Comments on: Internet gender selection ads attacked in India

By: Galloise Blonde

Galloise Blonde — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:51:30 +0000

By: Elaine

Elaine — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:35:28 +0000

It seems to me that the law in India could do a lot to change the status of women (and hence girls). According to the paper, the 70 year old woman who had twins recently only wanted a boy because only boys can inherit property (tho’ apparently there’s not much property left there to inherit…). If this is true, surely the solution is obvious. The same applies to dowries.
Apart from that, I agree that it is impossible to ban gender specific abortion and since abortion is legal, adverts relating to it are legal and it is not ISP’s job to change society.

By: MixTogether

MixTogether — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:22:13 +0000

This is just the tip of the selection iceberg. Anyone who has used Shaadi.com will have noticed caste, skin tone and even astrological selection criteria (know if YOU are a manglik?). Family life can be a picky business.

I know it’s only speculative at this point, but remember that any response to this question will also inform a debate on the same issue if scientists ever discover a reliable way to screen for homosexuality. It might not ever happen, of course…

By: Laban

Laban — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:42:55 +0000

… or to put it another way, if India just killed more boy babies to even up the score, there’d be nothing to worry about. Perhaps someone should start a campaign.

By: Laban

Laban — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:41:15 +0000

I think I’ve got it. Aborting children is fine, as long as it’s done in a gender-neutral way.

By: Rumbold

Rumbold — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:14:20 +0000

So Much For Subtlety:

I am a strong supporter of free speech, which was why I was wondering about whether it is fair to blame the ISPs for this.

As for freedom of the individual, it depends on what rights you assign to the foetus, and at what state you assign those rights. I understand that trying to regulate such things are problematic, as if you think that women should be allowed to have abortions (as I do), then it is difficult to then turn round and say that a woman can have an abortion, but not for gender reasons. However, on the opposite side, millions of female foetuses are aborted because of their gender, which helps to solidify the notion of a patriarchy in which men’s lives are considered more valuable then women’s.

On the question of ultrasound, I thought that it wass illegal for the mother to be told the sex of her child.

By: So Much For Subtlety

So Much For Subtlety — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:56:34 +0000

I am sorry but why do you support the activists? Abortion is usually a legal activity. Some might even say that it is a Woman’s Right. Free speech is also kind of important to a lot of people. If India’s laws conflict with both principles, then perhaps something is wrong with the law and activists ought to aim to change that. The only case that can be made here is that by making abortion legal, it allows people to act in their own interests which are not necessarily those of the State. Does the State have priority over the wishes of individuals? You can see the obvious objection. It is also probably unenforcable and so making a mockery of the legal system. How do you determine intent but allow ultrasounds?