
China, India grapple with the consequences too many men - bmmayer1
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/04/22/china-india-grapple-with-the-consequences-too-many-men/
======
calvinbhai
Many decades back there was scaremongering among the western nations that
overpopulation in China and India will lead to hunger all over the world,
which lead to a lot of programs that may have actually lead to US / Europe
sponsoring these technologies to become widely available in China and India.

Ford Foundation is often cited as one of the main culprits pushing the
ultrasound technology in these countries, the result of which is the current
situation of skewed gender ratio.

Upward mobility of women (in search of grooms) leads to more and more
frustrated men at lower levels, leads to more crime and overall desperate
situation.

Sadly many recent articles follow the typical propaganda based approach and
look at blaming patriarchy etc.

src: [https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/what-money-
can...](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/what-money-can-buy-
profiles-larissa-macfarquhar) [https://www.amazon.com/Unnatural-Selection-
Choosing-Girls-Co...](https://www.amazon.com/Unnatural-Selection-Choosing-
Girls-Consequences/dp/1610391519/abhinav-20) [http://indiafacts.org/was-ford-
foundation-culpable-in-aborti...](http://indiafacts.org/was-ford-foundation-
culpable-in-aborting-female-foetuses-in-india/)

~~~
Retric
At birth the human male female ratio is 1.05 men to 1.0 women. Every nation in
history has dealt with this with minimal issues, saying a very slightly higher
ratio is going to cause problems seems vastly overstated.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_rat...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_ratio)

~~~
defertoreptar
That says the world "at birth ratio" is 1.03, and the article says Dongguan
has a ratio of 1.18. I haven't crunched the numbers, but after a quick glance
at the other countries, I'd be willing to believe Dongguan is within the top
percentile. Doesn't seem "overstated" to me.

~~~
Retric
Two at birth numbers are listed in different columns 1.03 and 1.07.

------
anon518
Apparently, it could have been worse.

"Study finds millions of China's 'missing girls' actually exist":

[https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/01/asia/china-missing-
girls/inde...](https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/01/asia/china-missing-
girls/index.html)

~~~
RobertRoberts
There's some youtube videos (can't find them right now) from video bloggers
(right term?) that live in China, and there are many Chinese women that
Chinese men won't marry (apparently older women). This is despite the fact
that men out-number women. There's a cultural aspect that may not be taken
into account that may be exacerbating this issue.

------
georgeecollins
It's interesting that there is a similar imbalance in China and India (~35m).
That implies to me that the imbalance was not caused by the one child policy,
but by sonograms and abortions.

~~~
chaostheory
I could be wrong but the sonograms and abortions are also just a side effect.
The real problem is that neither place puts much importance on gender
equality. Women have even less opportunities than men over there, compared to
the West. That said, things have improved and continue to improve though the
pace is really slow

~~~
verroq
I was under the impression that gender equality in Chinese society is much
better than the west in some respects, espescially the amount of women in
STEM.

~~~
ploxiln
You have the correlation backwards, believe it or not.

Great writing, lots of sources, in
[http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-
exagger...](http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exaggerated-
differences/)

> Do we find that “countries that lack gender equity in school enrollment” and
> “stereotypes associating science with males” have fewer women in tech?

> No. Galpin investigated the percent of women in computer classes all around
> the world. Her number of 26% for the US is slightly higher than I usually
> hear, probably because it’s older (the percent women in computing has
> actually gone down over time!). The least sexist countries I can think of –
> Sweden, New Zealand, Canada, etc – all have somewhere around the same number
> (30%, 20%, and 24%, respectively). The most sexist countries do extremely
> well on this metric! The highest numbers on the chart are all from non-
> Western, non-First-World countries that do middling-to-poor on the Gender
> Development Index: Thailand with 55%, Guyana with 54%, Malaysia with 51%,
> Iran with 41%, Zimbabwe with 41%, and Mexico with 39%. Needless to say,
> Zimbabwe is not exactly famous for its deep commitment to gender equality.

> Why is this? It’s a very common and well-replicated finding that the more
> progressive and gender-equal a country, the larger gender differences in
> personality of the sort Hyde found become. I agree this is a very strange
> finding, but it’s definitely true. See eg Journal of Personality and Social
> Psychology, Sex Differences In Big Five Personality Traits Across 55
> Cultures:

>> Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are
larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have
more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors
report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated
across samples from 55 nations (n = 17,637).

> In case you’re wondering, the countries with the highest gender differences
> in personality are France, Netherlands, and the Czech Republic. The
> countries with the lowest sex differences are Indonesia, Fiji, and the
> Congo.

