china- female baby rejects. (1 Viewer)

[Kittycat]

well, yenta was 1/2 right....

it said in some poor country areas your allowed another child if the first one was a girl.
since girls can't work on the farm as effectively.

Yes but arent they only allowed max two kids no matter if they are both girls ... or boys for that matter?

 

[jm1234567890]

Yes but arent they only allowed max two kids no matter if they are both girls ... or boys for that matter?

I haven't heard anything like that...

where did you read that?

 

[Generator]

Eg. The ABC and SBS news services were shitloads more objective than Channel 7, 9 and The Daily Telegraph which led the whole shamelessly populist "Corby is innocent" drum beating throughout their news coverage

Even though they may be public broadcasters, keep in mind that the ABC and SBS are independent (with the ABC required by law, I believe, to be balanced), and you cannot compare such organisations with those that are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the state.

 

[supercharged]

Even though they may be public broadcasters, keep in mind that the ABC and SBS are independent (with the ABC required by law, I believe, to be balanced), and you cannot compare such organisations with those that are nothing more than a mouthpiece for the state.

In that case there should be a law requiring ALL news teams to be balanced not just government ones, rather than the constant spewing of biased junk by the commercial networks especially one Mr Rupert Murdoch

I'm sure there is even a documentary movie on how heavily biased and unobjective his Fox News network (more like propaganda network) is in America.

 

[ameh]

^ unobjective?


lol

 

[Not-That-Bright]

There is a movie... I could make some documentary about how bias CNN is i'm sure...
CNN, CBS, ABC etc (basically all the media) have a liberal bias, Fox News has a right-wing bias... I don't really think there's that big a problem.

 

[supercharged]

^ unobjective?

lol

ok subjective then...anyway my point is just because a news network is government owned, doesn't necessarily make it any more biased than the so-called "free media" owned by big business interests.

ABC and SBS news are FAR more balanced than the commercial networks of Channel Seven, Nine or Ten crud news.

 

[pete_mate]

What the hell is the obsession with human rights in China? Get over it, Human rights in China is damn good compared to many parts of the world. If you want some reading material about human rights abuses against children why just go take a look at Africa (world's worst human rights) where child slave labour and child soldiers are rife?

get real, africa is the poorest nation in the world, just because your better than africa doesnt mean your good, plus africa has a host of other problems, when you've got millions of people dying of aids who cares about human rights? human life is a more pressing matter

africa doesnt even have a proper functioning government, but your human rights violations are a result of a functioninig government with little care for an individual persons rights

china hosting the olympics is a joke, they still havent fixed up their act

 

[supercharged]

get real, africa is the poorest nation in the world, just because your better than africa doesnt mean your good, plus africa has a host of other problems, when you've got millions of people dying of aids who cares about human rights? human life is a more pressing matter

So therefore by being disorganised, poor and having a high level of AIDs infection, makes genocides in Rwanda and Dafur etc a non pressing matter?

 

[Frigid]

china hosting the olympics is a joke, they still havent fixed up their act

what has hosting the olympics have to do with human rights?

besides, we haven't really fixed up our act (reference here), and we've hosted two olympic games already.

obviously my comparison is outlandish, but IMO olympic games hosting and human rights issues are not correlated.

 

[pete_mate]

the point is its gonna take a hell of a lot of effort to fix africa's problems, whereas all china needs, (with its functioning government and society) is a change in attitudes, not massacre-ing people after they protest for example

the olympics is linked, countries are chosen on the basis of the virtues the olympic games upholds, such as peace and human rights.
during the time of selection there was contraversy over china shou;d be allowed to host it, hell; they'd be having it much sooner than 2012 or whenever it is if this werent an issue

australia's detention policy is irrelevant, we dont shoot our own people and have good welfare and health , hence on the Quality of Life index we're up there next to sweden

 

[paper cup]

get real, africa is the poorest nation in the world, just because your better than africa doesnt mean your good, plus africa has a host of other problems, when you've got millions of people dying of aids who cares about human rights? human life is a more pressing matter

africa doesnt even have a proper functioning government, but your human rights violations are a result of a functioninig government with little care for an individual persons rights

china hosting the olympics is a joke, they still havent fixed up their act

Human life. and what sustains human life? food and water - and education, these are all important. and what sustains these necessities? THE ECONOMY. and what is china focusing on at the moment? THE ECONOMY and this is why things like social welfare and human rights aren't being given much attention
may I remind you that china is also a DEVELOPING COUNTRY
WHERE CORRUPTION IS RIFE
It's not as bad as in Africa but it's still present.
you're hypocritical aren't you
by the way africa is a continent
and we never said we were 'good' only that people who know little about the situation should do a little research or listening to others before launching into tirades with little factual or practical basis
and re the olympics. Olympics will pump money into the economy, which will go toward IMPROVING THE LIVING STANDARDS OF THE ORDINARY PEOPLE
didn't you say human life is more important?
and in africa a lot of the aid goes into private coffers, not battling AIDS.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I don't see how you can't be a developing country AND focus on human rights =/ The Chinese government doesn't need to try to crush freedom at every opportunity...

