Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /afs/ir.stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/wpmu-settings.php on line 45

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /afs/ir.stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/wpmu-settings.php:45) in /afs/ir.stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Elephant in the room…part 2 http://stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/familyplanning/2008/11/13/elephant-in-the-roompart-2/ Subject to Terms of Use: See http://www.stanford.edu/home/atoz/terms.html Sat, 12 Sep 2009 00:15:21 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Maggie Chen http://stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/familyplanning/2008/11/13/elephant-in-the-roompart-2/comment-page-1/#comment-283 Maggie Chen Sun, 16 Nov 2008 06:41:03 +0000 http://stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/familyplanning/?p=101#comment-283 I like how you straight-forwardly stated the larger question you've been trying to answer throughout the entries. I don't think you can remove gender bias from a reproduction or sexual health-related system. Ideas about what it means to be a man or a woman (or perhaps transgender or a different gender) and the positive and negative implications of those meanings will always be around. However, I do think that you can bring more equality to how population control systems view gender. Throughout your dialogue on China, I kept thinking, "Where are the vasectomies??" If the government is offering, and perhaps pushing, birth control and sterilization for women, they should devote an equal amount of attention to men (vasectomy and maybe condoms would be the main ones, until we develop a darn birth control pill for men, we can talk more about this if you want). This assumes a perspective that men and women have somewhat equal hands in the creation of a fetus, but I think this might have a shot at changing the gender bias in population control. I like how you straight-forwardly stated the larger question you’ve been trying to answer throughout the entries. I don’t think you can remove gender bias from a reproduction or sexual health-related system. Ideas about what it means to be a man or a woman (or perhaps transgender or a different gender) and the positive and negative implications of those meanings will always be around. However, I do think that you can bring more equality to how population control systems view gender. Throughout your dialogue on China, I kept thinking, “Where are the vasectomies??” If the government is offering, and perhaps pushing, birth control and sterilization for women, they should devote an equal amount of attention to men (vasectomy and maybe condoms would be the main ones, until we develop a darn birth control pill for men, we can talk more about this if you want). This assumes a perspective that men and women have somewhat equal hands in the creation of a fetus, but I think this might have a shot at changing the gender bias in population control.

]]>
By: jliebner@stanford.edu http://stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/familyplanning/2008/11/13/elephant-in-the-roompart-2/comment-page-1/#comment-281 jliebner@stanford.edu Sun, 16 Nov 2008 05:41:56 +0000 http://stanford.edu/group/womenscourage/cgi-bin/blogs/familyplanning/?p=101#comment-281 I don't think China can control its population without disenfranchising women. While influenced by Communist ideology (which is not necessarily bad - there are good arguments for individual actions for the collective good), women may actually be in favor of the one child policy and doesn't seem to mind have reproduction controlled this way, your second point still stands. Given gender disparities and the underlying value of a woman, girls are not the preferred choice. By limiting reproduction to one, aka only giving women one shot, they are, time and time again, going to way and do everything in their power to have a boy. And this is a violation of human rights. What I've been thinking more about recently, is the responsibility of the government to control population for economic reasons. With population growth inevitably comes poverty, and poverty is "the world's most ruthless killer and the greatest cause of suffering on earth". While improved health will produce more people (lessening child mortality, improving life expectancy), increased poverty will also prevent people from being healthy. I believe governments have a duty to reduce poverty, and I think that in the government's eyes, the easiest way to act is to reduce reproduction and governments are doing this in various ways: forced sterilization, economic incentives, etc, but women, as a population, are becoming victimized. I don’t think China can control its population without disenfranchising women. While influenced by Communist ideology (which is not necessarily bad – there are good arguments for individual actions for the collective good), women may actually be in favor of the one child policy and doesn’t seem to mind have reproduction controlled this way, your second point still stands. Given gender disparities and the underlying value of a woman, girls are not the preferred choice. By limiting reproduction to one, aka only giving women one shot, they are, time and time again, going to way and do everything in their power to have a boy. And this is a violation of human rights. What I’ve been thinking more about recently, is the responsibility of the government to control population for economic reasons. With population growth inevitably comes poverty, and poverty is “the world’s most ruthless killer and the greatest cause of suffering on earth”. While improved health will produce more people (lessening child mortality, improving life expectancy), increased poverty will also prevent people from being healthy. I believe governments have a duty to reduce poverty, and I think that in the government’s eyes, the easiest way to act is to reduce reproduction and governments are doing this in various ways: forced sterilization, economic incentives, etc, but women, as a population, are becoming victimized.

]]>