mamiof5 Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Is her husband transgender?Why would he be? Didn't she say all boys no girls? Am I reading this right? I'm sick and really groggy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamiof5 Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 I didn't know boys were more prone to certain complications :( I'm thankful for all our kids regardless gender, but if that's true I'm thankful our 2 youngest are healthy boys (our first 3 are girls, for a while I wondered if we'd have boys). Also, on dh side we have seen a higher girl/boy ratio in our kids' generalization (9 female, 4 male and 2 miscarriages-gender unknown). Genetics are complicated and very interesting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Why would he be? Didn't she say all boys no girls? Am I reading this right? I'm sick and really groggy No it... wait it... darn it! I read that, like, six times and I could've sworn it was the other way around! OMG. I need to get a new glasses prescription or something. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 This is interesting. I only have girls but have miscarried. My brother only has girls and they have miscarried. My dad is an only and my mom only has one sibling due to miscarriages and still births (of boys). My husband is one of five. Out of 16 grandchildren, 13 are girls. I have 6 daughters and one son and have miscarried twice that I'm aware of. I'm not sure what that means but it seems to defy statistics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 We have a friend with a child who has a life-altering genetic condition. They told us that this condition is nearly 100% diagnosed in girls, because if boys are conceived with the same condition, the rate of miscarriage or stillbirth is nearly 100%. The condition their daughter has is quite rare, but I wonder if there are other similar genetic conditions with the same issue that one gender or the other is always miscarried if the child inherited those genes. Huh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 I think that also with the royal bloodlines of Western Europe, it is important to consider as well the constant in-breeding which caused every royal house to be super related to every other royal house. Spain in particular had been marrying uncles to nieces for hundreds of years so one has to wonder about Katherine of Aragon's health, well being, and genetic status to begin with, and it isn't like England didn't practice the same thing. I doubt either of these two adults were particularly genetically robust. Katherine was a profoundly devout Catholic. One way to prove supplicance was through fasting and other mortifications of the body , and Katherine NEEDED to produce a son. I've read that some believe Katherine may have been basically starving herself to ensure a male heir. No evidence that I know of, but it's an interesting supposition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 I read once that more boys are conceived but more girls make it to birth thus leading to a slightly larger female population on the planet. Apparently boys are much more fragile in utero compared to girls. I have no remembrance of where I read it but I remember thinking that it was interesting. I've read the same. Something to do with, Y chromosome sperm on the whole are faster to the egg, but X chromosome sperm are hardier (and longer lived). I think more boys are supposed to be conceived with intercourse quite close to ovulation as a result and more girls with intercourse earlier in the cycle (because the x-sperm are still hanging around). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Katherine was a profoundly devout Catholic. One way to prove supplicance was through fasting and other mortifications of the body , and Katherine NEEDED to produce a son. I've read that some believe Katherine may have been basically starving herself to ensure a male heir. No evidence that I know of, but it's an interesting supposition. There were so many bizarre and dangerous practices related to fertility that it sometimes seems like it was a miracle any of the women of the era had babies at all! :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melinda in VT Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I have a personal theory that the illegitimate kids weren't really his. The mistresses wouldn't have had the same scrutiny that the queens had. The real father would have no reason to step forward and say, "That kid might be mine" because a kid's illegitimate kid was provided for. eta: Plus if you are mistress, it is already established that you have no problem with sex outside of marriage. I'm not sure the last part is true if you are the mistress of Henry VIII. All that is established is that you are not willing to defy the king in order to avoid sex outside of marriage. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamiof5 Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 No it... wait it... darn it! I read that, like, six times and I could've sworn it was the other way around! OMG. I need to get a new glasses prescription or something.That's OK! Probably you were thinking about the all girls no boys like the Ingalls. I'm just really groggy today and wasn't sure I was putting 2 and 2 together properly :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ausmumof3 Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 When I was googling this before I started the thread I found that in times of low stress, there are about 105 boys born for every 100 girls. But in times of high stress it's been found to dip down to something more like 79-100, but the boys who are born are much more likely to survive if they live to birth- they have longer lifespans and tend to be healthier. Which implies that women's bodies are more likely to miscarry genetically weak boys in hard times (war, famine, hard winters were examples given). Which was interesting, but occurred among all women generally, not specific families due to genetic causes. I have also heard that in hard times boys tend to still grow to the same size taking more out of the mother whereas girls foetuses are more likely to reduce their intake being a bit impacted themselves but reducing the impact on the mother. