U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 10:53 AM
 
5,240 posts, read 2,366,471 times
Reputation: 13322

Advertisements

Nah. The lemmings just do a free fall ...all together.

China regulates gender population.

Black widow spiders...the same.

If gender keeps being renamed/classified..we won't need to be of concern....since "self identifying' is an intriguing way to hinder procreation. Every self identifying person for them self!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 10:54 AM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
2,132 posts, read 763,532 times
Reputation: 4415
I don't think Betty Zane or Molly Pitcher got the memo.


BTW- Black Widows don't become widows until after the male has served his purpose....And "Self Identity", not to mention homosexuality, are evolutionary dead ends. As Seinfeld would say, their team has to be constantly recruiting new members. They can't manufacture them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Houston, TX
13,778 posts, read 7,797,930 times
Reputation: 28093
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nov3 View Post
Nah. The lemmings just do a free fall ...all together.

China regulates gender population.

Black widow spiders...the same.

If gender keeps being renamed/classified..we won't need to be of concern....since "self identifying' is an intriguing way to hinder procreation. Every self identifying person for them self!
Not anymore. They are allowing two kids after the gender imbalance became so serious men started having problems finding mates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:08 AM
 
51 posts, read 7,043 times
Reputation: 104
Women are more important than men.


A woman can only have one child per year for maybe ten childbearing years, while a man can father any number of children for many years.


If you want to destroy a culture or civilization, get rid of their women, and the culture and civilization will eventually die out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:23 AM
 
2,549 posts, read 475,089 times
Reputation: 1374
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarstowC View Post
Women are more important than men.


A woman can only have one child per year for maybe ten childbearing years, while a man can father any number of children for many years.


If you want to destroy a culture or civilization, get rid of their women, and the culture and civilization will eventually die out.
A woman might be limited to having one pregnancy episode a year, there is such a thing as carrying 2 or more kids during that episode. Let's not forget there is also adoption and foster children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:08 PM
 
727 posts, read 174,428 times
Reputation: 2091
No.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:21 PM
 
Location: AZ
636 posts, read 340,117 times
Reputation: 2636
Could I be allowed to choose who drops dead? That could sway my opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:27 PM
 
3,886 posts, read 2,899,848 times
Reputation: 5307
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
The concept originates in the mathematics of biology: one male can initiate the pregnancies of many women contemporaneously, but one woman can only carry one pregnancy at a time...ie- a clan could perpetuate itself nicely with one male and many females, but a clan with one female and many males would be doomed to extinction.


That concept may have morphed thru the years into the "protect the weak" mentality, but ever since the invention of gun powder, size & strength doesn't mean so much any more.


As Zoisite points out above, given our huge world population now, losing a few (even a million at a time) still leaves plenty of folks left over to keep the species going.


"Fire!...Oughta my way!" ---George Costanza
Couldn't we also break this down further into pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women? Pre-menopausal women would hold the biological value while post-menopausal women would have no biological value. Now if the OP's hypothetical 123 million women to die were all elderly women wouldn't that help tremendously with the anticipated social security, pension and healthcare imbalances on the economic front?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:32 PM
 
Location: S.W. British Columbia
6,430 posts, read 6,061,212 times
Reputation: 11749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks View Post
Not anymore. They are allowing two kids after the gender imbalance became so serious men started having problems finding mates.

That's absolutely NOT the reason why China changed to a 2-child policy. That stuff about gender imbalance and Chinese men not finding mates was just a spiteful nonsense rumour that got started in USA around 2005 and then it spread via internet. Here are the real reasons why China changed to a 2-child policy so that SOME families (not all) are now allowed or are subsidized for two children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-child_policy


BTW, the United Kingdom has a 2-child policy now too. I give it another 20 years and USA will be instituting a 1 or 2 child policy too.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:49 PM
 
Location: S.W. British Columbia
6,430 posts, read 6,061,212 times
Reputation: 11749
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtkinsonDan View Post
Couldn't we also break this down further into pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women? Pre-menopausal women would hold the biological value while post-menopausal women would have no biological value. Now if the OP's hypothetical 123 million women to die were all elderly women wouldn't that help tremendously with the anticipated social security, pension and healthcare imbalances on the economic front?
Social security, pension and healthcare WHERE, in what countries? Not all countries are equal in those things and not all countries have equal birth rates.

If the deaths of the 123 million women occurred scattered about the world it wouldn't make any difference if they were pre-menopausal or post-menopausal and it would have no impact on benefits in places where benefits exist. If the deaths occurred in one single country that happens to have social security, pension and healthcare benefits (which not all countries do) then the impact and imbalance the deaths has on the rest of that one country's population and civilization would be so devastating it would overshadow any impact on benefits and no matter if the women were pre or post menopausal, that wouldn't be a consideration and their age and breeding capability would be irrelevant.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top