Following Sunday’s airing of Satyamev Jayate, it isnt a surprise that the hot topic of conversation around watercoolers is Aamir Khan/ Female Foeticide. As one would expect, the overwhelming reaction was positive, admiring the actor and deploring the practice of killing the girl child.
I did, however, have one conversation which left me with a lot of difficulty – though morally reprehensible, this gentleman (who shall not be named) provided a logical reason to support female foeticide. And, for once, i could not argue with him on his logic, which has caused me considerable distress.
This is how the conversation went.
Him: Ok, imagine that there is one man and 100 women. Theoretically how many children can be born in 1 year?
Me: Theoretically, well, 100 i guess. (Assuming that man is as virile and handsome as me of course)
Him – ok, now assume there are 100 men and 1 woman. How many children can be born in 1 year?
Me – well, only 1.
Him – Correct.That is why forced sterilisation didnt work in the 70s – we were focussing on the wrong gender. Instead of vasectomies for men, if we had forced tubectomies on women, we would have had more of an impact on birth rates.
Me – well, you can’t be sure about that
Him – I can. Women are the limiting factor in children. Specifically, the less working wombs there are the less kids you can have, right? if you tie one man’s tubes, some other man can still f*** his woman and make her pregnant. Tie a woman’s tubes, and then, no matter who f***s her, she cant have kids – its more efficient
Me – dude, that’s callous
Him – its a fact! Lets take it one step further. If the limiting factor of population growth is number of available wombs, then the “ideal” way is to kill a female child even before its born. That way we dont even waste resources in making her grow to a reproductive age only to tie her tubes. We have the same effect – one less available womb. Except its even MORE efficient.
Me – DUDE! That’s just wrong! Your mother is a woman! if she didnt exist, neither would you!
Him – that’s just the luck of the draw. Some people get born, some dont… it has nothing to do with the logic
Me – ya, but increasing birth rates have to do with NRR (net reproductive rate), if we can bring NRR down…
Him – again, thats post facto – we are trying to bring down NRR because of so many available wombs. If those wombs didnt exist, birth rates would automatically drop. You cant fault the logic
Him – you *cant* fault the logic. Female foeticide is the most efficient way of long term population control, which is india’s biggest challenge
Me – …. …. I am *SO* tweeting about this.
So, there you have it. One man’s logic as to why female foeticide should be supported. And for the LIFE of me, i cant find a way to LOGICALLY argue his point. I can always get emotional and call him a murderer, or a nazi or try to make him think aout how sweet little girls look like when dressed up as a princess, but he’s just going to respond with “That’s all glitter, my underlying logic is sound”
Female Foeticide is morally reprehensible. And what Satyameva Jayate is trying to do is to bring up these onversations for discussion. How do i fight this guy’s logic? Someone help me?