Shooting the Stork: Is it cool to abort your baby based on sex? A new First World dilemma! Take the poll!

by Natasha V.C.

SHOCKING NEWS: WOMEN (AND WITTY VERBOSE TEENS NAMED AFTER ALASKAN CITIES) WHO ARE PREGGERS CAN FIND OUT THE SEX OF THEIR BABEH BY BUYING A KIT.

Hooray! Right? Now you can decide whether to name your baby Apple or Brooklyn months before you even show your baby bump. Now as more and more consumers have been getting their swollen hands on gender detection kits there has been greater media scrunity about the sex-selective abortions in The Third World.

As we’ve known for a while those of us with vaginas have less labor market value in developing countries.

So what if the tests tells you’re going to squeeze out a boy and lo and behold your infant has a cooter betwixt her legs? What if you live the lush and litigious First World? Well, you sue the shit out of some one.

According to the LA times:

“More than 100 women have filed a lawsuit against Acu-Gen and its owner, Chang-ning Wang, that is pending in federal court. At least one customer has been questioned by the FBI.” Wang (heh) has repeatedly declined to discuss the scientific validity of the test. So the suing is just none-sense, if you carry the kid in your body for 9 months and pop it out the last thing that should be on your mind is refund. Buyer beware and all that shit. The real question at hand, is whether its cool, in first world country, abort a baby based on sex. The question has been less taboo in places like China and India where the amount of males in a household and can sink or save a family.

And here in the US the gender selection taboo is slowly being broken.

 

But there is a difference here. In a country such as ours, where the gender ratio in the household isn’t as closely linked to financial stability, it comes down to a question of want.

~ flexiPoll: free online web poll ~
Whether or not you want a boy or a girl or not? Of course this brings up all sorts of thorny nuanced issues, but ultimately I believe that if you don’t want the kid for whatever reason, then don’t have it. Whether its for financial or emotional reasons or the fact that you had your cold heart set on naming your new son Preston, you don’t want it, don’t have it. Its your vag, live how you please.

But what do you think?

9 comments

1 Wilford Brimley Mook { 02.28.08 at 3:39 pm }

It sort of depends: are you asking if it’s uncool or if it should be illegal? Yes and no, respectively.

2 Natasha VC { 02.28.08 at 3:43 pm }

hmmmm what qualifies as an “uncool” abortion?
spiteful abortions?
gender based abortions?
late term abortions?
between lunch and the spa abortions?

3 Wilford Brimley Mook { 02.28.08 at 4:09 pm }

I think that is sort of beside the point. I could consider you uncool for just about anything I like, and if I do, that’s really just a matter between you and I. Whether or not to have a sex-based abortion is, like whether or not to listen Backstreet Boys, an entirely subjective matter. If you do either one, I will probably think you are a tool.

4 Natasha VC { 02.28.08 at 4:14 pm }

What if I abort a Backstreet Boys’ babeh? Every one’s a winner then.

5 Wilford Brimley Mook { 02.28.08 at 4:40 pm }

You could even abort a Backstreet Boy for all I care. 87th trimester abortions are all the rage these days.

6 Pepin { 02.28.08 at 4:48 pm }

Holy crap, did you just sit down and do the math on that? 30 years old times twelve divided by nine equals P. P times three trimesters carry the seven equals… I’d say the 110th to 120th trimester… your estimate was conservative… VERY conservative. Fascist.

7 maotsedan { 02.28.08 at 7:17 pm }

So my joke is going to get cut out of the vote-box…

I’ll say this, from an evolutionary standpoint, I just can’t imagine sex-based abortions being a good idea. We can’t even plan our economies, why the hell do we think planning our sex-balance - a logical implication of this line of questioning - would be a good idea?

From the cheese-ass-liberal every-person-for-herself perspective that most of us aspire to, though, why the f not? Just avoid slippery slopes.

But, I have a better question - can this guy, instead, create a “sexy” test? Because I really think American prospective parents would really benefit form the opportunity to ensure a sexier next generation.

8 maotsedan { 02.28.08 at 7:25 pm }

Oh, and what’s with this being a “gender” prediction test?!? This is like 101-level social Anthropology isn’t it? To be clear: Sex is the bits and pieces, gender is identity.

Maybe that should be our Wang’s (heh heh) defense in court: “I made no claims on sex. Can any of the plaintiffs demonstrate whether their infants are queer or not? Until that point the “gender” question remains open.”

9 Wilford Brimley Mook { 02.29.08 at 1:42 pm }

Pepin, ah you’re right, my synapses misfired and I put three trimesters into a year, not a pregnancy. Nick Carter would be a 115th term abortion.

You must log in to post a comment.