House of Eratosthenes

The Papua New Guinea jungle has given up one of its darkest secrets – the systematic slaughter of every male baby born in two villages to prevent future tribal clashes.

By virtually wiping out the ‘male stock’, tribal women hope they can avoid deadly bow-and-arrow wars between the villages in the future.

‘Babies grow into men and men turn into warriors,’ said Rona Luke, a village wife who is attending a special ‘peace and reconciliation’ meeting in the mountain village of Goroka.

H/T to Ace, via Helen, who adds:

But the commenters to the Daily Mail article that discussed the story certainly had sympathy for these female infant killers. One has to wonder about what kind of twisted morality commenters like the following must possess to write the following:

Stop judging these people with Western ethics. The commenters here have no idea how these people live and deal with life. I’ve lived with New Guineans and their minds do not work in the same way as Westerners. Overall they are gentle people and things must have got pretty bad for the womenfolk to kill their own children. In their minds it was the only way to save the village. Save your disgust for the baby killers in this country who should know better.

In any conflict, it’s always the women and children who suffer through no doing of their own. And when everything has been ruined, and the men killed, they have to pick up the pieces and restore everything. They must have really had enough to kill their own children like that.

How horrendous that these women so no other option but to kill there own babies to prevent heartache in the future,its a lose lose situation for them.

No sympathy at all for the male infants that died, just for the women who had to do the killing, how pathetic.

I suggest readers browse the Daily Mail comments for themselves. The nugget Dr. Helen lifted from there is a specimen, not a champion.

I wonder how Sally Field feels about this idea. We already know her opinions about other things. Perhaps the notion of male-only baby genocide would bring such joy to her that her nipples would stick out like pencil erasers.

The article goes on to suggest, if I’m reading it correctly — which is doubtful — that the fighting is still goin’ on. Seems to me, if that’s the case, that the experiment has not only been started, but brought to a conclusion. Didn’t work out so hot. But still. Women kill men systematically…newborn, infant, defenseless men…and the sympathy is reserved for the women who kill. Poor, poor mothers, how desperate they must be.

Can’t get much more deranged than that.

Those who sympathize with the women are short sighted. They are destroying their society because without the male stock, there will be no society later on. And even if they do allow a few males to survive, 2 additional issues come to mind: low gene pool will destroy the group and the genes may end up slanting to female births out of proportion to male but that’s probably several generations down the line. The first problem is likely to hit first.
- Shannon in AZ | 12/02/2008 @ 03:24

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Sally Field, Call Your OfficeSunday, November 30th, 2008

Sally Field, Call Your Office
Sunday, November 30th, 2008