# Hypothetical: a shot given to a pregnant mother that ensures a heterosexual child. Do you do it? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [August 1, 2012, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075 "2012-08-01T17:23:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/101 "2012-08-01T20:49:24Z")
> [@EmilyG](#): > > I’m female, and I identify as straight. I never want to have kids, but if I were to have a child, I would not administer the shot/pill ensuring a straight child. The reason is that I have absolutely no problem with gay people. Many of my friends are gay, and some are bisexual or asexual. I love all my friends regardless of their sexual orientation. Like a few other posters, you seem to answer based on how it would affect, or not affect, you. Now maybe you did take that into consideration. If so, I have to ask, are you of the mind that the world that life is as easy for a gay child as a straight one? That there isn’t a strain of bigotry, ridicule and bullying reserved for gay kids? Is that time behind us? ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/102 "2012-08-01T20:52:41Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > 1. Selecting males has bad societal implications down the road, which will affect the children so selected - namely, lack of mates for many. It is unclear what bad societal and personal implications hetero selection would have. Ironically, it would have implications for children of parents that choose not to choose down the line. Unless MORE people choose non hetero than already happens naturally (which seems unlikely). So the people that choose not to choose are most likely making their kids hook up options worse and worse as time goes on. So it might well turn in a race to straightdom at some point. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/103 "2012-08-01T20:53:07Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This doesn’t apply to me and my wife either- it’s biologically impossible for our child to have the same race or ethnicity as both of us. Obviously, a child’s race or ethnicity depends on the socially-constructed rules of the society in which it is born - but it is going to be in some way derived from yours (by “yours” I mean your wife’s and/or yours) - assuming it is biologically yours, that is. Exactly how depends on where you are. For example, the socially-constructed rules in the US state that the child of a Black and a White parent is “racially” Black (hence, Obama is Black). It inherits the “race” of one of its parents, the Black one. In other places, the child of a Black and a White parent would be considered an intermediate or mixed category - derived from both parents. In both cases, the parents would have a recognized interest that their kid be visibly derived from them, regardless of how “race” is socially classified. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/104 "2012-08-01T20:56:27Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > Gay male. > > 1. I am so glad my mother didn’t have this pill; my life would possibly be greatly diminished. Im glad you think so, as it means that you have a good life, but you simply do not and cannot know that to be a fact. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/105 "2012-08-01T20:57:27Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Obviously, a child’s race or ethnicity depends on the socially-constructed rules of the society in which it is born - but it is going to be in some way derived from yours (by “yours” I mean your wife’s and/or yours) - assuming it is biologically yours, that is. Exactly how depends on where you are. > > For example, the socially-constructed rules in the US state that the child of a Black and a White parent is “racially” Black (hence, Obama is Black). It inherits the “race” of one of its parents, the Black one. In other places, the child of a Black and a White parent would be considered an intermediate or mixed category - derived from both parents. > > In both cases, the parents would have a recognized interest that their kid be visibly derived from them, regardless of how “race” is socially classified. Ok. But it still seems to me that in my case, the pill accomplishes the same purpose (as far as the hypothetical happiness of the future child) if it makes my kid white as it does it if makes my kid straight. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/106 "2012-08-01T21:01:39Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Ironically, it would have implications for children of parents that choose not to choose down the line. Unless MORE people choose non hetero than already happens naturally (which seems unlikely). So the people that choose not to choose are most likely making their kids hook up options worse and worse as time goes on. It’s not _as_ serious, though. You would reduce the number of gays, but in a very large population, that effect would not be as significant. Each gay could still, in theory, find a mate - albeit the total population pool to choose from would be smaller. Making a disproportionate number of males creates a harsh competition for the remaining females (assuming percentage of heteros doesn’t change). Some hetero men are guaranteed not to find mates. ---
