-child policy do not have to pay a tax to have subsequent children.

 

If they ignore the law, are not persuaded by the prevailing government sanctions and still have the child then there is a) a fine and another even greater expense to obtain hukou for the child.

[GZBILL]

If you want lots of babies, any Lao Wai can come to China and become a baby factory. I just looked out my window and saw a blond Lao Wai pushing a baby carriage (infant inside), with two little Chinese children in tow, and a bun in the oven...

 

Also false.

 

Expats married to Chinese are, in some provinces / municipalities, also subject to the one-child policy.

 

Although there was once a time when an informal agreement between the US embassy and Chinese government which permitted US citizens married to Chinese citizens to be "exempt" from the family planning rules, that is no longer the case.

 

Depending on each province's effectiveness in controlling the birth rate -- as determined by the central government -- certain provinces no longer take into consideration that one of the spouses is not Chinese. One such province is Guangdong -- especially Guangzhou -- and, if I am not mistaken, Zhejiang Province.

[GZBILL]

I thought these were an interesting comments:

 

While popularly referred to as the "one child policy", the rule actually restricts just 35.9 percent of the population to having one child, Yu Xuejun, a spokesman with the commission, said in a Webcast on the government's website (www.gov.cn).

 

Except in Central China's Henan Province, couples can have two children if they are both only children, he said.

 

In addition, more than 11 percent of the population, mostly minority groups, is free to have two or more children, he said.

 

http://chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-07/11/...ent_5432238.htm

 

Han people are free to have more than one child; they just have to pay more tax. A few families do it, but to what I've heard others at my office share, there aren't that many Han that have a second child.

 

I am certainly no expert on China's policy, but according the the article referenced above and my fiancee, if both parents are the only child, they are free to have another child without penalty. The idea is that the two children replace the parents without increasing the population. My experience is limited to Shanghai. I'd say most of the people i know have a sibling. My first gf had a sister. My fiancee has a sister (as I understand it, her father was jailed for this offense until the relatives bailed him out). Most of the people at work have a sibling. True, many of these are before the policy was implemented. They can indeed have more children, but they pay a stiff penalty.

 

It is not true that throughout China that couples that are both only children can have more than one child. This policy is allowed by the central government but actual implementation is left to municipal and provincial governments. Many cities -- especially Guangzhou -- make no exceptions whatsoever in these cases.

[whome?]

I thought these were an interesting comments:

 

While popularly referred to as the "one child policy", the rule actually restricts just 35.9 percent of the population to having one child, Yu Xuejun, a spokesman with the commission, said in a Webcast on the government's website (www.gov.cn).

 

Except in Central China's Henan Province, couples can have two children if they are both only children, he said.

 

In addition, more than 11 percent of the population, mostly minority groups, is free to have two or more children, he said.

 

http://chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-07/11/...ent_5432238.htm

 

Han people are free to have more than one child; they just have to pay more tax. A few families do it, but to what I've heard others at my office share, there aren't that many Han that have a second child.

 

This is false.

 

Those that are subject to the one-child policy do not have to pay a tax to have subsequent children.

 

If they ignore the law, are not persuaded by the prevailing government sanctions and still have the child then there is a) a fine and another even greater expense to obtain hukou for the child.

 

This was true for my in-laws. They had three children. They both workedfor hte government but when they decided to have the second child they had to resign their posts, pay a very large fine, and large cost for hukou registration. They had two more children because they wanted do. 2 girls and 1 boy.

[GZBILL]

I thought these were an interesting comments:

 

While popularly referred to as the "one child policy", the rule actually restricts just 35.9 percent of the population to having one child, Yu Xuejun, a spokesman with the commission, said in a Webcast on the government's website (www.gov.cn).

 

Except in Central China's Henan Province, couples can have two children if they are both only children, he said.

 

In addition, more than 11 percent of the population, mostly minority groups, is free to have two or more children, he said.

 

http://chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-07/11/...ent_5432238.htm

 

Han people are free to have more than one child; they just have to pay more tax. A few families do it, but to what I've heard others at my office share, there aren't that many Han that have a second child.

 

This is false.

 

Those that are subject to the one-child policy do not have to pay a tax to have subsequent children.

 

If they ignore the law, are not persuaded by the prevailing government sanctions and still have the child then there is a) a fine and another even greater expense to obtain hukou for the child.

 

This was true for my in-laws. They had three children. They both workedfor hte government but when they decided to have the second child they had to resign their posts, pay a very large fine, and large cost for hukou registration. They had two more children because they wanted do. 2 girls and 1 boy.

 

Yes, that is the way it generally works.

 

Those who are civil servants virtually always lose their jobs. Even those who work for MNCs are not immune. While my company will not go out of its way to fire those who break the one-child policy, we will not allow them any insurance coverage or maternity benefits. If -- and it does happen -- the government tells us that one of our employees is breaking the one-child policy and expects us to take action, the employee will be summarily fired with no termination benefits.

 

Smaller companies and private companies may not care at all.

[david_dawei]

I said my study showed the opposite of,

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas.

 

I guess I have to quote it twice now

 

My only meaning to "using stats to prove one's point" is that, as anyone searches the web, they will run across an article, a stat, a proposal which resonants with them... the article I quoted matched to some of my previous thinking which I could not find often support for easily... So Latched on to it. I'm not sure how others choose their articles. But the Tb thing has been with me for years and few comment on it.

[whome?]

I said my study showed the opposite of,

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas.

 

I guess I have to quote it twice now

 

My only meaning to "using stats to prove one's point" is that, as anyone searches the web, they will run across an article, a stat, a proposal which resonants with them... the article I quoted matched to some of my previous thinking which I could not find often support for easily... So Latched on to it. I'm not sure how others choose their articles. But the Tb thing has been with me for years and few comment on it.

