E/CN.4/2002/73/Add.2 page 26 93. Misinterpretation, exploitation and, in some cases, manipulation of religion can create social mechanisms that control women’s status, sometimes denying the most basic rights, such as freedom of movement and the right to travel without the husband’s authorization as well as the right to study in non-segregated co-educational schools and to spend time and mix with friends or colleagues of the opposite sex. Such mechanisms are intensified by the fact that women’s representation in spheres of public life, including religion, is limited and sometimes non-existent. It cannot be denied that, in most religions, misinterpretations detrimental to women are due to men. It seems highly likely that, if women had participated with men in such interpretive work, discrimination would without doubt be less prejudicial to their rights and, where discrimination nonetheless continues, it might have been less severe. In this instance, we are witnessing rather a reverse phenomenon where, possibly through not acting differently, women in a number of cultures are regarded as guardians of traditions, including those most detrimental to their status or to their position before the law or to their image within the family and in society. In many cultures and religions, the persistence of stereotypes prejudicial to women is reflected in a preference for male children, the effects of which can be very harmful to women. 2. Son preference 94. Male-child preference is, to varying degrees, prevalent in all continents and is explained by the existence of patriarchal models, discriminatory interpretation of religion and specific factors such as economic contribution, support in old age, continuity and perpetuation of the family line, inheritance laws and performance of religious duties. Under Islam, for example, several verses of the Koran have been interpreted—sometimes out of context—as denoting a generalized preference for males, which has been exacerbated by countries’ patriarchal cultures and nonreligious factors.94 That applies also to Christianity95 and Judaism.96 Such preference can consciously or unconsciously give rise to practices harmful to women and is a source of discrimination. It has been defined as “the preference of parents for male children which often manifests itself in neglect, deprivation or discriminatory treatment of girls to the detriment of their mental and physical health”.97 Son preference is expressed in an everyday manner and can manifest itself in important events, such as childbirth, where the arrival of a daughter is often felt to be a disappointment. Also, a daughter is regarded by her parents as a transient being who will eventually leave them to live in her husband’s home. In many cultures, daughters are seen as offspring born to depart, their place not really being in the family community.98 Preference can be reflected in a negative general portrayal of the image of women, neglect of female children and discrimination against them in all areas of life, notably in employment and education or even in ordinary acts of daily living. 95. In many States, son preference is, as will be seen, reflected in severe forms of discrimination and criminal acts against women and girls such as, for example, sex-selective abortion, female infanticide, non-registration or abandonment of female children and dietary discrimination. In some States, the status of “out-of-plan” children can be such that they are officially non-existent and exposed to considerable discrimination.99 Such practices also lead to demographic imbalances in favour of males in some regions of the world, especially Asia.100 In some Asian countries, son preference may have adverse effects on fertility control and can sometimes be a major obstacle to population stabilization policies.101 In those same countries, it has led to the development of dangerous practices in official medical systems for birth prevention based on sex selection or foeticide.102