Child Gender Theory

AvengerSentinel · 2017-08-20T16:31:29+00:00

Satoshi Kanazawa is an evolutionary psychologist who has backed up most of the claims you're making with evidence. He makes a very convincing argument that high status men tend to have more boys, and physically attractive parents tend to have more girls, being that attractiveness is a more useful trait to girls than boys.

JamesSkepp · 2017-08-20T16:47:06+00:00

I recently read an article pertaining the gender of a child based on the living conditions of the parents.

Post a link.

Never heard about that idea, but it seems to make little sense. It would have to be a mechanism that evolved. If it evolved - it would be present in similar species too (this or that monkey, or even mammals in general). I'm pretty sure it's not.

If it evolved, it took tens-hundreds of thousand of years. This means it showed up first way before we had ANY civilisation developed - we're talking about the proverbial caveman and the wandering hunter-gatherer tribes. In those times the environment was always harsh. This would inevitably lead to significant and noticeable trend in male/female births. I'm pretty sure it no such trend ever happened, even based on evidence that that no such trend is visible now (recorded history). If it was evolutionary we should see it, as these things don't appear and disappear overnight.

There is difference in genders by live births (globally it's 100 too 106 in favour of men), but these differences arise AFTER the gender of the fetus is established and known, not before.

You can also observe in families which have a very very beautiful wife that the probability of a girl child is more as it ensures heightened hypergamy.

Show the data source. Anecdotal stories or personal opinion is not evidence.

But considering a family which has an ugly wife, male births are the norm.

...?

A genetically dominant gene wins.

You don't seem to understand how genetics and gene selection works. Genes do not compete per se. You mix random male and female DNA and it creates a new "mix" of traits. This new mix is either better adapted to it's environment or not. If it's better adapted it has statistically better chance of surviving and reproducing.

Men are genetically better predisposed for survival in the wilderness - yet our genes never overtook the female ones, there was no women-extinction b/c "we had better genes".

This can also come down to how the relationship between two couples is, or who is more dominant. This can be due to the fact on how much a girl loves a guy or the tingles or how insecure she is. This may alter the conditions in the uterus.

Provide the source. Last time I heard fairytales like this was around highschool - if you fuck a woman harder it's gonna be a boy, if you fuck her gently it's gonna be a girl.

I am seeing more and more proof that theory is right based on observing everyday life and the life of celebrities

This is called confirmation bias. You think all cats are black, suddenly you see more black cats than usual. Also - you're talking about biology, that's science. If you want to prove scientific theory, celebrities and "observing everyday life" is not the way to go.

and regional data etc.

Post a link.

Columbia statistician Andrew Gelman points out that a correct interpretation of the regression coefficients in Kanazawa's analysis is that attractive people are 8% more likely to have girls, an error that Kanazawa acknowledges.[18] Gelman argues that Kanazawa's analysis does not convincingly show causality, because of possible endogeneity as well as problematic interpretations of statistical significance in multiple comparisons.

Kanazawa found that 56 percent of the most beautiful people in the survey had a daughter first compared with only 48 percent of the merely attractive, average, homely, and downright ugly people combined.

According to Keith Bowers, an ecologist at the University of Memphis, there are good reasons why the population never veers too far from the gender balance. “Sons need more food than daughters, so consistently over-producing males create a more competitive family environment,” says Bowers. If all parents had sons when times were good, they may struggle to find a mate or territory when they grew up. Meanwhile, those with a genetic predisposition to over-produce daughters while everyone else is having sons would have a big advantage. “Over time you’d expect roughly equal numbers of males and females to be born,” says Bowers.

Shame that this Kanazawa dude is the only one that has researched this. There seems to be SOME truth to this, but OTOH it's neither proven nor really refuted.

NeoreactionSafe · 2017-08-20T19:41:09+00:00

You can also observe in families which have a very very beautiful wife that the probability of a girl child is more as it ensures heightened hypergamy. But considering a family which has an ugly wife, male births are the norm.

At the time of fertilization, it maybe said that nature acts in its best interest of survivability or survival of the fittest. So, if nature feels there is a better chance for a female child to move to the higher rungs in society, a female child is born. If nature feels there is a better chance for the male child to move to the higher rungs, a male child is born.

Am I the only one that realizes this is "junk science"?

"Nature" doesn't magically sense the external world and by some hidden method select whether a boy or girl gets born.

Remember the Red Pill is about destroying myths.

Do not assume scientific studies are always "honest".

CC_ee · 2017-08-20T16:31:19+00:00

We know through science that the gender is solely related on the chromosome contained in the sperm that impregnates the egg

If this is true then surely..

If you think nowhere in hell this guy paired up with this girl(way out of league), girl child incoming. If you feel this guy could've done much much better, either genetically or whatever, male child incoming.

This makes no sense right? Sperms carry equal X and Y chromosomes right? So why is a dominant male more likely to pass on Y rather than X?

Title	Child Gender Theory
Author	Heinzdoofens
Upvotes	13
Comments	17
Date	August 20, 2017 2:52 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/6uw499/child_gender_theory/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/child-gender-theory.45453 https://theredarchive.com/post/45453

Comments