Should we take active steps to reduce the proportion of babies born male?

In the past, many young men would have been wiped out by war or industrial accident. And now that we have electric motors, men's traditionally greater physical strength is less important.

Do we really need so many men in the world?

If only about one in every ten or twenty babies was a boy, then eventually over time we would end up with fewer men in the world; and therefore also less crime, less disease, less homelessness, less unemployment and more general happiness.

And no male presently alive need die of anything but old age -- we just have to be more careful not to replace them, is all. Isn't that a goal worth working towards?

Update:

**EDIT**

@Omg, Quato: Most of the jobs woud dbe done by robots. Women would do the jobs that had not been fully autiomated.

@Anonymous: Eventually, it should be possible to produce artificial sperm. Until then, we can manage using what we can obtain from men.

@Bill: We would not be "killing unborn boys", they would simply never exist in the first place. And there would not be "straight women unable to find a mate". Heterosexual sex is a learned behaviour.

8 Answers

Relevance
  • Elana
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    But who would kill the bugs?

    Is it surprising that the people who put forth these arguments are also the ones who try to convince the world that misandry isn't possible?

    It won't be too long before NEITHER gender is necessary. Yes, even gestating women could be replaced by artificial wombs. For that matter, who needs sperm or ova if we can do the genetic recombination right in the lab?

    Hell - let's just figure out exactly what genes we want and be done with the genders entirely. With no concept of sex, we won't need them!

    In the meanwhile, please recognize that every gender has, from time to time, thought that the others were annoying. Fortunately, we're stuck with each other.

    That's a good thing.

  • 2 years ago

    You're a sick pup. I hope you don't have any sons -- sounds like child abuse is right up your alley.

    At least you had the grace to leave out the term people like you usually throw around, "final solution."

  • 2 years ago

    The prostitutes will run out of customers. There's about 50 million around the world.

  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    As a queer woman, women cause crimes and spread diseases, contribute to homelessness and unemployment. For those who want to reproduce, how will they do so without a male or at least sperm from a sperm bank provided by a male? I feel as though the goal we are working towards is equality for all genders, cities, and nations and what you are suggesting is a Venus utopia which sounds like some man-hating garbage.

    Source(s): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio Drop your Gender Studies Class.
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Bill
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    So you would have a bunch of straight women unable to find a mate because you're killing unborn boys. It's like China, but in reverse. lol The guys left over I bet would enjoy more than one wife though. Wait..do you actually enjoy having more than one wife? That doesn't sound great to me.

    And my girlfriend loves buying heavy ****. I mean, really, does she really need a two hundred pound rock to go in her flower bed? No, but then I guess she doesn't need 1,000 bushes and flowers either.

    Edit: lol. Being heterosexual is not learned behavior. I was flirting with girls in pre-school and I assure you no one taught me to do that. I was actually pretty bad at it. :/

    And how would they never exist? Women are going to get pregnant and they're going to get pregnant with boys, so obviously they would exist. Oh right, everyone is going to be gay all of sudden because heterosexual behavior is somehow learned behavior even if the anatomy of men and women debunk that argument.

    Artificial sperm doesn't work. Artificial eggs does appear to somewhat work though not well enough to call it a success, but doing the same thing for sperm doesn't work at all. I wouldn't hold out hope for artificial sperm at this point. And really, making the whole species rely on artificial means is stupid and quite frankly insane. You do however make a good argument for why artificial eggs and sperm should never be released to the public. People like you always manage to make an idea that could do some good into one of the worst ideas human beings ever thought up.

    Why not just automate all the jobs? Why half *** it for the sake of women?

  • Anonymous
    2 years ago

    When there are too many males, Nature (G*D) creases more homosexuals. That tends to end the problem naturally, without War, Famine, or Disease.

    The attempt by the Democratic Government using the Vietnam War to empty the Ghettos did not work.

    Neither did Reagan's HIV/AIDS experiment.

    Let Nature take its course.

    Reference the Chinese after effects of intervention.

    Ending the Pope's War on Sexuality would help. End the crazy idea of only allowing monogamous families.

  • Quato
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    Sounds great, but no, women need us too much, who would collect your garbage and treat your sewage are repair your roads and sh*t?

  • Lili
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    In centuries past, women regularly died --- and usually died young -- in pregnancy and childbirth. Should we therefore reduce the number of babies born female?

    No, sweetie. I think we should just let nature take care of matters. We don't need to be monkeying around with the percentages of men and women in the population. We're not gods.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.