Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago


The Scientific Fundamentalist

A Look at the Hard Truths About Human Nature
by Satoshi Kanazawa

Why Are Older Parents More Likely to Have Daughters?
 
Once again, parents are more crucial to sons than to daughters

Published on April 17, 2011 by Satoshi Kanazawa in The Scientific Fundamentalist

One of the consistent findings in the field of reproductive medicine is that older parents are more likely to have daughters. Why?
Previous studies have repeatedly found that one of the reliable predictors of the sex of the offspring is the age of the parent. Older parents are significantly more likely to have daughters than younger parents.

The National Child Development Study replicates these findings from earlier studies. As the following graph shows, the association between the age of the parent and the sex of the first child is not monotonic, but there is a general decline in the proportion of sons as the parents get older. Teenage parents are particularly likely to have sons, with the proportion of sons at .5327, and older parents over the age of 40 are significantly less likely to have sons, with the proportion of sons at .3557. Two-thirds of children born to parents over 40 are girls! The bivariate correlation between the probability of having a son and the age of the parent is significantly negative (r = -.030, p < .001, n = 9,301). Each year in the parent’s age decreases the odds of having a son as the first child by 1%.

UserPostedImage

As you can see in the following two graphs, the association between the age of the parents and the sex of the first child is stronger among women than among men. In fact, the bivariate correlation between the probability of having a son and the age of the parent is only statistically significantly negative among women (r = -.34, p < .05, n = 4,864), not among men (r = -.024, ns, n = 4,437). Among women, each year in age decreases the odds of having a son as the first child by 1.2%. However, the graph below clearly shows that fathers over the age of 40 are significantly less likely to have sons, with the proportion of sons at .3592.

UserPostedImage

UserPostedImage

Given the prevalence of age homogamy, where the age of the mother and the age of the father are generally positively correlated such that younger women are typically married to younger men and older women are typically married to older men, the slight sex difference in the pattern is not important. The overall picture is that the older the parents (both the mother and the father), the more likely they are to have a daughter. The question is: why?

Because both the quality of the eggs and the quality of the sperm decrease with age, it is tempting to explain the declining likelihood of having a son among older parents potentially in terms of such quality of gametes (although I’m not aware of any argument that suggests that lower-quality gametes are more likely to produce girls). However, such explanations, even when correct, are proximate, not ultimate. They answer the question of how; they don’t answer the question of why. The lower quality of gametes, if it indeed lowers the probability of producing boys, is the mechanism that evolution employs to make sure that older parents are more likely to have daughters. But such a proximate mechanism does not explain why evolution “wanted” to make sure that older parents are more likely to have daughters, in other words, why it is adaptive for older parents to have daughters, not sons. That requires an ultimate evolutionary explanation.

As I explain in an earlier post, parental investment is much more crucial for the future reproductive success of sons than for that of daughters. Sons’ reproductive success largely hinges on the status and resources that they inherit from their parents, particularly, their fathers. This is why the presence of sons deters divorce and the departure of the father from the family. Sons therefore need parents to invest in them, to make sure that they inherit the status and the resources of the family.

In sharp contrast, daughters’ future reproductive success is largely determined by their youth and physical attractiveness. Once they are conceived with particular genes that influence their physical attractiveness, there is very little that parents can do to increase their daughters’ future reproductive success, beyond keeping them alive and healthy. There is absolutely nothing that parents can do to affect the progression of time that determines the daughters’ age, nor is there anything they can do after the conception to influence the daughters’ physical appearance (once again, beyond keeping them healthy).

The problem with older parents, of course, is that they are more likely to die sooner. If the parents die before the children reach sexual maturity, it will have a greater negative impact on sons’ future reproductive success than on daughters’. This may be one evolutionary, ultimate reason why older parents are more likely to have daughters. Parents may be evolutionarily designed to have more daughters when they are older, so that, when they die, they are less likely to leave sons who have not sexually matured. Being orphaned young is bad both for boys and girls, but it’s much worse for boys than for girls.


UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (2h) : @jalenreagors They’re discussing if Sheduer can go back to college on NFL Network LMFAOOOOO
beast (4h) : Great point Martha
beast (4h) : Buddy Ryan used to say if a candy bar goes missing, there are two to blame, Rex and Rob 🤪 jk 😁
Martha Careful (7h) : Bum Phillips used to say there are two ways to get better. Get better players or get players to play better. We have a new DL coach
Zero2Cool (7h) : Yes. Look at the losses last year. They can win.
beast (8h) : Can Packers win with their current DL?
bboystyle (9h) : waiting for a pass rusher.
dfosterf (11h) : 5 minutes between picks in the 3rd
dfosterf (12h) : 3rd. Hate this phone
dfosterf (12h) : 4rd
dfosterf (12h) : 5 minutes in the 4
dfosterf (12h) : 7 minutes between picks in the 2nd round
Martha Careful (12h) : Sorry to bitch, but the headline writers in that section absolutely mislead, or don't know how to read. It is maddening
Martha Careful (12h) : No thanks. Not a dependable guy to be in the right place and run the right route. Dumb as a box of rocks.
Zero2Cool (13h) : Losing 2nd round pick for a one year rental, not ideal. Especially a headcase.
TheKanataThrilla (13h) : Pickens for Jaire may be interesting. Definitely not sure we want Pickens long term.
dfosterf (13h) : No.Absolutely not
Zero2Cool (13h) : NO NO NO NO NO NO!!1 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
dhazer (13h) : scenario: Our main prospects are off the board when our pick comes around, do we just throw a 2nd round pick at Pittsburgh for Pickens
TheKanataThrilla (14h) : Hopefully she had some comfort that her son will be live his dream when she passed away. Sad news.
Mucky Tundra (15h) : Damn that sucks
Zero2Cool (15h) : News about Derrick Harmon mom, saddening.
Zero2Cool (16h) : Mark Murphy: "I predict we will trade up once and down twice."
beast (17h) : Rip the Packers and getting the fans yelling and booing him
beast (17h) : Super competitive Bears fan and WWE "superstar" wrestler, Seth Rollins is supposed to announce a Bears pick and absolutely rip Packers
packerfanoutwest (25-Apr) : Golden
beast (25-Apr) : I want DT Derrick Harmon, Oregon
Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : And I can't be looking at my phone
Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Hey I'm at work lol
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : btw, new site chat won't delete auto like
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : because everyone left like wimps
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : I am wondering if there is some type of autoclear when there isn't activity after a certain amount of time.
Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : What happened in the chat? Me and Zero posted a few things earlier and they're all gone
dfosterf (24-Apr) : 10-15 min bs plus flyover
dfosterf (24-Apr) : Yes
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : 7pm is when this kicks off????
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : I told him. IT'S VONTE MACK , no matter what!
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : He asked me who I thought The Browns were taking.
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : 2. Would of had to wear Browns gear all week. NOPE I'll watch from my living room.
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : He wanted to know if I would go. 2 things, would have had to fly from Detroit to Green Bay. Nope
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : All expense paid trip to the draft. He will be in the Browns section. I told him to say hi to J-10VE for me 😃😃i
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : For a call from my nephew, he won an sllexp
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : Hope to see everyone in the Chat tonight!!! Go Pack Go!!!
TheKanataThrilla (24-Apr) : Jeanty would be a great pick-up for the Bears. I see Warren mocked to them as well who I think would be a great selection.
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : GameDay Chat is open. Posting bits an tids in there.
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Excellent Source: The Bears have a deal in place to move up to 5 if Jeanty is there.
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : Probably not until 10pm will be making pick
dfosterf (24-Apr) : But it is still not tonight. Lol
wpr (24-Apr) : Today is finally here.
dfosterf (24-Apr) : I should have put it in quotes
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
14m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

24-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

22-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.