*snip* - nevermind! a 'duh' moment.
*snip* - nevermind! a 'duh' moment.
A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow
Actually, I supposedly have estrogen dominance (which is really just a progesterone deficiency, I think); that's what causes me to have fibrocystic breast condition, which makes my boobs hurt really bad for a week or two out of every month.I would guess that River has higher testosterone than average, as do Chuck, Aps, and 1069. All mothers of sons, fwiw.
What I read recently is that when the father of a child is under 18 (as the father of my children was when they were born), there is an 80-85% chance the children will be male.
The mother's age apparently doesn't matter, although statistics show that slightly more than 70% of teenage mothers have boys (again, this could be related to the age of the father).
Apparently XX-sperm (the kind that produces girl babies) are larger, slower, and longer-living than XY sperms, which produce boys. XY sperms are faster, but die quicker.
Adolescent boys tend to produce a lot of XY sperm, and not very many XX sperm at all.
I never had any idea that the woman had any part in determining whether the baby would be male or female.
That is interesting.
Last edited by 1069; 05-15-10 at 08:55 AM.
Oh, I can't stand jewelry, really.Exactly. Every serious BF I've ever had has known that if he bought me an expensive, white diamond ring I would likely be pissed.
Gems are just rocks, to me, however expensive.
I can't wear rings at all, they hurt my fingers. I have sensory issues.
My husband and I got each other's names tattooed on our backs when we got married, instead of rings.
My son, however, recently bought his fiancee an ostentatious ring which apparently cost six hundred dollars.
I think it's a foolish expenditure under the circumstances, but they're both really happy with it, and I guess that's what matters.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
If it's true, it would mean that in ancient/prehistoric times, when everyone began to reproduce as soon as they were physiologically capable of it, there would've been far more males than females in any given population, rather than the roughly equal numbers we have today.
As to discussing this issue with regard to the emancipation issue...I would say its a FAIR question and my response would likely be the same. That change came about is of course a GOOD thing. However I think the 'change' whould truly have come about in a much more healthy manner if it hadnt occured the way it did. Society evolved. When you look at the emancipation issue, several states had already banned slavery before we even became a country. The importation of slaves was banned shortly after we became a country. And on a societal evolution scale, we as a country are still in relative infancy when compared to most European countries. I think the change would have occured and we would be MUCH further along with regard to race relations had their not been the threat of force. The unfortunate consequence is that once that threat became a reality you had groups spring up that exploited the hurt, the anger, the fear. Its no different today. Much smaller numbers...same pattern...same types of people.
I think the same can be said for the womens rights 'movement'. Instead of allowing a natural evolution (which was already occuring) we have a movement where ALL women were being redefined (and consequently, mens roles as well) and sometimes NOT in ncessarily a GOOD way.
So you can have both...a little bit of fun AND serious debate. But maybe it would start with anonymous people sitting at their keyboards realizing they arent on the UN Human Rights counsel and are just participating in an opinion blog and not take themselves quite so seriously.
First of all...in life it helps deal with **** if you have an actual sense of humor. Ive seen **** and still work with people going through what can only be described as living hell and let me promise you...if I didnt develop a very dark sense of humor I wouldnt be as healthy emotionally (to what level I still am) as I am. So when a thread like this comes along I think it is totally appropriate to say things like "of course I believe in womens lib...I LIKE it when a woman gets on top!"
That said, you're male, and so that's a little like a white person claiming that the best way to deal with the issue of slavery and Jim Crow laws is just to take a comical view of it, and that blacks really ought to quit being such goddamned buzzkills and develop a sense of humor already.
Or like a gentile joking about the holocaust and being unable to understand why Jews have to be so danged serious about everything all the frickin' time. Etc, etc.
We need to understand that these are still sensitive issues to many people, especially older people who actually lived through these dark times.
Even I'm not empathetic enough to know that.
Sometimes it's better to play it safe.