Does Abortion Lead to Sex Trafficking and Crime in General?

This, from a piece that ran on Freakanomics radio, Via NPR today:

Hvistendahl: In some countries where sex selection has taken off, people see this machine as really a way to ensure them a boy.

Since the introduction of the ultrasound in Asia, in the early 1980s, it’s often been used to determine the gender of a fetus — and, if it’s female — have an abortion. In a part of the world with big populations, these sex selection abortions have had a big, unintended consequence.

Hvistendahl: I mean there are over 160 million females missing from the population in Asia, and to put that in perspective, it’s more than the entire female population of the United States.

So, what happens in a world with too many men? For starters, there’s more sex-trafficking, more AIDS, and a higher crime rate. In fact, if you want to know the crime rate in a given part of India, one surefire indicator is the gender ratio. The more men, the more crime.

So if I am understanding this correctly, for those countries that take abortion to the next logical conclusion, in which potential parents choose which traits they want, and abort the fetuses with traits they don’t, crime goes way up because men are more desirable than women for most in this situation. This poses an interesting line of questioning for me. It is no secret that by-and-large (still a gross oversimplification), women’s groups and LGBTQ groups support abortion (or in nicer terms “a woman’s right to choose”. So if the entire world has access to ever-increasing technology that allows potential parents to easily and accurately identify which children will be genetically gay or lesbian or women, it stands to reason, given the data thus far, that most of the world will choose to have more straight boys. Will these groups continue to support a woman’s right to choose when it endangers the very survival of their type?

Also, the piece seems to indicate that when there are too many men and not enough women, things go bad. So there it is. From a feminist and humanist perspective, I have no choice but to condemn abortions for the greater good of women and LGBTQ persons who may not have been born yet.

Enhanced by Zemanta

0 thoughts on “Does Abortion Lead to Sex Trafficking and Crime in General?

  1. Rod of Alexandria

    Hey Chad,

    Why the jump from a discussion of sex trafficking and HIV/Aids to the LGBTQ community? If there is higher crime, wouldnt that mean a large prison population, and therefore STDS and other illnesses as a result of jail rape?

    Reply
    1. Scott F

      So are we saying that the prison industry is actually behind the production and distribution of ultra-sound machines? The first one is always free!

      Reply
  2. Tusk

    You have only proposed one solution…not supporting abortion. There is no reason to assume that that is the only viable option, nor is it safe to assume that it is the best solution.

    Standing against and/or eventually outlawing abortion most certainly does not solve the problems presented when abortion rights are taken to their “logical next step.” I.E. Crime rates.

    If anything, access to the option of abortion has been proved to be a crime deterrent. By that, I mean that with access to abortion, most of the people who would statistically have grown up to be criminals are never born, because the mothers who live (and would raise said child) in situations that statistically have been demonstrated to lead to lives of crime choose not to have those children.

    This has been proved in the book, “Freakonomics,” using America from the time of Roe v Wade, and taking into consideration those states which allowed abortions prior to it being nationally legalized. The book also shows a causal relationship, not simply a correlated one, because a “control group” was unwittingly born during the same time in another country that had banned abortion. In short, the findings indicate that at the very same time that crime rates in the states began to plumit (about 18-21 years after those American children might have otherwise been born), the youth who HAD been born in the other country overthrew and killed the leader who made their births mandatory.

    It’s an ugly truth, but it’s still the truth. Abortion is a crime deterrent. The book explains it more eloquently than I could without it in front of me. I recommend you read it.

    Going back to your proposed solution (standing against “a woman’s righ to choose”) and standing against women of the LGBTQ…forgive me, but I think this is little more than sexism under the guise of progressivism. Sort of like, “oh, I absolutely support the LGBTQ, but those women…they just don’t know what’s best for them, like I do.”

    Abortion doesn’t breed crime. It has been proved to do the opposite. The solution you’ve proposed will only replace one problem with the same problem on the other side of the coin.

    Now, I would, admittedly, be remiss, if I didn’t propose my own solution, after telling you how wrong yours is, so here goes.

    Do everything you can to change peoples’ minds about women! Help in any way you can to not make women property, or otherwise undesirable as heirs. Show people that women are actually really and truly equal; actually capable; actually valuable for other reasons than making male babies. Take a look at The Girl Prohect, for christ’s sake. Making a difference, by making women competitive in the realm of ideas.

    History is chock full of wars for wombs, and this is a narrative that needs to die. As soon as we can get people to realize that women and girls are valuable, viable, and equal, your fears and apprehensions stated above will dissipate without raising the crime rate.

    There is more than one way to skin a cat. Your way has been shown to replace a problem with the same problem. It’s time to alter our assumptions.

    Reply
  3. optimistic chad

    Well, full disclosure here, that last line about me having no choice but to condemn abortions was a bit tongue in cheek. I knew that I was grossly oversimplifying things. The fact is, I don’t support abortion for other reasons. This was an example of passing on some bits of relevant information that supports my view.

    However, you are very correct about a better way forward. Legally condemning abortion really won’t “solve” anything. The “war” for the care and upbringing of all youth, male, female, straight or LGBTQ remains a war in the hearts and minds of people, not legislation.

    But the freakonomics book you point to does not do a great job of full disclosure either. It is rather ideological about the abortion issue as well. Using the book’s internal logic, there would be no hate crime if every black or homosexual was aborted as a fetus. However, that isn’t crime going down, that is just a different form of crime, in my book. Eugenics, which is the evil I was getting at, is staring us in the face, and the consequences thereof are already being felt in China and other Asian countries.

    Genetic testing is getting ever more available and cheaper. What if my parents decided that they didn’t want a kid that was prone to being overweight? I may not exist. I find that to be a crime. Where do we draw the line. Is it ok to abort any unwanted fetus? What qualifies a fetus as unwanted? It could be anything. It is not inconceivable that due to the merciless jokes about “gingers,” that a majority of young parents that are too influenced by culture would decide to abort red-haired children. Thus an entire human trait could be wiped away from history for what? Vanity? If China has taught us anything, it is that this isn’t science fiction. It is reality. And I don’t like that kind of reality.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *