godelian wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 6:40 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am
No, I'm talking at people who live at a level where they can't even afford the uniforms for school.
If they cannot afford a uniform, why do they even need to wear one?
Because in Developing World schools, school itself is often paid for by the government...but you aren't allowed to attend without a uniform. Getting uniforms for their children is beyond the means of many of these poor folks. They're living on less than $1 American every day...and food is the priority.
As soon as these people get money, the first thing they do is put their children in school. And if the school does what schools should do -- educate in basic literacy and maths, and so on -- the family's out of poverty within one generation.
I specialize in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. What is there so privileged about these countries?
Well, I have to ask: in what sense are you a "specialist" when you don't already know what I just told you? Even a casual acquaintance with these countries or others like them should make you know I'm telling you the truth: so what are you "specialized" in?
No cynicism intended: I'm just asking a question that seems obvious to me.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am
That's not an option she's allowed to have, in those cultures. Nobody's giving her any choice.
A woman can reject every serious suitor that shows up,
Nope. Not in the Developing World. In many cases, she has no say whatsoever. Her family, her tribe, or her necessities often make choice utterly impossible.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am
Yep, there is. I'm amazed you don't know that. You obviously don't travel much. I know for sure you're wrong about that.
I choose to live in the poorest areas of the Indochinese archipelago. I have lived here for over a decade.
I'm sorry...I find that very hard to believe. If it were so, you would surely know what I'm telling you. How could you possibly live there, and still know nothing about the conditions of the poor? It stretches the possibilities of imagination to think that.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am
One way is through corporate donations, and another private fund donations
Yeah, that will fund the useless degrees of millions of women.
No, no "degrees." I'm talking about basic education. Basic.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jun 30, 2022 3:34 am
best given to sustainable initiatives like microenterprise, sustainable farming, and microschools, which create independence and self-sufficiency, not handouts and dependence.
So, the idea is to create some more "strong and independent women who need no man".
No. The idea is to create a woman who has a basic education and can provide for the children she's been forced to have with the man who abandoned her, or died in war, or was swept up by the gangs, or is a hopeless addict now, or the aged abuser her parents forced her to "marry."
And so far as population goes, the goal is to empower the people who are actually the source of the rise in population to make a different choice without having to murder their own children.
All noble goals, I'm sure you agree.
Now, here's the problem you and I are having, Godelian. I was responding to a question about how to manage world population without abortion. You, by contrast, are preoccupied with the question of how privileged and Western woman are managing the marriage "market" these days.
Both are legitimate questions. However, they are not at all the same question, and are not interchangeable. Privileged Western women have nothing to do right now with the population statistics: statistically, Western women are not even reproducing themselves in replacement numbers, let alone creating a population rise.
So let's deal with these questions separately. If you can understand the necessity of giving unspoiled, undereducated, under-optioned women in the Developing World a basic education so they can feed their children, I can go on and talk with you about the Western problem of dating and marriage. But we can't legitimately do both questions at the same time. They aren't the same.
I think you and I agree on the Western woman problem. I don't see much you've said with which I would take an issue. But if you try to apply the same solutions to Developing World women, I can't agree with you, because then, you'd just be dead wrong about that, and verifiably wrong.
So what's your choice? Do you want to keep arguing as if every woman is a privileged, Western type? Or do you want to consider that poor women in the Developing world, who are the only ones that now really have anything to do with global population control, need education not abortions?
What would you like to do here? I'll leave it in your choice.