 

[jm1234567890]

I don't see how you can't be a developing country AND focus on human rights =/ The Chinese government doesn't need to try to crush freedom at every opportunity...

how do you base that statement?
"The Chinese government doesn't need to try to crush freedom at every opportunity..."

you have alot of freedom in china, just not much freedom to speak against the state. I guess this is just to make it easier for them to make decisions and hold power.

 

[Frigid]

i've a feeling my most learned friends are just basing their statements on Cold War stereotypes and events that happened 16 years ago.

without being accused of being a 'phanatical', i would like to point out that what suits western democracies might not suit china. it is not an attitude problem, but rather a contextual difference.

besides, let me put it this way, how long did it take for england to turn from a feudal state to a democratic country with responsible and representative government? were there not bloodshed, revolution and state oppression along the way? it must be remembered that china only threw off her feudal shackles at the turn of the 20th century and ceased its civil wars 56 years ago.

there are a multitude of reasons why china is not a fully westernised, human rights-loving, representative government, but none of it is based on what my learned friend pete calls attitude.

alicia: empty your PM inbox will you.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

So what you're basically saying is that we shouldn't criticise China? or other oppressive regimes? I agree that you need to somewhat accept other people's customs and that other cultures feel different but isn't it taking it a little too far?

 

[paper cup]

I don't see how you can't be a developing country AND focus on human rights =/ The Chinese government doesn't need to try to crush freedom at every opportunity...

I know NTB, that's the problem so many people have

say that they allow people to protest against the government. initially there will be some small muted protests which may escalate into big whopping ones, which may catalyse social upheaval. You have to remember that although the CCP deprives the Chinese people of many democratic freedoms, its rule in the 1990s and into the 21st century has been characterised by social and economic stability. You can see the lure of stability to a nation which first endured WW2 and the Jap invasion, then Mao, the Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution - and the period just coming out of the CR (the 1980s people were still gnawing on bark - the govt aimed to solve the starvation/housing problems by the mid 1990s, which it mostly did, admirable for the resources and time it had and the shambles the economy was in). Social stability is required for the economy to develop. And as I have said and will say again, a developed economy is required for the formation of a developed society which places emphasis on ideas such as human rights and social welfare. Right now Chinese society is dog eat dog - people are more concerned for their own survival.
Do you get my drift.

 

[paper cup]

i've a feeling my most learned friends are just basing their statements on Cold War stereotypes and events that happened 16 years ago.

without being accused of being a 'phanatical', i would like to point out that what suits western democracies might not suit china. it is not an attitude problem, but rather a contextual difference.

besides, let me put it this way, how long did it take for england to turn from a feudal state to a democratic country with responsible and representative government? were there not bloodshed, revolution and state oppression along the way? it must be remembered that china only threw off her feudal shackles at the turn of the 20th century and ceased its civil wars 56 years ago.

there are a multitude of reasons why china is not a fully westernised, human rights-loving, representative government, but none of it is based on what my learned friend pete calls attitude.

alicia: empty your PM inbox will you.

emptied. it won't let me rep you, but let me say here that I <3 you

 

[Frigid]

So what you're basically saying is that we shouldn't criticise China? or other oppressive regimes?

no, but what i am saying is that we shouldn't use those criticisms as the forefront of every single comment we make about that country.

other than the fact that China has human rights abuses against certain minority groups, censors the internet, has non-representative government, has bad environmental problems and a large rift between the rich and poor, in all other respects I don't think it's a bad place at all.

I think many Australian people's perceptions of China haven't really changed since the end of the Cold War, and yet, since then China has changed a lot.

 

[paper cup]

no, but what i am saying is that we shouldn't use those criticisms as the forefront of every single comment we make about that country.

other than the fact that China has human rights abuses against certain minority groups, censors the internet, has non-representative government, has bad environmental problems and a large rift between the rich and poor, in all other respects I don't think it's a bad place at all.

I think many Australian people's perceptions of China haven't really changed since the end of the Cold War, and yet, since then China has changed a lot.

exactement.
how many of you have actually been to China, out of interest.