**Author:** ![raspberry\_hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@raspberry\_hunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raspberry_hunter)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/107 "2012-08-01T21:04:13Z")
Ugh. I have a kneejerk reaction against the shot; what right do I have to mess with the characteristics of my kid? I might take it, though, for the reason others have named: because it ups my chances, statistically speaking, for grandkids. And I really want grandkids! But I also would really want the kid to be a girl. (Again, it would probably make her life easier, as I have far more knowledge of how to parent a girl than I do on how to parent a boy. Also would statisically up my chances for grandkids, because any child of ours? Is going to be a science/math nerd, and the reproduction odds are WAY better for science/math nerd girls.) If there were a shot I could take to make the kid a girl, would I take it? Again, probably yes… In both cases, though, I’d feel really oogy about it. And maybe that would convince me not to do it… Does it make a difference that I selected my mate partially because I thought he would make really awesome kids who would have a leg up in the world? ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/108 "2012-08-01T21:07:29Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > It’s not _as_ serious, though. You would reduce the number of gays, but in a very large population, that effect would not be as significant. Each gay could still, in theory, find a mate - albeit the total population pool to choose from would be smaller. . Oh thats certainly true. But as time went on the pool would get smaller and smaller and at some point IMO even all but the most pro gay /whatever happens happens folks would be like “shit, that poor kid will never find a “mate”!” at which point the race would be on. It would kind of be like the evolution of farm families as a way to make a living. Its okay, not so bad, not so good…find some other way to make a living kid! I guess it might reach some equilbrium of folks that no matter what won’t make the choice, but I bet it would result in a small fraction of gay folks than exist today. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/109 "2012-08-01T21:14:39Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Ok. But it still seems to me that in my case, the pill accomplishes the same purpose (as far as the hypothetical happiness of the future child) if it makes my kid white as it does it if makes my kid straight. Except to the extent that the child itself wishes a visible connection to its parents. For example, a child with a black father and a white mother may wish, as it grows up, that it had visibly dark skin, because of who its father is. Others would naturally assume the child’s father was not its biological father if it was 100% white, which may also cause the child a certain amount of unhappiness. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/110 "2012-08-01T22:18:17Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Except to the extent that the child itself wishes a visible connection to its parents. For example, a child with a black father and a white mother may wish, as it grows up, that it had visibly dark skin, because of who its father is. Others would naturally assume the child’s father was not its biological father if it was 100% white, which may also cause the child a certain amount of unhappiness. There’s no way to predict what the child would desire in the case your describing- and as far as avoiding being a victim of bigotry, it is the same. There’s no reason to believe that a child in that case would have a greater chance at a particular skin color preference than the other- assuming the parents stay together. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/111 "2012-08-01T23:04:03Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Seems to me that there are some distinctions here: > > 1. It is not proved that people have male children because they wish to spare their children a life of female discrimination. You have demonstrated that such discrimination exists, not that this is their motive male selection. From your link: I was thinking about it on the way home and I think this is pretty much a distinction without a difference. There are a plethora of reasons why people choose to abort the female baby. There would also be reasons why people would take the no-homosexual pill. It seems to me that the rock bottom relates to value - the female in those societies is not valued as much as the male to those people. Homosexuals are not as valued as heterosexuals to some individuals. In any event, you quote another ‘reason’: > [@](#): > > son is often preferred as an “asset” since he can earn and support the family; a daughter is a “liability” since she will be married off to another family, and so will not contribute financially to her parents. The patriarchal structure of a society is the single most important factor skewing the sex ratio in favor of males, accentuated in some cultures by the burden of raising a dowry for a daughter’s marriage. Openness to the very concept of sex selection is a significant factor: among societies which practice selective female abortion nowadays, many were systematically practicing female infanticide (either directly or by withholding postnatal care from children of undesirable sex) long before abortion became a viable option.[27] Furthermore, in some cultures sons are expected to take care of their parents in their old age.[28] In modern East Asia, a large part of the pattern of preferences leading to this practice can be condensed simply as a desire to have a male heir. Monica Das Gupta (2005) observes that, in late 1980s to early 1990s China, there was no evidence of selective abortion of female fetuses among firstborn children, or in families with one or more existing sons (in fact, families with multiple sons were, if anything, more likely to abort a boy than a girl). But, at the same time, families with existing daughters appeared very likely to abort any further female fetuses, resulting in heavily skewed sex ratios.