~~~
topmonk
As far as what I heard is that in cultures where a woman can choose watch she
wants to do, most will not choose tech.

Whereas, in countries where women are expected to do what society wants them
to do, they are forced into tech because that is where the money is, and is
how they can best help feed their families.

------
dm3730
Just reading about this and looking at a sex ratio map,
[https://www.mapsofindia.com/census2011/female-sex-
ratio.html](https://www.mapsofindia.com/census2011/female-sex-ratio.html) ,
there is a massive difference between a diagonal line between the North and
the South. North India is what is described as dominated by patriarchal
religions like Islam, Christianity, Islamicized-Hinduism and Urdu-Hindi
languages whereas South India and North-East India practices animist or
ancestor worship Hinduism (less Islamic/Christian influence) and speak
Dravidian or Austro-Asiatic languages. It is like two separate countries. The
North seems to be a terrible mess with well below normal female births.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
Curiously, it carries across the boarder to Pakistan [EDITED OUT: which
appeared to have had fewer than 550 females per male in 2013] [1].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_inequality#/media/File:...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_inequality#/media/File:2013_Gender_gap_index_world_map,_Gender_Inequality_Distribution.svg)

EDIT:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio#/media/File:20...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio#/media/File:2012_Birth_Sex_Ratio_World_Map.jpg)

~~~
Scaevolus
That's a map of a composite "gender inequality" score, which is about
employment and earnings ratios, not actual sex ratios.

Here's one for sex ratios:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio#/media/File:20...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio#/media/File:2012_Birth_Sex_Ratio_World_Map.jpg)

------
Kluny
> In India, there is the opposite effect: Because brides are scarce, families
> are under less pressure to save for expensive dowries.

So weird. Note that it says "less" pressure, not no pressure. Women are in
short supply, yet their culture still requires the bride's family to pay the
groom to take her? More evidence that those macroeconomic supply and demand
curves are nonsense.

~~~
Karishma1234
Bribes help women get better husbands. Unlike USA marriages in India is about
family ties and hence it is important that an uneducated unattractive women
gets a good husband. She has to pay the premium of dowry to get a husband who
otherwise will not marry her.

An educated engineer girl in India can easily marry a waiter without dowry but
her inherent greed for wealth makes her seek someone who is even richer and
she pays for that using dowry.

Dowry system is essentially greed of females and not males.

~~~
thechao
I’ve not experienced social dating outside of the southwest of the US, but if
you don’t think social, familial, educational, and income factors don’t
heavily weigh into marriages, here, then you’re 100% wrong, and need to meet
both my mother-in-law, and mother. Also, be aware that past a certain age,
women here can pretty much expect full-time interest by their “aunties” in
arranging dates to meet potential suitors.

~~~
Karishma1234
I am pretty sure you are in top 5% people by education, income and thinking.
But people like you and me don't really count when we are talking Indian
statistics. It is that farmer in Bihar who counts more.

As income levels in India rise this will rapidly go away. But then we are at
least 30 years away from that.

P.S. These are not really big problems as the op-ed intellectual yet idiots
make them out to be.

------
upofadown
>“In the future, there will be millions of men who can’t marry, ...

Why? Two husbands are better than just one. More resources to support the
family. Flip a coin and then alternate on the kids.

Multiple wives are allowed in other countries. Why not allow multiple husbands
instead? It wouldn't work for everyone but it only has to work for some...

~~~
sumedh
> Why not allow multiple husbands instead?

Read an article (lazy to search it again) which says it is already happening
in some North Indian states like Punjab and Harayana where brothers "share" a
wife.

~~~
Karishma1234
True. Our building watchman spends 6 months in Mumbai while his brother 'takes
care' of his wife. He then goes back and brother comes on watchman duty.
Better its my brother than neighbour he says.

~~~
eklavya
I was about to reply to the parent, where? It's so unreal that you have a
first hand example. It came as a shock to me, I wonder what other social
phenomenon I have missed.

