To think that breastfeeding a baby boy is more demanding than breastfeeding a baby girl?

[hairymelons]

This is my totally made up theory based on something my mum said once, what I've seen friends experience and a bit of cod-science: Breastfeeding boys (in general) is more demanding than breastfeeding girls (in general) because boys generally grow to be bigger than girls, therefore need more milk to fulfill their potential.

Please don't shout or throw things at me, I'm just wondering if others have found this to be true.

My mum BF 2 boys and 4 girls and reckons there was a big difference in appetite. My friends who BF all had girls and they seemed like 3 hourly/take it or leave it kinda babies, whereas DS was permanently attached and always seemed desperate for more. I think it's because he has tall parents and had lots of growing to do. However, I have no experience to make a comparison and so am prepared to accept that my theory is bollocks.

Thanks.

Not the case here. DD is much bigger than DS and I would say their feeding habits were very similar although Ds would be on the breast for longer at each feeding. And I would say with DD (2nd born) we had more problems when starting out then DS.

i have two girls. fist one 9lb12 and fed like a dream,really content
2nd one used me as a dummy-would see/hear/smell me and be immediately STARVING and need to feed for as long as she wanted-she was unputdownable-which is good in a book,less good in a new born...
both mine self weaned-dd1 at 11months and dd2 at almost 10-was contemplating having a babymoon with her at that point but realised i'd been topless for almost a year and actually if she wanted to stop then who was i to talk her out of it!

My first is a boy and was very large, and fed constantly; I never felt as if I had enough.

2nd (DD) and third (DS2) babies were both coincidentally the same weight - almost 3lb less than DS1. They both seemed much easier to feed. I never felt as if I had anything to spare, but with DS1 I was always panicking that I didn't have enough and he was always hungry.

Rather than being down to sex I would say it was:

• the size of him, he needed more
• my inexperience of breastfeeding. It's possible that the other DCs fed as much but by then I was used to having a baby permanently attached and it felt normal.

I would guess that if there is a difference in boys' and girls' feeding patterns it is just down to boys being bigger and needing more.

A friend has just had a boy after two girls and she was saying that "boys are so different, need so much more feeding." But then again he is bigger.

Not the case in my family - 3 grandsons all same age, 1 was a doddle to bf, 1 sucked hard enough to give me a lovebite at 2 days old and I had lots of problems but still bf at 13mo, 1 cousin lots of difficulties and mother was mix feeding at 6 weeks and gave up a bit later.

MIL bf'd all four children, except the girl who wouldn't take it and was on formula by 2 weeks. She's coeliac - no idea if that's cause or effect?

hairymelons- sorry I missed your question.

Yes they literally just stopped BF one day- going from several feeds one day to nothing. I can remember DD1 settling down as if she was going to feed then getting up and walking off. I didn't know the never offer, never refuse at the time and did offer several times but she just didn't feed again. I was very but was 5.5 months pg with DS1 at the time so didn't have time to brood.

Thanks elvislives, was just curious as I can't ever imagine DS not wanting to feed! DS is 16mo and I think I'd quite like to stop akthough I can imagine being a bit sad too.
Thanks much.