The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > General Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-21-2003, 11:03 AM
belladonna belladonna is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Are more males born during war time?

A coworker just e-mailed me a little blurb about how more males are born during war time, nature replenishing the herd, etc. etc. Going strictly on anecdotal evidence, this bears out among us here in the office (two expecting boys), my son's daycare (four of us expecting boys) and my family (three more boys!), but I'm a bit skeptical that it is actually true overall. Are there any studies that have actually borne out this claim?
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 04-21-2003, 12:09 PM
Q.E.D. Q.E.D. is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 22,536
That wouldn't make sense from an evolutionary standpoint anyway. Increasing the percentage of males does nothing to accelerate population growth or replenish a diminished population, since it's (obviously) the females that bear the young. Certainly large-scale warfare hasn't been going on long enough for there to have been any significant evolutionary repsonse to it. I haven't found a study on this one way or the other, but for now, I'm going to have to call BS on this one.
__________________
SnUgGLypuPpY -- TakE BaCk tHe PiT!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-21-2003, 12:15 PM
stolichnaya stolichnaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Certainly males die disproportionately during war. But the fact that the extra males ostensibly conceived during the time of war wouldn't be sexually viable for quite some time. Then, fifteen to eighteen years hence, there would be a glut of men.

I can see why this would be a compelling story (and incidentally, my own anecdotal sample bears it out ) but sounds glurgey.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-21-2003, 12:22 PM
belladonna belladonna is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
That's what I was thinking too guys. Glad I'm not just a hopeless cynic.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-21-2003, 12:39 PM
CrazyCatLady CrazyCatLady is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Well, I'd be really interested in how, exactly, the Y sperm know there's a war on and put forth that extra effort to "support our troops", so to speak.

Anecdotal evidence is bad because it's a really small sample. Hell, everybody I know who's pregnant or just had a baby has girls.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-21-2003, 12:58 PM
MLS MLS is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 6,910
Here I go with the book recommendations again. Matt Ripley's The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature is, I believe, the source of a related factlet that I recall. The basic theory is that while the X and Y sperm don't know that a war is on, war obviously causes a lot of stress. Stress interferes with the mother-to-be's hormone level, which can affect the sexual orientation and development of the fetus. So IIRC, wartime was not necessarily related to more males or females being conceived, but to the development of more homosexuals developing.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-21-2003, 01:59 PM
WillGolfForFood WillGolfForFood is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Quote:
Well, I'd be really interested in how, exactly, the Y sperm know there's a war on
Maybe the fellow that just transported him here was wearing a battle helmet?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-21-2003, 02:58 PM
trabi trabi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Two sperms swimming along:

Sperm 1 - Are we nearly there yet?

Sperm 2 - You must be joking, we've only just passed the epiglotis.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-21-2003, 05:17 PM
TitoBenito TitoBenito is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Re: Are more males born during war time?

Quote:
Originally posted by belladonna
A coworker just e-mailed me a little blurb about how more males are born during war time, nature replenishing the herd, etc. etc. Going strictly on anecdotal evidence, this bears out among us here in the office (two expecting boys), my son's daycare (four of us expecting boys) and my family (three more boys!), but I'm a bit skeptical that it is actually true overall. Are there any studies that have actually borne out this claim?
Yes more boys are born during war time, but more boys are also born during peace time. I think it's 105 male births to every 100 female births in the US, which is pretty standard if things are done naturally. In China though, the the figures of reported live births is somewhere close to 115 to 100, at least as I remember.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-21-2003, 05:35 PM
Xema Xema is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Quote:
Originally posted by TitoBenito
In China though, the the figures of reported live births is somewhere close to 115 to 100, at least as I remember.
This is probably attributable to selective abortion, male children being considered in that society more desirable than females. IIRC India has a similar tale to tell.

Apropos the original question, what is supposed to be the mechanism for an increase in males? Do women hear of the war and somehow change their metabolism? It seems hard to imagine how this would work.

And there is the important point that evolution works on the gene level, not the level of a society. Though I suppose you could postulate a gene that "sees" an "opening" for males that could be exploited.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-21-2003, 05:46 PM
amarone amarone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,431
Quote:
Originally posted by MLS
Here I go with the book recommendations again. Matt Ripley's The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature is, I believe, the source of a related factlet that I recall. The basic theory is that while the X and Y sperm don't know that a war is on, war obviously causes a lot of stress. Stress interferes with the mother-to-be's hormone level, which can affect the sexual orientation and development of the fetus. So IIRC, wartime was not necessarily related to more males or females being conceived, but to the development of more homosexuals developing.
Nearly. Ridley states the "returning-soldier" effect to be a fact - more males are born during and shortly after wars. There is a good deal of evidence that the hormone levels in the mother (gonadotrophin) and father (testosterone) affect the sex of the offspring. It has been postulated that war changes the role of the typical women, which affects her hormone levels, resulting in more males.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-21-2003, 06:01 PM
KidCharlemagne KidCharlemagne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by MLS
The basic theory is that while the X and Y sperm don't know that a war is on, war obviously causes a lot of stress. Stress interferes with the mother-to-be's hormone level, which can affect the sexual orientation and development of the fetus. So IIRC, wartime was not necessarily related to more males or females being conceived, but to the development of more homosexuals developing.
Interesting, because i once read an article that explained how male homosexuality was a group survival adaptation. The idea was that homosexuals are basically a natural version of eunuchs - they had the strength and other assets of men but the warriors could leave them with their women without fear of losing them to men at home.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-21-2003, 09:09 PM
jiHymas jiHymas is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
If anything, I would expect a greater proportion of girls to be born in war-time, due to poorer diets and increased stress. See Is there anything we can do so we have a boy?.

I have attempted to find statistics for the Sex Ratio at Birth for the United Kingdom in the 20th Century - it would seem to me that the above implies more girls during the Second World War and I am confident that the data exists ... somewhere! I'm just not familiar enough with demographic resources on the Web to find it other than by dumb luck, however, and I'm not having much tonight.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-21-2003, 10:03 PM
amarone amarone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,431
The appropriate paragraphs from Ridley's Red Queen are reproduced here, about two-thirds of the way down the page.

In the book, Ridley also mentions some animals producing more females in times of stress. The theory is that as the females are smaller, they are easier to "grow" and therefore less likely to be spontaneously aborted. I don't know that this would apply to humans, though, where there is little difference in size between males and females at birth.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-21-2003, 10:20 PM
MajorTom MajorTom is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Could be a thread killer as has happened before. I was once told by a father of all girls that " Anyone can make a boy, but it takes a real man to blow the nuts off 'em"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.