[27] Which is under the cultural heading. It seems as though you are inferring that this is **the** proved reason? If not, then I don’t see the distinction you are making. Further, even here, it indicates that the female is: 1. A liability (she does not contribute to her family) 2. A burden (the family has to raise money to sell her off). If you follow that up with the other reasons, and it seems to me to be an apt comparison. In that society to be a female is a burden, a liability to the family, and they also experience discrimination. You might argue that the welfare of the female is secondary to the parents (who are assuming the burden), but certainly someone could say that they would opt for the male-only pill simply because life is harder for the females. This last line is all that is important since that’s what makes the comparison apt. In that society, a female does face a lot of discrimination. A female does have factors that could conceivably contribute to the female’s unhappiness. Since happiness was the paramount reason for taking the anti-homosexual pill, why not also it apply to the anti-female pill? > [@Malthus](#): > > 1. Selecting males has bad societal implications down the road, which will affect the children so selected - namely, lack of mates for many. It is unclear what bad societal and personal implications hetero selection would have. The same argument can be made for selecting only heterosexuals. For one thing, it wouldn’t force society to actually make strides at tolerance. Instead of encouraging homosexuality to be accepted into society (like interracial marriage), it’s actively avoided. This would make any homosexuals who slipped through the cracks potentially face an even worse atmosphere than they do now. Further, if society can just get rid of desirables with a shot, then I would think this could encourage even more bigotry towards other characteristics. Like I said earlier, if this were the 1800’s, would you argue that African American’s should use the shot so that their children would be white? That would ensure that their children would not be slaves and thus have a better life. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/112 "2012-08-01T23:28:33Z")
Imagine we live 100 years in the future and anti-gay prejudice has totally and completely vanished… gay marriage is legal, gay adoption is legal, there’s been a gay president, gayness is just utterly “normal” in all ways, in all countries in the world (yeah, I know, I wish). Then what would your answer be? I think there’s something interestingly paradoxical about this. In the current cultural climate we live in, I think there’s a reasonable case along the lines of “I don’t see anything wrong with being gay, but at the same time I wouldn’t want my child to be the victim of bullying and prejudice… suicide rates are still sky high among gay teenagers, etc. So I would take the shot”. But at the same time, saying that you would take the shot feels an awful lot like saying that you would love a straight child more than a gay child, and thus value straights higher than gays, so it’s tempting to not take the shot just because taking it is “wrong”. On the other hand, if all the prejudice was truly gone, there would no longer be that “he will be bullied” factor pushing you towards getting the shot, so it would seem that the only reasonable answer then would be not to get the shot. But on the other hand, if prejudice was truly gone, and there wasn’t this big political/cultural issue hanging around being the elephant in the room, people might not find it objectionable to make the same kind of minor logistical judgments you might make if there was a similar shot that ensured that your child was right-handed. Sure it’s not a big deal, and it’s not like I value right-handed people over left-handed people, but there are various minor situations in which it’s advantageous to be right-handed as opposed to left-handed. Similarly, in this hypothetical future, it’s really not a big deal if you’re gay or straight, but there are minor logistical reasons why being straight might be easier (larger mate selection, can have natural-born offspring with your loved one), so you might make that choice without having to worry about what signal it was sending or what statement it was making. (Of course, that assumes that you’d be willing to make even minor choices of that sort… there’s an interesting debate about whether any sort of prenatal meddling at all is a Bad Idea, and a response of “of course I wouldn’t take that pill, I wouldn’t do anything to change my unborn child at all, for the worse or the better” is certainly a reasonable and consistent one.) ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/113 "2012-08-01T23:36:15Z")
Since this the hypothetical can only exist in a world of pure fantasy. I’d rather give my child the shot that gives them a 100% chance to gain super powers. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/114 "2012-08-01T23:39:29Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Imagine we live 100 years in the future and anti-gay prejudice has totally and completely vanished… gay marriage is legal, gay adoption is legal, there’s been a gay president, gayness is just utterly “normal” in all ways, in all countries in the world (yeah, I know, I wish). > > Then what would your answer be? > I think there’s something interestingly paradoxical about this. In the current cultural climate we live in, I think there’s a reasonable case along the lines of “I don’t see anything wrong with being gay, but at the same time I wouldn’t want my child to be the victim of bullying and prejudice… suicide rates are still sky high among gay teenagers, etc. So I would take the shot”. But at the same time, saying that you would take the shot feels an awful lot like saying that you would love a straight child more than a gay child, and thus value straights higher than gays, so it’s tempting to not take the shot just because taking it is “wrong”. > > On the other hand, if all the prejudice was truly gone, there would no longer be that “he will be bullied” factor pushing you towards getting the shot, so it would seem that the only reasonable answer then would be not to get the shot. But on the other hand, if prejudice was truly gone, and there wasn’t this big political/cultural issue hanging around being the elephant in the room, people might not find it objectionable to make the same kind of minor logistical judgments you might make if there was a similar shot that ensured that your child was right-handed. Sure it’s not a big deal, and it’s not like I value right-handed people over left-handed people, but there are various minor situations in which it’s advantageous to be right-handed as opposed to left-handed. Similarly, in this hypothetical future, it’s really not a big deal if you’re gay or straight, but there are minor logistical reasons why being straight might be easier (larger mate selection, can have natural-born