Why anyone is surprised at this, I can't imagine. Girls are perceived to be worth less than boys, so market forces result in the supply of girls to be constricted until it meets the demand. Sexism is the reason girls are devalued, but this practice isn't the devaluing, quite the reverse: by making girls more scarce, selectively aborting some increases the value of the ones who survive. Boys are the ones being devalued by the practice - and the ones being hurt, since it means half of them will have no opportunity to marry or have (legitimate) children.

I wonder if perhaps some of the outrage is related to the fact that abortion is the means used to achieve this end. Are some liberals not quite as comfortable with mass abortion on demand as they like to think they are? Could they perhaps have a vague unease stemming from the gut feeling that in some parts if China half the female babies are being killed?

Which would "feel" more like this situation: if half of all the baby girls born were exposed and left to die at birth, or if medical technology made it practical to pick the sex of the baby before conception instead of after? Something tells me that the latter wouldn't feel nearly as creepy. Maybe it's just me.

Actually, the devaluing of girls isn't about sexism - it is a rational response to the economics shaped by Chinese cultural standards.

If you have a boy, you've established your retirement since your son is responsible for you in your old age. If you have a girl, she ends up being primarily responsible for her husband's retirement.

That's a pretty awful way to set up a society. As a woman, I'm very thankful and fortunate to have been born in a country where I have a pretty good expectation of equality.

Of course, it's going to take a lot of time and effort to change the perception of girls and women in China, but it will probably pick up as the country continues to develop and modernize. What will be interesting to see is if all these "extra" males will lead to the kinds of social problems that some economists and sociologists have been predicting.

As a woman, I'm very thankful and fortunate to have been born in a country where I have a pretty good expectation of equality.

@ Sevuma

Don't forget you're also thankful for being born in this era. Women were not treated much better in the other countries in the past.

As a man, I'm very thankful and fortunate to have been born in a country where women have a pretty good expectation of equality.

Don't get me wrong, I find this whole business appalling. What I'm curious about is the thought process of people who only find selected parts of it appalling.

Sevumar:

That's a pretty awful way to set up a society. As a woman, I'm very thankful and fortunate to have been born in a country where I have a pretty good expectation of equality.

Actually, American society is probably biased the other way. In terms of the "retirement benefit", female children are likely a better investment than male children. Not only are women more likely to take care of their parents, but the 'expected outcome' of a female child is normally much higher.

And, indeed, you see the same sort of 'economics' where female children are adopted more often than male children.

@ Xando

This is the case in Cambodia where it's the responsibility of the daughter to take care of the parents.

Over there you will see more boys up for adoption than girls.

And it'll all equal out. So, aborting a female is ok just because she's a female (staying away from the child/ fetus language... the aborted IS chromosomally female, right?). Devalued for no other reason than because you're a girl. Yeah, women should be used to it by now, right?