30 million more men than women in China by 2020

[gougou]

Well, I do doubt that China will permit such a loss of human resource in the next few years.

Again, if Chinese women don't want them, why would the party want them?

[chenpv]

Again' date=' if Chinese women don't want them, why would the party want them?[/quote'] Oh well, maybe afraid of being accused of violating human rights if western media picture the whole story as 'Chinese government forcing thousands of bachelors out of China'.(sh) Besides, China has no 'Maternacracy'.

[roddy]

I'd agree - I think any government looking at over-population and under-employment, given the opportunity to get rid of the most under-educated, under-employed section of it's menfolk (and those are in all likelihood the men who are going to miss out) in some way it couldn't be blamed for would probably jump at the chance. However, these are the men that are least likely to be welcome to go and work in other countries.

Wonder what the consequences of having 30 million more women than men would be. . .

[Luobot]

Wonder what the consequences of having 30 million more women than men would be. . .

Fewer wars ... more shopping ...

[chenpv]

Wonder what the consequences of having 30 million more women than men would be. . .

Fewer wars ... more shopping ...

Luobot' date=' I am afraid you misinterpreted roddy. He was probably thinking otherwise on reading adrionlondon's saying:

maybe there needs to be a legalisation of polyandry (one woman, many husbands).

I am wrong? (sh)

(Btw, what's the english word for 'one husband, many women'? )

I have been thinking whether the statistics that 'there were 118.6 boys born for every 100 girls' could be depicted from another angle, so as to evaluate the efficacy of One-Child policy.

Irrespective of effectors from child policy for ethnic minorities and people from rural area, if we suppose a sample of 200 families, does this 118.6 over 100 datum suggest that about 19 families, 8.5% of total, choose to violate the One-Child policy? Am I way off the track?

[Koneko]

(Btw' date=' what's the english word for 'one husband, many women'? )

[/quote']

Yes, that's right. I can't think of any other word other than this.

But polyandry is not the only solution to this imbalanced gender ratio in China.

Maybe, the government of China can pass a new act, viz., Adelphogamy Act?!

It's a policy for several brothers from the same family to share a common wife, aka, alpha female!! Ha ha..

But then, I just realised that there are no brothers in Chinese Han families in Mainland China.

K.

[HashiriKata]

But then, I just realised that there are no brothers in Chinese Han families in Mainland China.

Koneko, there're brothers in my family. What do you think?

(And you don't have to go as far as China! )

[Koneko]

Koneko, there're brothers in my family. What do you think?

Ha ha... The second question will be:- Do you want to be the alpha male or beta male?

(And you don't have to go as far as China! )

Gender ratio in Japan is quite even as shown here, 1.01 males/female

K.

[sui.generis]

(Btw, what's the english word for 'one husband, many women'? )

polygyny. Funny, as I was reading this thread I was wracking my brain to think of how to say polyandry.

Another solution I've heard suggested is the about-face of the gov't to encourage homosexuality. It certainly doesn't seem pre-disposed to do so, but to me the party seems just pragmatic enough make that sort of change.

This is an unusual permutation of a gender imbalance problem, but it's far from the first. In societies that have practiced polygamy, which is virtually always polygyny, even though there may be an equal number of both genders, not every man gets multiple wives. The more powerful and the more wealthy get many wives, and the poor and powerless get none. Generally there are more poor powerless men in a society than not, and so the majority get nothing. The other variation of the problem is when you have massive war deaths of the male population. These are generally followed by an increase of births of male babies, which may be triggered by a general hormonal shift (testosterone/gondatrophin) in the remaining female population--forced to take on roles thought of as masculine to fill the economic and social gap, and under that hormonal shift they are more likely to give birth to male babies.

I don't know if it works in exactly the opposite direction, such that an opposite shift in hormonal balance would lead to an increase in the births of female babies, but that could ultimately provide a solution without gov't intervention (or compliment intervention). If the competition amongst potential male suitors for female companionship led to an increase in chivalrous, caretaker type behaviour that was met with an equal increase/assumption of traditional gender roles, and if that assumption had the opposite effect on hormone levels in potential mothers that the assumption of traditional male gender roles had, and if that opposite hormone level led to an increase in female baby births, then the population would even out. There'd be more 40 year old men with 20 year old wives in 2040 than normal, but I don't think that would present an immediate problem.

Before you get on me for any perceived sexism, read pg 123, The Red Queen. The book is not science fact, but it is science. My attempted extension is neither, but is an honest attempt.

[gougou]

and under that hormonal shift they are more likely to give birth to male babies.

