Female sex: only negative associations?

[Appleinthepark]

I mostly don't think about this but when I do, I get so upset.

I have 3 DCs and I have children of both genders. When expectong my DD I came across scientific papers on offspring sex ratio. Most of them claim that:

-more girls are born in stressful times like during a famine or war
-poor, short, starving mothers have more girls
-stressed mothers have more girls
-fathers with anxiety history have more girls
-billionaires have more sons

I found these facts so upsetting and still do. Boys are associated with all the good stuff: they are walking indicators of wealthy, dominating, well nourished, condident yet relaxed parents. Those who have girls are worse off.

I know they are just scientific papers but I actually got quite offended first, then sad: I generally find it difficult to think I am not capable of something and those papers make me feel like being a woman or having girls is somehow an indicator of being less worthy or not being the best version of yourself.

How do others feel about such scientific papers? Any woman here who does not feel like these statements get under your skin?

I'd find it pretty odd to do this kind of research, but I guess if there's anything in it, I can imagine more girls being born when the chips are down because without women, we're all done for. Women's ability to gestate young is precious and requires resourcing, whereas the male ability to fertilise is relatively 'cheap' in resource terms.

The fact that I think like that is probably due to my own upbringing. My mum did everything - raised us, grew our food, educated us, fixed the house, earned the money. My dad was tbh a decorative inessential.

So I wonder what in your past makes you feel women are being disrespected in this research? What pain from the past are you feeling?

Well it is the man that determines the sex of a child depending on whether his sperm is carrying the X or Y chromosome.

I'm not sure what you have listed is facts or coincidences.

How do others feel about such scientific papers? Any woman here who does not feel like these statements get under your skin?

If those are accurate statistics, then I don't feel anything about them. They certainly don't irritate me. If it's a fact, it's a fact.
Plus it's hardly widely known and discussed, it's not like people say "oh you must have been stressed, that's why you've had only girls"

A neonatal consultant told me that for reasons unknown, girls were more likely than boys to survive when born very prematurely. I wonder whether the scientific data you have looked at is along those lines - are girl pregnancies more likely to go to term despite adversity whereas boy pregnancies might be miscarried?

I think historically there have been loads of reasons why it’s been worse to be a girl or to have a daughter. Hopefully that has changed now.

None of the things you’ve listed make me think that it’s worse to have a daughter. They just seem like chemical reactions.

I was taught that it's because the male foetuses are more delicate than female and more prone to very early miscarriage when times are tough.

I'd find it pretty odd to do this kind of research, but I guess if there's anything in it, I can imagine more girls being born when the chips are down because without women, we're all done for.

I’ve never thought about it, but if I did I’d think this. Having a full generation of women is more important than a full generation of men.

But OP I would focus on why this bothers you. It’s like getting upset that men have bigger muscles* - it’s just evolution, it’s not personal

*this one is annoying though

So girls are a bit tougher and more essential, boys are a more fragile luxury?

It’s like getting upset that men have bigger muscles

Meh, they've nothing as powerful as a uterus!

I think this is fascinating rather than upsetting.

It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective - ie it is non-negotiable that we must have enough females in order for the species to survive and reproduce.

We really don't need as many men as women in order to carry on the species (although longer-term having plenty of males as well as females is beneficial for genetic diversity).

But in the short term, when the environment is challenging and stressful, having a higher proportion of males around isn't really helpful. The more men there are the more wars over resources - which then reduces the overall sucess of the human species.

Bullshit

It just makes me feel like I failed: I was not dominant or relaxed or confident but in a "poor state" and then becomes obvious to anyone and to yourself when you have a girl. It is like an indicator that you cannot hide 🫤

Well we hear it seems women's sole purpose in life is to have children

And no i don't agree with the idea but there seems a lot of people who think so

Doesn't get under my skin at all. I'm a poor single mum and I don't have daughters so this stereotype isn't true for me.

Sperm with the X chromosome are larger and survive longer - presumably if there is less frequent sex, the X-chromosome sperm are more likely to fertilise the egg.

Also, female foetuses apparently are less responsive to maternal cortisol (produced during times of stress) than male foetuses. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210406/Mothers-stress-levels-during-conception-could-be-a-determinant-of-fetal-sex.aspx

I don’t see why you would get upset by such findings, if anything it shows that females are genetically more resilient.

I think you would do well to invest in some basic statistics training as you don’t seem to understand how these patterns relate to individual circumstances at all.

A pattern where more girls are born in adverse circumstances does not mean that all girls are born because of adverse circumstances.

Absolutely. When I walk into the village with my three boys trailing behind on market day, knowing that there will always be someone around to chop wood, chase off intruders and tend to the farm in my old age, I feel like a rock star.

And then I remember which century we are in.

Yes and no. The sperm determines sex but the type of cervical mucus the woman is producing at the time of conception can be helpful or hostile to either x or y sperm.

As people have already said, you have it the wrong way round. Girl fetuses survive even in stressfull times with little food as they are stronger, more resilient whereas boy fetuses (and sperm) will either not take or miscarry under the same conditions. Hence more girl babies born, they survive.

You’re completely misunderstanding the research. More females are born in tough conditions because males are more likely to be miscarried.

That's interesting.

I don't find it upsetting,it is what it is,it's very interesting.

You are framing the information in a very negative way. There's no reason to take these population studies as a personal criticism, do you tend to take everything so personally?

Happy relaxed couples with money in the bank will have female offspring around half the time too.

Having female offspring doesn't only happen if you're stressed/ poor, just like having male children isn't only for chilled out, wealthy people!

It just makes me feel like I failed: I was not dominant or relaxed or confident but in a "poor state" and then becomes obvious to anyone and to yourself when you have a girl. It is like an indicator that you cannot hide

No, the sex of your child(ren) doesn't indicate anything whatsoever to other people.
You haven't said what the sex ratios are but I bet they're not very far off 50:50, only observable in statistical population data. Most people who have more than one kid have a mix, and I'm sure you can think of confident, relaxed women with daughters...well, I'm short (as were my parents but they had 2 boys as well, what the heck is wrong with being short anyway), but I'm generally quite confident and relaxed and I've got a wonderful DD.

This.

How do others feel about such scientific papers?

Seems an odd question for someone who doesn't really follow science to ask. Quote:

I have children of both genders

And in your case, OP, you said you've got children of both genders (I assume you mean sex) - feeling you've 'failed' in some way because they're not all boys is frankly a bit daft. Do you actually think boys are better in some way?

How about you link to these papers which are upsetting you so we can see the statistics and methodology?