~~~
Karishma1234
In case you have missed this phenomenon you might have missed the following
too: \- People from Harayana actually paying money to smuggle young brides
from UP and Bihar. \- Bringing brides from outside has become an election
promise in Harayana. \- There is an active flesh trade going on between
Assam/UP/Bihar and Haryana. There is also arbitrage. For example buying brides
from Assam at Rs 5000 for UP but then selling them in Haryana for Rs 10,000 \-
Church is also responsible for moving young children across country. I
remember meeting a young girl from Odissa working in a house in Goa. She was
brought there by Church. The girl was later rescued for sexual abuse.

------
vichu
Here is the original article from The Washington Post (this appears to be a
rehost by Mercury News):
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/world/too-
many-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/world/too-many-men/)

It contains more charts and graphics, but also makes use of parallax scrolling
that some may find annoying.

------
a2tech
Isn’t the consequence usually unrest and war?

~~~
batuhanw
Wars are killing men, which isn't happening for a while like before. So men
population grow fast and there is nothing to decrease it.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
Wouldn't your causal mechanism be disproven by the reams of peaceful countries
without such imbalances? In any case, the natural overproduction of males
versus females at birth is too tiny to explain these gulfs.

~~~
falcor84
As I understand it, the grandparent's argument is that earlier on in history,
wars (and violence in general) would cause a reduction in the percentage of
males. For example[0], in Soviet Russia following WW2, the ratio of young
men/women dropped to 0.7. And that given that the China and India are more
peaceful now (for various reasons), this violent force does not come into
effect.

I don't understand how your response is relevant to the above argument.

[0]
[https://www.ucis.pitt.edu/nceeer/2007_820-4g_Brainerd1.pdf](https://www.ucis.pitt.edu/nceeer/2007_820-4g_Brainerd1.pdf)

------
pacetherace
This is also causing the average age when girls are getting married to go down
and it is increasing the age difference between the bride and groom.

------
clamprecht
Is there currently any country with too many women? I've heard interesting
things about Paraguay, which lost like 90% of their men after some really bad
wars, and how it changed their society.

~~~
AdamTReineke
Per Wikipedia, Russia has about 4 million more in the 15-64 demographic. 48m
men and 52m women.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia)

This article seems to have a little more background on why. Wars and alcohol
are harder on men than women. [http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2015/08/14/why-the-form...](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2015/08/14/why-the-former-ussr-has-far-fewer-men-than-women/)

~~~
meric
I’ve read quite a few Chinese articles about a trend of Chinese expats working
in Siberia marrying with local Russian women. I don’t know how accurate they
are so I won’t post them here. It was interesting read though.

~~~
batuhanw
I personally know some Turkish people who’ve been in Siberia for years and
what they say is the same as yours.

------
lzoo
The 60-year-old mom who still cooks for her seven sons + her husband... Noooo!
learn how to make your own bread - at least.

~~~
rabboRubble
And now you know why that woman may have aborted female fetuses. Avoidance of
the continuation of miserable life for the women of India! Better to have boys
that get married, then you can sit back and boss around the daughter-in-law.

Oh whoopsie, everybody aborted the girls? Hmmmm, I wonder why.

------
emmelaich
What's with the ungrammatical title?

It's the MercuryNews title, so not the submitters mistype.

Reminds me that USA Today had a front page heading with technology misspelled
as _techonolgy_

~~~
Animats
The Mercury News was acquired by the Contra Costa Tribune, and barely has a
newsroom any more.

------
whooshee
Many of those 'more men' are from villages who didn't like girls. So they are
swallowing that on their own, which is kind of re-balancing. By the way, given
the tech we have these days, more and more young people seem to be OK to live
only with themselves. Let alone VR, if you will.

------
ShabbosGoy
I wonder what the long term impact will be on their societies. If brides are
scarce, would it lead to the betterment of social conditions for women in
these (traditionally) chauvinistic societies?

~~~
imron
Unfortunately, that's unlikely. I mean it might happen in urban well-developed
areas, but if history is any indicator then for most parts of the country
women will likely be worse off, and you'll see things like an increase in
kidnappings, forced marriages, and shared marriages with multiple men.