Impressed again by what a cool species we are...

About encouraging homosexuality, I don't think that is something you can change by decree. My guess is that most of the people that will not find a partner come from less than liberal backgrounds; homosexuality isn't even on their radars yet. It would take a die hard party member to change sexual orientation just because Hu Jintao asked him to...

[adrianlondon]

the gov't to encourage homosexuality

The problem with this, and my gay friends here are also contemplating "marriage and kids" just because they feel they have to, is that in old age it is expected that your children look after you. So everyone wants children as it obviates the need to save for a pension, meaning you can continue to buy apartments in chaoyang to rent to forigners, and huge cars. And even if you think you don't need to do this, your own parents panic as you're not following a family tradition.

Surely other countries have suffered an imbalance? What about places such as the UK after the world wars?

[Koneko]

What about places such as the UK after the world wars?

I don't have any information on UK postwar gender ratio; but I think currently, there are more females than males in this country.

Follow my earlier link to gender ratio:-

total population: 0.98 male(s)/female (2006 est.)

0.02 British female surplus?! Any takers?

K.

[sui.generis]

Any chance it's the same .02 that have good teeth?

[Koneko]

Ha ha ha... I forgot to include those senescent members in my 2% stats earlier!

K.

[Lu]

These are generally followed by an increase of births of male babies, which may be triggered by a general hormonal shift (testosterone/gondatrophin) in the remaining female population--forced to take on roles thought of as masculine to fill the economic and social gap, and under that hormonal shift they are more likely to give birth to male babies.

Right, except that the gender of a baby is determined by the sperm, that is, by the father, not by the mother's hormones. So unless somehow more female than male foetuses are miscarried in times of a shortage of men, this sounds like nonsense.

Oh, and I don't believe the kind of work people do influences their hormones, either. The other way around might work (give female athlete male hormones and she runs faster), but not this way (female athlete does not become more masculine from running fast).

[sui.generis]

The hormones in men aren't irrelvant, but the returning soldier effect I refered to is attributed to women's hormones. Which sperm, one with a y or one with an x chromosome implants first does determine gender, but before one can implant, it has a journey to make through the potential mother's body, and that's where her hormones can have their effect.

I don't believe the kind of work people do influences their hormones, either.

My guess is it's not the work, it's the way the work makes you feel (percieved status). Your enviorment and your reactions to it do affect some hormone levels. I don't know if gonadotrophin is associated with males at all--not all hormones are related to gender--but that is the hormone believed to be boosted by the assumption of more (percieved) dominant roles in post-war women.

Check the link to the book I mentioned above, and for shorter reading, check BBC: Sex ID: Testosterone

Interestingly, some studies show that testosterone levels in women change according to the status of their occupations.

[Lu]

Thanks for the BBC link, but I am still skeptic.

Which sperm, one with a y or one with an x chromosome implants first does determine gender, but before one can implant, it has a journey to make through the potential mother's body, and that's where her hormones can have their effect.

When a man ejaculates, millions (billions? anyway a lot) of sperms start swimming towards the egg. Half of them have an Y chromosome, half an X. How would the mother's hormones (assuming that they do chance when she has to do a different job) influence which of those millions (/billions) of sperm cells reaches the egg?

it's the way the work makes you feel (perceived status). Your environment and your reactions to it do affect some hormone levels.

This is also interesting. Would that mean that women with a high status (directors of companies, women in the government) have more sons than average? Or that families where the wife is the boss have more sons?

[gougou]

This is also interesting. Would that mean that women with a high status (directors of companies, women in the government) have more sons than average? Or that families where the wife is the boss have more sons?

I remember reading something similar a couple of years ago. The question was: will you be more talented than average at playing piano if your mother learnt to play the piano? IIRC, the researchers concluded that a skill you acquire after birth is stored in the proteins, while what is passed on to your offspring is stored in the genes. Thus, let aside certain factors such as greater dexterity, the children of piano players should a priori not have a greater chance of being great piano players. However, at the time there was no proof for that, nor for the opposite.

[bhchao]

When a man ejaculates, millions (billions? anyway a lot) of sperms start swimming towards the egg. Half of them have an Y chromosome, half an X. How would the mother's hormones (assuming that they do chance when she has to do a different job) influence which of those millions (/billions) of sperm cells reaches the egg?

The temperature of the man's sperm in the testes may be a factor that influences the gender of the baby.

[Lu]

The temperature of the man's sperm in the testes may be a factor that influences the gender of the baby.

So that means the baby's gender is still determined on the father's side, not the mother's, and the mother's hormones have no influence on the gender of the baby.