Sex Ratio Imbalance

I was reading Stan Abram’s article on how the sexual ratio imbalance in China (120men:100women), lead to economic imbalances via the institution of marriage. His post was sparked from a recent law in China, which declares that whoever pays the down payment for a house, will own it in a divorce.
http://www.chinasmack.com/2011/stories/new-chinese-marriage-law-protects-mens-assets-angers-women.html

I liked the line from one woman netizen that said, “好加一條:房子是誰的,那誰來照顧打掃!” (“Add a corollary: whoever owns the house, should take care and clean it themselves!”)
Good idea. I personally would love to stay home while my spouse goes out and works at a giant soul-sucking corporation. I think we should get married!

And just like my other post regarding the Russia-DPRK-ROK pipline proposal, it’s all about protecting yo’ dollah billz, yo!

Notice how I didn’t just say “marriage”, but the “institution of marriage”. No, I don’t care if sex isn’t between a man and a woman. I just want to emphasize, that marriage isn’t necessarily something done “for love”, because the divorce rates definately prove otherwise. They were originally for bringing two families of a certain economic background, and creating a stronger family unit. For instance, let’s say your family were blacksmiths: if you wanted the marriage to be business related, you’d want someone who could help out with the accounting books, or be a nice receptionist at the front; if you were too busy at work though, maybe you wanted someone to help you out with house chores. Someone who farms on the otherhand, would do no good with a blacksmith’s daughter, because even though she may be able to help out with chores in the house, she wouldn’t be able to help out in the field at all. This is why you want to marry people of the same economic background, and is the real concept behind the phrase, “門當戶對
UPDATE August 19, 2011:
http://www.chinahearsay.com/marriage-gender-housing-is-the-supreme-court-sexist
Stan Abrams makes a good point that separating funds between husband and wife is ridiculous, and points out flaws in the new law. So what is one to do? The author still says “no marriage”=”no hassle”

Corollary September 6, 2011:
http://www.chinadebate.com/2011/09/china’s-new-marriage-law-may-exacerbate-gender-wealth-gap-by-leta-hong-fincher
A very extensive explanation of this new marriage law, and its possible implications on marriage in China. Maybe it will make women think twice about marriage, and e

阿江

本人現任爲龔家令道製作主筆。關心東亞美洲兩地政治。
13=阝12=口 J=丁 (阿)
L=氵 Z=工 (江)
–1312JLZ (阿江)
You can contact me via…

Facebook Twitter Google+  

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *