Feminism’s “Gendercide”

Wondrous news! The mainstream media and even the United Nations have “discovered” the 30 year old crisis of “missing girls.” The Economist (the recent edition entitled, “Gendercide”) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) came out with the “news” that over 100 million girls and women that should be alive are not.

The culprits are parents who want to have sons only and use sonograms to identify the sex of their child in the womb. The end result is millions of sex-selection abortions of unwanted girls every year.

Pro-lifers have denounced this “slaughter of Eve” in the strongest terms for some time now. It is undoubtedly the greatest campaign of deadly discrimination against women in history. Incredibly, with few exceptions, the problem of sex-selection abortion is steadily worsening in Asia and around the world!

Shockingly, The Economist’s recommended solution is more feminism: more propaganda from the same folks who brought you abortion, but this time directed toward somehow improving the public image of women and daughters. Basically, they are saying that a big PR blitz is needed to highlight the positive contributions of women to society.

Of course, any society that does not value female children or women in general, as much as men, is in serious need of a change of heart on the subject. Can anyone take seriously, however, the proposition that those who trumpet abortion as a paramount right of women are the best ones to lead us in recovering a sense of the dignity of womanhood?

The Economist points approvingly to modernization and societies which have abortion on demand but no sex-selection abortion crisis. Putting aside the fact they acknowledge that Chinese and Japanese-Americans are having recourse to sex-selection abortions, these same “progressive” societies have embraced myriad other assaults on female dignity: pornography, contraception, “sex education” which teaches the objectification of the human person, and so on.

If they are seriously proposing that the solution to the eradication of women in the developing world is a more complete embrace of the very ideology that has so obviously harmed women and men, then we must point out the absurdity of this view as many times as it takes to sink in.

Radical feminists willingly sacrifice the health and lives of mothers on the altar of abortion-on-demand. It is only one step further to stand by while unborn girls are killed for the “crime” of being female. Some “pro-choice” feminists are understandably uncomfortable with this, but they are trapped by their sinister ideology which affirms that no one can tell anyone else their “choice” to abort is wrong.

A turning point in my pro-life education regarding so-called “women’s rights” organizations came while attending a March 2007 meeting deep in the bowels of the United Nations headquarters in New York. South Korea’s government proposed that the full assembly of the UN Commission on the Status of Women adopt a resolution to condemn sex-selection abortion. The vast majority of international delegations were initially favorable to this proposal; then the feminists unleashed their fury.

The self-proclaimed “defenders of women” lobbied hard and successfully to have the European Union and others abandon preborn girls to their fate and kill the largely symbolic UN resolution. Their logic was essentially this: If we accept that some abortions must be stopped, then all abortions are in danger, and our goal is to spread, not limit, abortion.

The way to end sex-selection abortion is to convince the world of the truth about the human person. All children are created in the very image of God, and as such have profound dignity and a right to life regardless of what doctors, parents, society or the State “choose.” No PR campaign can compare with this Natural Law standard when it comes to protecting the lives of unborn girls.

The lie that these feminist hypocrites are defending women or girls must be exposed and denounced in the strongest possible ways. They are defending abortion, period. They are not part of the solution — they are part of the problem — and millions of girls’ (and boys’) lives are being snuffed out every year because of them.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • goral

    “Shockingly, The Economist’s recommended solution is more feminism: more propaganda from the same folks who brought you abortion, but this time directed toward somehow improving the public image of women and daughters. Basically, they are saying that a big PR blitz is needed to highlight the positive contributions of women to society.”

    Pardon me, Mr. Meaney as I take apart this paragraph. The shocking item would be if the purveyors of secular internationalism did NOT recommend more feminism.
    It is propaganda as you say.

    “improving the public image of women”?
    “highlighting the positive contributions of women”?
    Are we equating the fair sex with wolves and crows and dandelions, all of which need better PR.?
    How degrading, how characteristic of those who look at the human race as just another burden on Mother Earth.
    They don’t mean to help women at all. They know they’re getting two for one out of this campaign. When there are less women births there is less breeding and less population to burden the earth.
    They’re looking for a way to communicate to us that it’s not fair that only women are carrying the load of freedom of choice and population control. Men also need to sacrifice themselves for the feminist cause.
    For the good of the human race we need to kill more men and not less women is what they’re telling us. The Economist needs to help the feminists get this message across in such a way that it fools its readers and the general public. This is not hard to do.

MENU