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 The times I miscarried I was offered genetic testing on the fetus. I declined, but many people get the testing and find out the sex of the child. I don't think they did genetic testing during that time though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa in Australia Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I know someone who's mother miscarried 7 boys and had 2 healthy daughters. The sister of the person I know has had 5 male miscarriages and 2 living daughters. there was a definite medical problem that made it practically impossible to carry a male pregnancy to term but I cannot remember what it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternalsummer Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 In a literature class I took in college, the class had to choose a children's author to write an extensive paper on, and I chose Laura Ingalls. My friend chose Lewis Carroll, and LOL, that was eye opening for her as well! Sounds like a lot of fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I have also heard that in hard times boys tend to still grow to the same size taking more out of the mother whereas girls foetuses are more likely to reduce their intake being a bit impacted themselves but reducing the impact on the mother. Yes, and then they grow up to be teenage boys and continue the selfish inhalation of food at the dinner table causing the mother to wonder if she will be cannibalized in her sleep should they feel the need to snack during the night! :D Mother of three boys, 19, 17, and 15. I am just trying to survive the grocery apocalypse. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Yes, and then they grow up to be teenage boys and continue the selfish inhalation of food at the dinner table causing the mother to wonder if she will be cannibalized in her sleep should they feel the need to snack during the night! :D Mother of three boys, 19, 17, and 15. I am just trying to survive the grocery apocalypse. I'm stunned by what my 14 year can eat. And I forget he's not little anymore. The other day I put some food on a plate for him and it was this tiny portion and then as I went to set it down I said oh I guess that's not nearly enough. LOL 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Isn't it crazy? I came home from a 4-H meeting the other day to find that a three lb. package of ground chuck had been decimated by two of them. They made half lb. hamburgers in the broiler and ate TWO A PIECE! :ohmy: :scared: :willy_nilly: :svengo: We had a long talk about money not growing on trees and the value of eating a big salad before making a burger and an apple as well. Good grief! I'm putting a padlock on the freezer. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I've seen mine eat cereal out of a large serving bowl. Comical.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Did you ever have to say this phrase, "A box of cereal is NOT meant to be consumed in a single setting. PUT THE BOX DOWN NOW!" GAH! Pa Ingalls couldn't have afforded boys. He couldn't feed his spindly girls properly. During the Long Winter his sons would have sneaked downstairs and roasted Grace for breakfast. Best that he only had girls since he never had enough food around. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Did you ever have to say this phrase, "A box of cereal is NOT meant to be consumed in a single setting. PUT THE BOX DOWN NOW!" GAH! Pa Ingalls couldn't have afforded boys. He couldn't feed his spindly girls properly. During the Long Winter his sons would have sneaked downstairs and roasted Grace for breakfast. Best that he only had girls since he never had enough food around. LOL Problem with him is he is so darn picky that cereal is probably one of the healthier items. At least it has vitamins! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoVanGogh Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 This really has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I have a friend who was a NICU nurse 20+ years ago, and she says "everyone knows" that white male preemies do the worst. NICU nurses of her generation at least refer to them as "wimpy white boys." She had her own preemie who was a wimpy white boy and did not survive, which is how this came up--I had no idea she had had a son before the one I knew as her oldest (he is probably 30 now). Carry on. . .. Our boy was premature, found later to have had a small perinatal stroke that would have caused the complications that led to his premature birth. We witnessed the "wimpy white boy" over and over again during his NICU stay. And we have heard that saying from nearly every specialist over the years. "Well, he is a male...they never do as well in these situations..." DS has (mild physically) cerebral palsy with a severe speech disorder. I know two sets of boy-girl twins, one born in 1947 and the other in 1968. In both cases, the girls did very well while the boys both nearly died at birth and were very sickly the first few years of life. I would love to see the research behind the "wimpy white boy" or know if it is simply an old saying/thought that has been discounted, but have never looked into it myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deee Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Try this article called, appropriately, "The Fragile Male". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119278/ Its been a while since I did any research in this field, but I remember this being discussed back in the late 80s when I was at Uni. I arrived home late from a meeting tonight. DS15 emerged at midnight looking like he hadn't been fed for a week, downed a plate of food and a glass of milk, played the guitar for 15mins, and wandered back to bed. Lucky he's an only - I couldn't afford to feed any more! He just lies around growing all day. He's just topped 6 feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I couldn't afford to feed any more! He just lies around growing all day. He's just topped 6 feet. THIS! Oh my goodness this is what my youngest does...just devotes every calorie, every bit of energy to growing. GAH! He eats so much now and is rail thin, tall. I cannot possibly imagine if he was an 1880's frontier teen out chopping wood, plowing fields, and wrestling cows all day. I have an acquaintance who owns a ranch and her 6'4" 17 year old eats so much that she said if it weren't for the fact that they raise cows so they "can feed him a steer per week", she would have had to abandon him at a firehouse a long time ago, LOL. I actually think it might be possible for me to break even on the meal plan at ds's college! Given the