‘No girls born’ for past three months in area of India covering 132 villages

If we assume girls are not preferred in the two most populous countries in the world (China, India) and their societies have a lower ratio of females to males, then the global trend of 1:1.08 female to male ratio must be skewed in a similar way somewhere else? right? Or does this account for that?

In other news, I thought we were headed for a different problem[0].

[0]: http://theconversation.com/the-y-chromosome-is-disappearing-...

It's a sober reminder of the feel good cultural relativism propped up by some

Simply put, there are not enough women to go around.

I suspect this leads to lots of overly fierce competition for women. Women treated more as precious commodities and less as human beings. Men lacking experience dealing with women. A certain percentage of men being unhappy much of the time because finding a mate is frustrating, or they've simply given up on it.

This is only conjecture but it's hard to imagine it being otherwise.

Suppose a village has a birth rate of 8 babies a year (2 babies every 3 months). There's (roughly) a 50% chance the babies will be male and female, 25% chance that they're both female and 25% chance that they're both male.

That means that if you're sampling from a district that has 1,000 villages (with the average birth rate of 2 babies / 3 months, roughly the birth rate indicated by the article), one quarter of the villages will have 2 male babies - that's 250 villages with 0 female babies born in the last 3 months.

Not making any claims regarding foeticide in India - just saying that the way they chose the villages matters a lot.