offspring with your loved one), so you might make that choice without having to worry about what signal it was sending or what statement it was making. (Of course, that assumes that you’d be willing to make even minor choices of that sort… there’s an interesting debate about whether any sort of prenatal meddling at all is a Bad Idea, and a response of “of course I wouldn’t take that pill, I wouldn’t do anything to change my unborn child at all, for the worse or the better” is certainly a reasonable and consistent one.) It is interesting- though I don’t take the last view you mention. If there was a pill that could (with no risk) make my future child more resistant to disease, or have better teeth/vision, or even be taller or smarter or more athletic, I might well be for it. If we could afford it, I can certainly imagine going for it. But I can’t imagine wanting my wife to take the pill the OP suggests- and I can’t, so far, see how it’s any different (in the wanting-to-lower-the-chances-of-being-a-victim-of-bigotry sense) then a pill that would change my future black (or perceived as black) child to white. The possible benefit just does not seem worth the cost of making such a big change to the child’s identity. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/115 "2012-08-01T23:45:19Z")
The hypothetical anti-gay shot without side effects has been criticized for being magically unrealistic. A much more plausible development would be the development of a prenatal test for a child’s being gay or likely to be gay. Assuming that gayness is in fact determined before birth by genetic or other factors, such a development is not at all impossible. Then what happens? It may be instructive to consider the example of prenatal testing for Downs’ Syndrome. It is estimated (Wikipedia cites a number of studies) that something like 90% of Downs’ pregnancies are now aborted in the US and UK. If a prenatal gay test existed, would there be a similar decline in the numbers of gay children born? Downs Syndrome is a seriously disabling and life-limiting condition; being gay is neither of those things and I am in no way implying any equation between the two. The question is, what would be the result of such a test becoming available? I would wager that, despite our best intentions, there would be an calamitous drop in the number of gay babies born. Parents, when asked, would hem and haw and lie to pollsters, but behind closed doors would trip all over themselves to schedule the abortion. The rate might not be as high as 90%, but it would probably be way over 50%. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/116 "2012-08-01T23:46:09Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I seems that your personal beliefs are more important than the quality of your child’s life. How is that any different from the point of view of some Christian Scientists? My motivation isn’t sucking up to monsters. Not an evil god, and not homophobic bigots. I’m not going to twist my hypothetical child to please a collection of vermin. By your logic, it’s a shame that back before the Civil War they couldn’t have injected black mothers with something that made their children grow up happy to be slaves; it would have stopped so much suffering after all. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/117 "2012-08-01T23:49:03Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Except that, based on the results here at least, very few parents would use the anti gay vaccine. The wonderful people of the SDMB are not an accurate representation of the feelings towards homosexuals of the average population. And to be quite honest i imagine most of them would change their tune when they realized the worlds gay population just dropped from 10% to .01% after the shot came out. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2012, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/118 "2012-08-01T23:59:56Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > I think there’s something interestingly paradoxical about this. Good post and points there. ---
**Author:** ![turtledove\_river](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e79b87/32.png) [@turtledove\_river](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/turtledove_river)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2012, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/119 "2012-08-02T00:24:06Z")
I would not take the Guarranteed\* Straight shot. I would take a Guarranteed High Self Esteem shot. That’s really all you need in life. \*Did I even spell that right? ---
**Author:** ![lavenderviolet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/cdc98d/32.png) [@lavenderviolet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lavenderviolet)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2012, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075/120 "2012-08-02T00:30:58Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > I would wager that, despite our best intentions, there would be an calamitous drop in the number of gay babies born. Parents, when asked, would hem and haw and lie to pollsters, but behind closed doors would trip all over themselves to schedule the abortion. The rate might not be as high as 90%, but it would probably be way over 50%. I also think that people aren’t considering what the social impact would be if OTHER PEOPLE were choosing to have the anti-gay shot. I think a lot of people are picturing the world in which they make this choice would be a world like the one we live in now where a good 10% (or so) of people are gay and it’s fairly mainstream/accepted now. But imagine the possible consequences if this shot was popular in society and the prevalence of homosexuality in the population had dropped down to less than 1%. Would it matter if your gay child would have a hard time finding others like himself in the new society? What if the rarity of gays in that world increased the amount of discrimination they faced? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypothetical-a-shot-given-to-a-pregnant-mother-that-ensures-a-heterosexual-child-do-you-do-it/630075.md?page=7)