price tag, that says a lot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawthorne44 Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I've read the same. Something to do with, Y chromosome sperm on the whole are faster to the egg, but X chromosome sperm are hardier (and longer lived). I think more boys are supposed to be conceived with intercourse quite close to ovulation as a result and more girls with intercourse earlier in the cycle (because the x-sperm are still hanging around). When I first read that in a book my first thought was "Like People. Men get their faster but then get bored and fall asleep. Women take longer to get there, but then have the patience to wait" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawthorne44 Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Isn't it crazy? I came home from a 4-H meeting the other day to find that a three lb. package of ground chuck had been decimated by two of them. They made half lb. hamburgers in the broiler and ate TWO A PIECE! :ohmy: :scared: :willy_nilly: :svengo: We had a long talk about money not growing on trees and the value of eating a big salad before making a burger and an apple as well. Good grief! I'm putting a padlock on the freezer. I remember reading that is why burger places started serving fries. Meat was rationed during wartime, potatoes weren't. I also remember reading where Abigail Adams was giving advice to someone to push the early courses of food at the teenage boys so that they didn't eat all of the meat course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 When I was googling this before I started the thread I found that in times of low stress, there are about 105 boys born for every 100 girls. But in times of high stress it's been found to dip down to something more like 79-100, but the boys who are born are much more likely to survive if they live to birth- they have longer lifespans and tend to be healthier. Which implies that women's bodies are more likely to miscarry genetically weak boys in hard times (war, famine, hard winters were examples given). Which was interesting, but occurred among all women generally, not specific families due to genetic causes. I read a study out of europe that was based upon 500 years worth of records. mother's of sons died younger . . . . one of the suppositions is a male pregnancy is harder. since infant dna does cross over to the mom, and fragments will remain there for the mother's life, perhaps something about male dna has an impact on moms. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I remember reading that is why burger places started serving fries. Meat was rationed during wartime, potatoes weren't. I also remember reading where Abigail Adams was giving advice to someone to push the early courses of food at the teenage boys so that they didn't eat all of the meat course. I have learned that potatoes are my friend. They now regularly eat baked potatoes with sour cream and shredded cheese in the afternoon as a snack which helps otherwise they'd be making a second sub sandwich for the day. That scene from Fellowship of the Ring where Pippen says he doesn't think Aragorn understands about first breakfast, second breakfast, elevensies, tea....ya...I'm raising male hobbits or something. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted March 16, 2016 Author Share Posted March 16, 2016 I read a study out of europe that was based upon 500 years worth of records. mother's of sons died younger . . . . one of the suppositions is a male pregnancy is harder. since infant dna does cross over to the mom, and fragments will remain there for the mother's life, perhaps something about male dna has an impact on moms. That's a very interesting correlation. I wonder if it really has something more to do with boys being treated differently than girls - given more food perhaps. Like the obesity paradox - if you have a 30-60 pound cushion of fat, you might be more likely to suffer disease, but you're also more likely to survive any given circumstance. If you have boys eating you out of house and home, you might be less likely to have that cushion of fat, at least in situations where food might be scarce. Not so much in recent years, obviously. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted March 16, 2016 Author Share Posted March 16, 2016 I have learned that potatoes are my friend. They now regularly eat baked potatoes with sour cream and shredded cheese in the afternoon as a snack which helps otherwise they'd be making a second sub sandwich for the day. That scene from Fellowship of the Ring where Pippen says he doesn't think Aragorn understands about first breakfast, second breakfast, elevensies, tea....ya...I'm raising male hobbits or something. Potatoes, soup, salad, meat and vegetables, fruit and cheese, dessert... I used to think multiple courses was extravagant. Now I just think it's good economic sense if one parent has time to cook for three hours a day (Or, in my case, isn't afraid to use multiple crock pots). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I read a study out of europe that was based upon 500 years worth of records. mother's of sons died younger . . . . one of the suppositions is a male pregnancy is harder. since infant dna does cross over to the mom, and fragments will remain there for the mother's life, perhaps something about male dna has an impact on moms. It would be interesting to see if this held true in say the last 30 years. I wonder if they have isolated that data? Seriously, I adore these boys and am so glad that I have them, but there are days when I am pretty certain they are also trying to kill me young! LOL That middle one...all those emergency room visits..."Oh you are the first running, fencing, wading pool injury of the season!" :svengo: At least the RN had a sense of humor. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 I read a study out of europe that was based upon 500 years worth of records. mother's of sons died younger . . . . one of the suppositions is a male pregnancy is harder. since infant dna does cross over to the mom, and fragments will remain there for the mother's life, perhaps something about male dna has an impact on moms. I remember a modern study showing that if you had at least three daughters you were significantly less likely to end up in a nursing home. Maybe it was daughters caring for the mothers that allowed them to live longer? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.