 

I guess I have to ask you to read your first quote a third time :

 

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas. However, the ratio rose very steeply for second and higher order births in cities 138 (132 to 144), towns 137 (131 to 143), and rural areas 146 (143 to 149), although the numbers of second order births in cities were low. These rises were consistent across all provinces, except Tibet, with very high figures for second births in Anhui (190, 176 to 205) and Jiangsu (192, 174 to 212).

 

Your posted article comes to the same conclusion as others. There is a gender imbalnce in the younger generations. The difference is your article provides two valid reasons for the difference not just one.

 

The only reason anyone posted any articles was in response to those who said gender imbalance does not exist within China and is not a problem but rather implying it is western propoganda and false generalizations.

[david_dawei]

I said my study showed the opposite of,

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas.

 

I guess I have to quote it twice now

 

My only meaning to "using stats to prove one's point" is that, as anyone searches the web, they will run across an article, a stat, a proposal which resonants with them... the article I quoted matched to some of my previous thinking which I could not find often support for easily... So Latched on to it. I'm not sure how others choose their articles. But the Tb thing has been with me for years and few comment on it.

 

I guess I have to ask you to read your first quote a third time :

 

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas. However, the ratio rose very steeply for second and higher order births in cities 138 (132 to 144), towns 137 (131 to 143), and rural areas 146 (143 to 149), although the numbers of second order births in cities were low. These rises were consistent across all provinces, except Tibet, with very high figures for second births in Anhui (190, 176 to 205) and Jiangsu (192, 174 to 212).

 

Your posted article comes to the same conclusion as others. There is a gender imbalnce in the younger generations. The difference is your article provides two valid reasons for the difference not just one.

 

The only reason anyone posted any articles was in response to those who said gender imbalance does not exist within China and is not a problem but rather implying it is western propoganda and false generalizations.

I really hate it when someone makes me read a link I posted It makes me leave the playing field of instinctual thought to rational logic

 

ok... your right.. on third viewing ... I deleted my excuse... no need to insert both feet

 

I think the gender gap is quite universally seen as produced by the one child policy; there are very easy stats to show it.

 

On the enforcement side, it is nothing less than the many key's which can open pandora box; both legal means and illegal extortions, exceptions for farmers, humanitarian changes (ie: after the earth quake), and ultimately there are revolts for the heavy fines given to some while the city slickers deliver on a red carpet (that is a reference to the movie celebrities which were known to exceed the limit without any punishment).

 

While their focus is on the birth end, most of us should realize that by marrying a chinese lady, we make the count worse; and if she has a daugther, the sins of the forefathers as they say... pass down a generation for the worse... the daughter is now not marriagable and any her potential offspring as well.

 

I grew up in Maryland which is known for it's crabs around the Chesapeake Bay area... but it was well followed that you threw the female crabs back into the water (out of the traps)...

 

I always found it ironic that when I was in a chinese market in the US, almost regardless of the chinatown city, that whenever I saw crabs I aways looked to see the gender ratio.... and they usually had mostly female crabs... I thought, this gender gap problem doesn't even find empahty in the marine world either...

[whome?]

I said my study showed the opposite of,

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas.

 

I guess I have to quote it twice now

 

My only meaning to "using stats to prove one's point" is that, as anyone searches the web, they will run across an article, a stat, a proposal which resonants with them... the article I quoted matched to some of my previous thinking which I could not find often support for easily... So Latched on to it. I'm not sure how others choose their articles. But the Tb thing has been with me for years and few comment on it.

 

I guess I have to ask you to read your first quote a third time :

 

The sex ratio at birth for first order births was slightly high in cities and towns but was within normal limits in rural areas. However, the ratio rose very steeply for second and higher order births in cities 138 (132 to 144), towns 137 (131 to 143), and rural areas 146 (143 to 149), although the numbers of second order births in cities were low. These rises were consistent across all provinces, except Tibet, with very high figures for second births in Anhui (190, 176 to 205) and Jiangsu (192, 174 to 212).

 

Your posted article comes to the same conclusion as others. There is a gender imbalnce in the younger generations. The difference is your article provides two valid reasons for the difference not just one.

 

The only reason anyone posted any articles was in response to those who said gender imbalance does not exist within China and is not a problem but rather implying it is western propoganda and false generalizations.

I really hate it when someone makes me read a link I posted It makes me leave the playing field of instinctual thought to rational logic

 

ok... your right.. on third viewing ... I deleted my excuse... no need to insert both feet

 

I think the gender gap is quite universally seen as produced by the one child policy; there are very easy stats to show it.

 

On the enforcement side, it is nothing less than the many key's which can open pandora box; both legal means and illegal extortions, exceptions for farmers, humanitarian changes (ie: after the earth quake), and ultimately there are revolts for the heavy fines given to some while the city slickers deliver on a red carpet (that is a reference to the movie celebrities which were known to exceed the limit without any punishment).

 

While their focus is on the birth end, most of us should realize that by marrying a chinese lady, we make the count worse; and if she has a daugther, the sins of the forefathers as they say... pass down a generation for the worse... the daughter is now not marriagable and any her potential offspring as well.

 

I grew up in Maryland which is known for it's crabs around the Chesapeake Bay area... but it was well followed that you threw the female crabs back into the water (out of the traps)...

 

I always found it ironic that when I was in a chinese market in the US, almost regardless of the chinatown city, that whenever I saw crabs I aways looked to see the gender ratio.... and they usually had mostly female crabs... I thought, this gender gap problem doesn't even find empahty in the marine world either...

 

Mei Wen Ti .. I was just thinking I must have missed something in the article.

 

Poor crabs .... by I think my beautiful mixed daughter will have no problem to marry .... if I let any boy close enough to her to get married