Go to From The Observation Deck
- Add a comment
- Go to Can there really be any such thing as "gender imbalance" amongst offspring?
Re:
I suppose, C C T, that it could be seasonal. Or perhaps it has more to do with when they are conceived as opposed to when they are born! If that's the case, then I guess it's probably better to let sleeping dogs lie. There are certain things you just don't ask people . . . 
posted by
JimmyA
on September 20, 2013 at 10:51 AM
| link to this | reply
Seems boys run in our families Jimmy, can't think of a reason unless it was being born in the Autumn. 
posted by
C_C_T
on September 20, 2013 at 10:36 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Jimmy
Over the years, Naut, I do recall hearing and reading about certain "methods" people can try to pre-determine what the sex of their baby might be ( eating certain foods, having sex during specific times, etc. ) But I suppose, in the end, it's up to The Fates. However, I've read not too long ago that right now, in the US, regardless of age, there are more females than males. Hmmm . . . doesn't that makes us the minority? Gee, I wonder if we can start to cash in on those "minority benefits" now . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 20, 2013 at 5:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: JimmyA
Well, Sir Wiley, I guess four out of seven isn't too bad. I guess I'm fortunate to not have lost any of my siblings. On my father's side, I have one uncle left, and I can't imagine what that must be like, to be the "last in line." I guess I'll have to ask him . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 20, 2013 at 5:12 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Oh, no, TAPS! Say it isn't so! 
But I have seen that too, a family that has either all boys or all girls. Like I wrote, sometimes family history dictates the gender and/or the sequence in which they are born. Other times, I guess it's "pot luck" . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 20, 2013 at 5:08 AM
| link to this | reply
Jimmy
I guess there can be in families, but overall things pretty well even out, I believe, although stats seem to suggest there is a slight preponderance towards male babies...
posted by
Nautikos
on September 19, 2013 at 8:30 PM
| link to this | reply
JimmyA
I had 3 sisters and 4 brothers who were all born and now there are only 4 of us still alive. LOL
posted by
WileyJohn
on September 19, 2013 at 6:56 PM
| link to this | reply
All I know is that when we had our fourth boy, the doctor told us that if we had twelve children, they would all be boys. He didn't seem to be kidding. Guess who volunteered to go get a vasectomy. LOL
posted by
TAPS.
on September 19, 2013 at 2:40 PM
| link to this | reply
Re:
It is indeed, Utah, and there really doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it either! Hopefully no one else's family has had to go through such bizarre events to keep a certain "sequence" intact . . . 
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 1:54 PM
| link to this | reply
It is very strange, I will tell you that.
posted by
UtahJay
on September 19, 2013 at 8:43 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
As they probably should be, adnohr. I know that family history can play a major role in determining people's offspring, but I had always found this tragic and bizarre sequence to be beyond explanation. The ration of boys to girls may be one thing, but to have them born in a certain sequence just doesn't really make much sense . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Kind of a random thing, swordfingers? You may be right. No one could possibly have any control over something like that anyway! I'm just glad this unusual sequence hasn't spilled over with my great-nieces and nephews . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:14 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Isn't it, Annicita? I mean, there just doesn't seem to be any logical or rational explanation for it either! Perhaps I should begin a study . . . 
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:13 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: JimmyA
Very succinctly put, Bill! No bizarre sequences or combinations, huh? I guess that's good . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:12 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
That's true, Kabu, thanks to that good ol' X chromosome! But what makes it so odd is that the determination of the child's sex should really have nothing to do with the order in which the children are born. If it's a boy, it's a boy. If it's a girl, then it's a girl. But for something in the gene-pool to create a particular sequence is bizarre indeed, and probably beyond normal explanation . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:11 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Wow, FSI! That's some ratio! One girl to seven boys. I would suppose, genetically, that the make-up of the offspring of any family would probably be based on past generations. For example, according to my family's history on my mother's side, there have been only one set of twins ever born, and they were distant, distant cousins from about a hundred years ago. Since then, there have been no twins born anywhere in my family! However, families with a history of twins will more than likely continue to have twins somewhere down the line. What a science . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:07 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Thanks, lovelylady. Yes, the loss of each of those nieces was tragic, but at the same time, somewhat bizarre because of that unusual sequence I wrote about. Sometimes we speculate what might have happened if, in the sequence, a girl was to be born next and a boy was on the way. Too terrible to think about . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 7:01 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Is that what it is, lustor? I've never really considered that before. As far as my nieces and nephews are concerned, there are nine boys and six girls, and with the great-nieces and nephews, it's two boys and four girls ( in no particular sequence, apparently ). There's probably a balance in there somewhere . . .
posted by
JimmyA
on September 19, 2013 at 6:58 AM
| link to this | reply
Interesting concept. Can't say the same for my family. The sexes were all over the place.
posted by
adnohr
on September 19, 2013 at 6:38 AM
| link to this | reply
don't believe in it... i think it just happened that way in your fam.
posted by
Carolyn_Moe
on September 19, 2013 at 6:25 AM
| link to this | reply
very interesting
posted by
Annicita
on September 18, 2013 at 6:16 PM
| link to this | reply
JimmyA
|No. BC-A, Bill’s R®st
posted by
BC-A
on September 18, 2013 at 2:32 PM
| link to this | reply
the Father of My Sons was a twin..and his brother had 2 girls while we had 2 boys. I have often thought maybe that was because they were twins. It is normal that the male determines the sex of the children so if there is a pattern running through your family, makes sense that it is in the male line.
posted by
Kabu
on September 18, 2013 at 1:34 PM
| link to this | reply
I myself have not heard of something like that...Thinking about it now, the paternal side of the family has been having a lot of boys over the last twenty years. Out of the eight babies born, seven are boys...
posted by
FormerStudentIntern
on September 18, 2013 at 10:07 AM
| link to this | reply
Wow! That's really interesting Jimmy. But such heartbreaking losses. I'm so sorry.
posted by
lovelyladymonk
on September 18, 2013 at 10:03 AM
| link to this | reply
I only have a brother and he has no natural children of his own, his wife has two boys. I had a boy, girl, girl so there is not real sequence to go by. But there are more boys being born now to replace those that were killed in the wars
posted by
Lanetay
on September 18, 2013 at 8:55 AM
| link to this | reply