So in a spare moment, I was thumbing through the 2007 edition of the “Pocket World in Figures,” published by the Economist magazine, and offered as a renewal incentive. Found an interesting set of statistics on page 19, under Population Matters. Under the category “Most male populations,” or in other words, the number of males per 100 females, here are the “leaders”:
1. United Arab Emirates……………214
2. Qatar……………………………………..206
3. Kuwait……………………………………150
4. Bahrain………………………………….132
5. Oman…………………………………….128
6. Saudi Arabia………………………….117
7. Greenland……………………………..113
8. Jordan…………………………………….108
9. Afghanistan……………………………107
1) I’m sensing a pattern in here, but just can’t quite grasp it.
2) Greenland?
Seriously though: Imagine what the meaning is behind these kinds of numbers: What forces shape a country such that it has over twice as many males as females? Especially when, by all accounts, females are everywhere else the sturdier gender, more likely to survive to adulthood? And what are the implications in such societies when rich guys get to have up to three wives, leaving your average guy next to no chance?
Actually, that’s a rhetorical question. I already knew the answer.
Second observation: Looks like the best way to keep the male population of Arab countries down to manageable size is to move them next to Israel. With the exception of #8 Jordan, 108 males to each female, the rest of her neighbors don’t make the cut.
For, you know: Whatever reason.
Wow. Those numbers are astounding. I’m also very surprised that China, which has been aborting and killing female babies for so many years now, isn’t found on the list.
When half of the population is so thoroughly oppressed, the whole society suffers. I wonder how many gifted Arab women who could have contributed in all the areas of life, from arts to sciences, have been instead been banished to carrying water and wood and to regular beatings. I am so very thankful to God that I was born into this country, where women are both cherished and encouraged to achieve.
You do notice that the top 8 are our allies, do you not?
Statistics like these bear more analysis beacuse they have a lot to do with Islam for one thing and environment in the case of Greenland.
Countries evolve at their own rate. I don’t see this as such a big deal. All of the countries on that list are working through issues with women and trying to make progress within the context of what is approproate for their society. Until they jettison Islam, its way too much to hope for or expect Western style equality.
The smart ones got out of the majority of those countries while the getting was good . . . I mean, how much warning do you need when you can look around and see what the ladies have to put up with AND then you see a photo of Khalid Sheik Muhammad, otherwise known by his buds as “the Hairball”, and know that you could be arranged to be kis wifey. YUK.
The chicks from Greenland moved to the Carribean – I wonder why??
What?! 214 males for every 100 females?! Is this at birth? These statistics are distressing! On so many levels, distressing! I’m curious–did the stats have a source? Did it start with UN? Because, they must have replied with an “Oh–okay, girls don’t count, therefore we won’t count the girls.”
Lex,
I wonder if those numbers are skewed by all the TCN’s those countries (1-6) import. I know Bahrain is full of unaccompanied guys from India, Pakistan, Indonesia, PI etc etc…
If they’re included in those numbers that would explain a lot of it – and would explain why none of the labor exporting countries are on the list.
That is a great point. I wonder if it includes all the Filipina maids and waitresses too.
Skippy, if Islam is the reason why the Arab countries have this disparity, then why doesn’t Indonesia, which has the most Muslims of all the Islamic nations, show up on this list?
Duh…the difference is the brand of Islam being shoved down everyones throats in the Arab countries, with a dash of Palestine thrown in?
Don’t have access to review the worldwide distro, but I wonder if they’re counting all those Eunuchs with the scimitars! You know those big harem guarding dudes right outta Arabian Nights.
‘Cause if’n I cared I’d feel pity…
B2
Indonesia has plenty of women. That’s why so many of them have to work as maids (or hookers).
Maybe the difference is that most Indonesians don’t take their Islam so seriously. Plus a great minority are Buddhist.
Skippy,
The filipina/os are a tiny percentaget of TCN’s in Bahrain. They are generally doing skilled/semi-skilled labor. You’ll never see one on a construction site, but you will see one as the driver who drops them off and picks them up at the end of their 12 hour day.
re your ‘male v female’ population stats..
i believe it is generally accepted that deeper penetration during intercouse yields statistically more female babies.
“a shallow penetration will favor girls and a deeper will favor boys.”
http://www.childbirth.org/articles/sex.html
draw then your own conclusions.
I personally know a native of the KSA, also a Muslim, who recently moved to London with his wife and two daughters to escape the mysogeny in the KSA. So, that is 3 females leaving and one male…
My first thought? Makes sense to me, considering that many Middle Eastern countries don’t consider women to be a person at all. I have to wonder if the women were counted, or if they were considered cattle instead.
Not too many years ago, someone published a book on the shift of gender balance in China, projecting a 157 males/100 females in the not too distant future. The author was on one of the talk show and also pointed out the countries that get way out of balance historically tend to most always have big militaries that then “adventure” into neighboring countries.
Blogrolling 2006-09-08…
Items of interest from my blogroll.
……
Somebodies cookin’ the books. I’ll bet they don’t count all their women. “Oh, hello Mr. census taker. Nope, only 3 wives in this house. Ignore those behind the curtain”
M your comment is kind of backwards. Your quote says more Male babies come from deep penetration.
M and Idaho joe:
(prepare for the second use of my bio degree, which will avoid clinical words that might trigger a spam filter)
It seems the male “parts” in the reproductive process are not as study in the biochemical environment enroute. The female ones seem to stand up better to the “exposure,” hence the reason for females arising from the shallow method…
That’s cuz us little chicks are TUFF!
(and if you need any proof, just look at Lex’s Israeli chicks with guns picture)
oh…sturdy was the word..were-cat is right in this case…