Bride kidnapping is already having somewhat of a resurgence in China -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping#China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_kidnapping#China)

~~~
ShabbosGoy
> In one form of a typical qiangqin, the abductor would arrive at a woman's
> house flanked by around twenty men. While the friends carried the woman
> away, the "groom" would use scissors to cut off the woman's panties. The
> woman, struggling to preserve her dignity, would be unable to adequately
> fight off her abductors. The victim would then be taken to the groom's
> house, where the marriage would be consummated.

Really bizarre stuff. You’d think in the 21st century, such primitive human
practices would not occur anymore.

------
onetimemanytime
_> >“In the future, there will be millions of men who can’t marry, and that
could pose a very big risk to society,”_

May I suggest a war between the two countries? This problem will be solved. I
was being semi-serious but I remember reading about war being more likely
since China had so many men.

~~~
batuhanw
Wars were preventing overgrowing of populations before. Now technology,
peaceful era causing overpopulation of homo-sapiens which is really big
problem. Thus I think what you suggest makes sense. Also it will give some
people reason to live, distraction, some glory.

~~~
chillacy
Most people were dying from disease (esp in infancy) for most of history, not
sure having another war will help there. And I can't tell what's more
horrifying, suggesting that we should start some more wars to kill people or
suggesting that we should bring back some plagues.

Also while I agree that it's harder to find glory in modern times, and there
definitely should be a better outlet for that need, I think war has changed so
significantly due to technological advances that people wouldn't find much
glory lobbing bombs from a UAV piloting center.

The days of finding glory on the battlefield are probably as distant as the
days of 90% of people working as farmers to produce food for themselves.

------
adamnemecek
Is Li Weibin’s life common?

~~~
DimitarIbra9
i don't think so. rare case.

~~~
imron
It's not a rare case at all, especially among male migrant workers.

~~~
whooshee
It is rather rare and illegal to 'buy' a partner, many left-over men will
probably be alone for their lives.

~~~
imron
I agree, but that is not what was asked.

adamnemecek was asking specifically about the life of Li Weibin, who didn't
buy a partner.

Instead his is the live of a hard laborer, living in cramped dormitories, and
forever alone, with little/no chance of breaking free from that life.

Unfortunately it's all too common among migrant workers.

------
senatorobama
I wish China and India would be friends instead of frenemies. Think of the
possibilities.

~~~
shripadk
Not going to happen. Pakistan has been China's ally for decades. China won't
break that friendship for India. India will never get into a trilateral
alliance with the number of issues (terror and political) pending with
Pakistan. To top it, China hasn't gotten over the fact that India gave shelter
to The Dalai Lama. Then there is the Chinese ambition to take over lands, seas
and oceans in and around it. China won't give up it's claim over Arunachal
Pradesh, nor will it set Tibet free, nor would it destroy the CPEC that it has
built through disputed territory to maintain status-quo. Too many sticking
issues that cannot be resolved until and unless China let's go of it's
territorial ambitions and stops backing terror sponsors in Pakistan.

~~~
whooshee
Actually Modi is visiting China in recent days. China and India will continue
to compete and cooperate. Tibet has been a part of China for many centuries,
and the serfs over there has been given freedom by CCP. Maybe some of those
old serf-owners didn't like that. In foreseeable future, both China and India
will look to increase its influence and there will be more conflicts, see
Maldives, but also deals to make, like phone-makers from China continue to
invest in India.

~~~
shripadk
Tibet was not part of China for many centuries. It was an independent country
before it was Annexed by China in 1951. There has never been any freedom given
by China to Tibet. Contrast it with India's liberation of Bangladesh from
attrocities of Pakistan. India did not annex Bangladesh when it had all the
strength and opportunity to do so.

Chinese influence in India is actually diminishing on the ground. People in
India are more aware now than ever before. People here prefer to buy products
either made in India or some other country and not from China. Things are
changing rapidly on the ground which will take a few years for it to be
visible to China. India cannot have the huge trade deficit it has with China
right now. To top it, China's persistent support to Pakistan backed terrorism
is going down in bad taste with Indian citizens.

Modi is not having an official summit with Xi. This is an unofficial summit
over Doklam and other pressing issues. I don't see any positive outcome from
this as both parties involved will not be willing to shift from their
positions.

Xi wants to consolidate power. Not just within but also by annexing other
territories, oceans and islands. This also includes involvement in the power
tussle currently underway in Maldives. This is a big gamble because it may end
up pushing those countries that weren't allies of China but still had trade to
reconsider China as a decent trade partner. Look at the US tariffs imposed on
China. Other countries will take the cue once they realise China isn't as
powerful as it portrays. It all boils down to if China can be a responsible
superpower. Currently, it has everything going for it except that one point.
Future will tell if Xi's gamble of alienating trade partners who weren't
allies a good move or a bad one.

~~~
whooshee
> There has never been any freedom given by China to Tibet.

It seems you completely ignored my remarks. 95% of Tibetans were serfs before
reintegrate to China. After 1951, they became free people have the basic human
rights. As in history, Both Yuan dynasty and Qing Dynasty have Tibet.

> Look at the US tariffs imposed on China.

US and China are in trade wars. Trump is playing the 'art of deal' game(not
only to China but also Japan and other countries) and he is sending treasury
secretary to China to negotiate. This has nothing to do with India/China
conflicts or Maldive incidents.

China is still a developing country and it didn't show off to be a superpower.
The major agenda is still developing its economy and addressing poverty.

Regardless all the challenges, 21st century can hold two most populous
countries in the world.

~~~
shripadk
The serf argument is a Chinese justification for invasion of Tibet. This has
nothing to do with "human rights". It was a simple and plain invasion of
another country which violated International Laws. You cannot shove that under
the carpet with any sort of justifications: even if it is a dislike for social
structure. If China really cared about the people of Tibet, it would have done
what India did after East Pakistan liberation. It created Bangladesh and
allowed the local people to rule themselves unhindered. India did not colonize
Bangladesh. In fact, this "reintegration" argument is bogey. India could have
used the same "reintegration" argument to justify colonizing Bangladesh as it
once belonged to Hindustan in the ancient times. It did not. There is
absolutely no justification for invasion and occupation of a territory.

> China is still a developing country and it didn't show off to be a
> superpower. The major agenda is still developing its economy and addressing
> poverty.

Are you seriously telling me that the militarisation in disputed South China
Sea is not showing off? How about building the CPEC across disputed territory?
How about China trying to build roads in the Doklam region? Are all these part
of it developing its economy and addressing poverty? Seems more like
unwarranted expansion to me.

------
ams6110
> sex-selective technology

Nice way to say aborting female babies.

~~~
natch
Or abandoning, also happens a lot, as I learned when someone in my family
adopted a girl.

------
oregondan
> ...demographers say it will take decades for the ramifications of the bulge
> to fade away.

heh

------
Karishma1234
Ford Foundation, Evangelical NGOs and World Bank Intellectual Yet Idiots are
to be blamed here.

I remember in my childhood government ran this insane propaganda for
vasectomy. Government claimed we all would die of hunger unless we stop
producing babies. This propaganda was sponsored by people in USA who claimed
population was a time bomb. Those fears were totally discredited with time.

Sadly good well off people bought the propaganda where as poor did not.
Government even outright lied that vasectomies are easily reversible when in
reality those procedures are more complex and not free.

That is why I caution current Indian government to simply ignore the first
world problems like Global warming doomsday and instead focus on rapid growth
so existing millions can afford to feed themselves and let USA and Europe play
the global warming game.

Indian PM is smart and he used global warming scare to get billions from USA
and Europe while doing only lip service to actual efforts. China is doing same
and better.

~~~
aaronblohowiak
Population is a time bomb that is presently exploding. The rate of food
production will not keep pace with population, and somewhere between 200-500
million people have died of starvation since the warnings about population in
1968 that likely inspired the programs you are talking about (not all in India
and not due to total carrying capacity...)

Global warming impacts the poor disproportionately compared to the rich,
because the rich will be able to afford food when it becomes more scarce. This
disproportionate impact on the poor is one of the reasons the Pope has called
on all of us (and the Wealthy in particular) to be concerned about and act on
global warming.

From a self-centered perspective, “don’t divide the farm” — concentrate
instead of dilute the wealth flowing to the next generation. I do not believe
the poorest are net contributors to economic activity so increasing their
number is not the path to national prosperity.

~~~
Karishma1234
You are wrong and smug Sir.

